I guess there is lots of evidence that the same may be the case elsewhere, even for a longer period of time, but in my country - soon to be defeated on the football field by the Brazil national team - the victory of market-oriented media policy was celebrated already at the beginning of the nineties, the decade often being described as “statist” or even authoritarian in terms of media policy. The promise of market freedoms, obviously, had not borne fruit of informed citizenship. On the contrary, the “public sphere” shrank indeed. But the alliance of so called progressive forces - many journalists, centre left political opposition, civil society and the academia - said: “Come on, that can't be result of the market failures. The problem must be in our local, twisted, variety of the media market, and especially, the old elephant of political power in the newsroom.” So we decided to give the market a second chance. We may call it media pluralism or by other decent names, but basically it was a part of an effort, as David Harvey, famously put it, “to bring all human action into domain of the market”. Obviously, once again, we used the government as an instrument to do it. Unfortunately, the elephant of state control over the journalism was so big, and we were so close to it, or too small in perspective, that we weren't able to notice something much, much bigger: the iceberg of the market logic rolling behind it.