Foundational Economics - Media Reform

General Discussion
1

I’m looking into the principles of Foundational Economics, and wondering how they can be applied to the media reform discussions we are engaged in?

What happens when media is no longer seen as an essential part of democratic life but as just another industry shaped by commercial imperatives? If the institutions that once provided space for local voices, independent journalism, and public debate continue to decline, who fills the gap? Do we rely on corporate media giants, whose priorities are dictated by profit and advertising models? Do we turn to digital platforms that thrive on engagement-driven algorithms rather than civic responsibility? Or is there still space for a different kind of media—one rooted in community, accountability, and public service?

If media were treated as a public good, how might it be different? Could we imagine a system where independent and community-led platforms were recognised as essential infrastructure, much like libraries, schools, or public transport? If media is the foundation of an informed and engaged society, why has it been left so vulnerable to market forces? Should access to quality journalism, diverse storytelling, and civic discourse be determined by profitability, or is there a broader social value that cannot be captured in financial terms alone?

When policy discussions about the future of media focus on the role of large broadcasters and global digital platforms, who is left out? Why is there so little space in these debates for civic society, public service organisations, and community-led initiatives? If the current review of UK media regulation does not consider the role of local and independent voices, is it truly addressing the needs of the public? What would it take for policymakers to recognise that a vibrant, diverse, and accountable media ecosystem cannot be built solely on commercial interests?

If we look at the decline of regional newspapers, the struggles of community radio, and the increasing concentration of media ownership, what does this tell us about the state of public discourse? If the spaces for local news, cultural expression, and civic engagement disappear, do we risk creating a society where people feel increasingly disconnected from the places they live? Can democracy thrive when citizens have fewer opportunities to participate in shaping the stories that define their communities?

If community media were given the same recognition as other essential services, what role could it play in rebuilding trust, strengthening local democracy, and ensuring more people have access to information that directly affects their lives? Could investment in alternative ownership models—cooperatives, trusts, and publicly funded local initiatives—help to shift the balance away from the dominance of commercial interests? Would a system that prioritises public need over shareholder value create a more sustainable, inclusive, and representative media landscape?

When media is treated as a foundational service rather than an industry, does it change how we think about its purpose? If it were supported as an essential part of a functioning society, would we see a shift away from clickbait and divisive content towards journalism that informs, connects, and empowers? Could a reimagined approach to media policy help rebuild spaces where communities can tell their own stories, rather than being passive consumers of narratives shaped by distant editorial boards and opaque algorithms?

If UK policymakers continue to overlook the importance of community-led media, are they missing a vital opportunity to strengthen social cohesion and civic participation? Should public investment be directed towards local media initiatives that provide spaces for dialogue, representation, and engagement? If we fail to act, will we look back and realise that the moment for intervention passed us by, leaving behind a media landscape that serves only those who can afford to control it?

If media reform is on the table, is it not the time to ask these questions and imagine what a different future could look like?

2

I’m working on a policy paper that looks at media reform on the basis of devolved, distributed and decentralised principles. Some questions that I feel are relevant include:

Who shapes the media landscape in the UK, and who should? Ownership and governance have long been concentrated in a few hands, shaping public discourse in ways that reflect institutional priorities rather than the lived experiences of communities across the country.

For decades, debates about media reform have focused on the dominance of corporate conglomerates, the erosion of local journalism, and the shifting economic models that underpin the industry. Yet practical alternatives have often been sidelined in favour of critique. What would it take to move from identifying the problems to constructing viable solutions?

A federated and decentralised media system offers one possibility. Rather than reinforcing centralised control, would distributing media governance across regions and localities create a more accountable and representative system?

If public service media were structured as a network of regionally autonomous organisations, what principles should guide their funding, editorial independence, and accountability? Would such a model ensure that media reflects the diversity of experiences across the UK, or would it risk fragmentation and inconsistency?

How can the balance between national coherence and local autonomy be maintained without one overpowering the other?

Financing remains a persistent challenge. If independent and community-driven media is to thrive, what models could sustain it beyond the cycles of grant funding and philanthropic dependency?

Should public investment in media be reframed as an essential part of civic infrastructure, akin to housing, transport, and energy? If so, what mechanisms would prevent political influence over editorial content?

How can funding models be developed that ensure long-term sustainability without locking media organisations into the same commercial imperatives that have led to the concentration of ownership in the first place?

Governance structures also require rethinking. If media is to be truly accountable to the public, what role should civic society groups, trade unions, local authorities, and cooperative networks play in shaping decision-making?

How can regulatory frameworks be reformed to ensure they do not entrench existing monopolies or create new ones in different guises? Should oversight be localised to reflect the needs of specific communities, or does effective regulation require some degree of central coordination?

The conversation around media reform often remains theoretical, yet the need for pragmatic interventions has never been more urgent. How can advocates move beyond broad calls for change and towards detailed policy thinking that accounts for implementation challenges?

If new governance and funding models are to be tested, what transitional structures would allow for experimentation without jeopardising existing public service provision?

How can engagement across multiple sectors create the conditions for meaningful change rather than incremental adjustments to a system that is already failing to meet democratic and civic needs?

Structural reform is not a simple process, but neither is the status quo sustainable. If media is to serve communities rather than extract profit from them, if it is to be an agent of democracy rather than a tool of consolidation, then the discussion must move from critique to construction.

What would it take to build a media system that reflects the principles of subsidiarity, distributing power to the lowest level at which it can be effectively managed? What safeguards would be needed to ensure that decentralisation strengthens democracy rather than creating new centres of unaccountable influence?

How can the shift towards pluralistic and locally accountable media be driven not just by those who work within the sector, but by the wider public, who have the most at stake in how media functions?

What does a media system that genuinely serves the public look like? Who gets to decide? What happens next?