{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.030708661417322834, 'fraction_numerical': 0.005511811023622047, 'mean_word_length': 5.169902912621359, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A European Risk Barometer for Media Pluralism: Why Assess Damage When You Can Map Risk?


 The role of government, if any, in assuring media pluralism is complex and contested. In her essay, Professor Valcke describes an indicators-based model, the Media Pluralism Monitor (MPM), for measuring threats to media pluralism in the Member States of the European Union. Although the importance of media pluralism is generally recognized, divergent approaches among the Member States (market vs. public regulation) make a harmonized rule unlikely. The MPM is described as flexible and adaptable to each Member State, not for regulation but as a standardized, neutral tool for collection of data on indicators of media pluralism. It is characterized as a holistic, risk-based analytical framework using six “risk domains,” three “risk areas,” and three types of indicators (a total of 166 quantitative and qualitative indicators) to potentially create a unique, multidimensional media pluralism “risk profile” for each State. Professor Valcke notes that while this tool has been available since mid-2009, it has so far had little uptake, and she suggests that absent any new initiatives from the European Commission on this politically sensitive issue, its future is uncertain.