quences, such as increased pollution-related deaths as polluters employ technologies that asing what is not measured In short, choosing a method of measurement of media concentration is not the same as a debate about using the metric system versus the avoirdupois system of weights First, we need to decide what is bad (or good) about such concentration, either in itself, or because of its effects. and then second we must design measurements of concentration or of the effects of concentration that make sense in terms of policy goals or effects Therefore, we cannot jump directly into the measurement debate without consid- ering what it is that we want to measure and why. On the other hand the what and the why are highly contentious issues. There cannot be a single"correct way to measure concentration if people differ about the nature of the problem, its effects, and its proper remedies. Given the limited scope of the assignment here, it seems most effective simply to make, for purposes of this paper, some assertions or assumptions about these matters Then we can turn to the measurement issues without having the ground shifting under foot. Even then there is no single correct way to measure concentration, as will be dem- onstrated below. Different conclusions about measurement may well result, of course, if one accepts assumptions about the nature of the problem that differ from those used here The media Concentration problem Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of griev ances CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AMENDMENT I, adopted 1791 (emphasis added) Freedom of speech and of the press from government abridgement is a fundamen tal right conferred on American citizens by the Bill of Rights. Although this right has been much weakened by the Supreme Court's reluctance to accord the same freedom to electronic media as to print, it retains a central position in our constellation of political freedoms. Indeed, many Americans understand this freedom to be broader(or different) than it is. It is common to encounter those who assert or simply assume that freedom of- 4 - 4 quences, such as increased pollution-related deaths as polluters employ technologies that reduce what is measured by increasing what is not measured. In short, choosing a method of measurement of media concentration is not the same as a debate about using the metric system versus the avoirdupois system of weights. First, we need to decide what is bad (or good) about such concentration, either in itself, or because of its effects, and then, second, we must design measurements of concentration or of the effects of concentration that make sense in terms of policy goals or effects. Therefore, we cannot jump directly into the measurement debate without consid￾ering what it is that we want to measure and why. On the other hand, the what and the why are highly contentious issues. There cannot be a single “correct” way to measure concentration if people differ about the nature of the problem, its effects, and its proper remedies. Given the limited scope of the assignment here, it seems most effective simply to make, for purposes of this paper, some assertions or assumptions about these matters. Then we can turn to the measurement issues without having the ground shifting under￾foot. Even then there is no single correct way to measure concentration, as will be dem￾onstrated below. Different conclusions about measurement may well result, of course, if one accepts assumptions about the nature of the problem that differ from those used here. The Media Concentration Problem Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of griev￾ances. CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AMENDMENT I, adopted 1791. (emphasis added) Freedom of speech and of the press from government abridgement is a fundamen￾tal right conferred on American citizens by the Bill of Rights. Although this right has been much weakened by the Supreme Court’s reluctance to accord the same freedom to electronic media as to print, it retains a central position in our constellation of political freedoms. Indeed, many Americans understand this freedom to be broader (or different) than it is. It is common to encounter those who assert or simply assume that freedom of