{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03379867744305658, 'fraction_numerical': 0.015429831006612785, 'mean_word_length': 5.1909090909090905, '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}}
Review: Copycat Television: Globalisation, Program Formats and Cultural Identity

models of journalistic effects (pp. 36, 45). However, many would argue that chaos turns to confusion when McNair discusses media ownership. In Chapter 6, he continues to assert the extreme difficulty of assessing the 'precise extent and nature' (p. 103)of the power wielded by media owners. Nevertheless, McNair is adamant that such power exists and that anyone who argues otherwise 'is naive' (p. 103). Owners' political power and their often interventionist editorial approaches are realities and McNair provides detailed examples of these throughout the book. However, the overtones of conspiracy and the zeal with which ownership (see, for example, pp. 103-4) is discussed sit incongruously with the book's overall tone and are directly contradicted on P: 158 when discussing journalism and PRo And while McNair is cautiously positive about the tabloidisation of news, the move to infotainment and the effects of this trend on the contemporary public sphere, he drops his guard when discussing the Internet and digital media. For example, claiming the 'dumbing down' of news and current affairs formats will be countered simply because new media have increased the range and scope of available journalism (p. 128), takes a particularly offhand approach to information access.