The Marketplace of Ideas Metaphor In Communications Regulation

Abstract

The "marketplace of ideas" metaphor has been interpreted from democratic and economic theory perspectives. These different interpretive approaches emphasize different policy objectives and have been associated with divergent regulatory philosophies. To reach a deeper understanding of how regulators have interpreted and applied the marketplace of ideas metaphor, I analyzed the use of the metaphor over the past 33 years by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). I conducted content analysis on each FCC decision, from mid-1965FCC decision, from mid- through mid-1998 which the "marketplace of ideas" terminology was used. The results suggest that the metaphor typically has been used within the context of deregulatory actions, and that, in recent years, the Commission increasingly has focused on the economic theory dimension of the metaphor. However, the results for the 33-year period indicate no significant relationship between the type of regulatory action taken and the theoretical interpretation of the marketplace of ideas metaphor employed.The "marketplace of ideas" metaphor is one of the foundation concepts in communications regulation. As such, it has been the subject of intensive scrutiny and analysis in legal, academic, and policy circles (e.g.A key point that emerges from these analyses is that the metaphor contains elements of both democratic theory and economic theory. This duality has allowed widely divergent interpretations of the metaphor to develop. My central concern in this paper is that these different theoretical approaches emphasize different policy objectives. Economic theory-based interpretations of the marketplace of ideas emphasize efficiency, consumer satisfaction, and competition, whereas democratic theory-based interpretations emphasize citizen knowledge, informed decisionmaking, and effective self-government. Within discussions of the marketplace of ideas metaphor, economic theory-based interpretations typically have been associated with arguments against government regulation of the communications industry, whereas democratic theory-based interpretations typically have been asso-

Promoting Diversity and Pluralism in Contemporary Communication Policies in the United States and the United Kingdom

“…We are therefore left with a situation in which the discourse of pluralism and diversity is extraordinarily common in British media policymaking, eloquently defined, clearly distinguished, but increasingly conceptualized in terms of efficiency, consumer satisfaction, and customer choice. Philip Napoli noted a similar "shift in orientation" in the United States from looking at diversity as a public good toward one that is a "tangible and empirically assessable construct" (Napoli, 1999a, p. 8), an illustration of the contemporary neo-liberal interpretation of the "marketplace of ideas" metaphor (Napoli, 1999b). It appears that, in the contemporary U.S. and UK policy arenas, the objectives of media diversity and media pluralism are converging around the rhetoric of competition and choice.…”

“…The second is based on the classic liberal paradigm of media freedom in which a democratic society sustains a "marketplace of ideas." Philip Napoli (1999b) argued that this metaphor has its origins in both liberal economic and democratic theory and has competition-based as well as public good objectives. It…”

Policy Implications From Algorithmic Profiling and the Changing Relationship Between Newsreaders and the Media

“…There are then implications for the future of competition in the marketplace of ideas (for a critical discussion of this theory in general, see Napoli [1999]). Many new players entered the media market, bringing new dynamics and fundamental changes to the nature of competition.…”

Editorial: Who Is Afraid to Give Freedom of Speech to Marketing Folks?

“…From an economic theory perspective, the competitive marketplace of ideas perspective suggests that competition between ideas leads to efficiency and consumer satisfaction (Napoli 1999). From a political theory perspective, the competitive marketplace of ideas perspective leads to better citizens who are better informed about more points of view and, consequently, better self-governance (Napoli 1999).…”

“…From an economic theory perspective, the competitive marketplace of ideas perspective suggests that competition between ideas leads to efficiency and consumer satisfaction (Napoli 1999). From a political theory perspective, the competitive marketplace of ideas perspective leads to better citizens who are better informed about more points of view and, consequently, better self-governance (Napoli 1999). Finally, despite the limited scope of this discussion, the exploration of this topic in an international setting might be more important than in a U.S. setting (for a general discussion of globalization and marketing, see Stremersch and Verhoef 2005).…”