On the Internet, for example, information is cheap and plentiful, but much of it is of dubious quality. There is a need to look carefully at the implications of a proliferation of channels. It would be simplistic to extend our experience with broadcasting so far and to think that in the future world we end up with a multitude of channels of more or less equal size and influence. That would be nice if it were to occur. But reality may turn out to be different.
Channels attract audiences with their content.
And content is not cheap to make. The big battles to secure rights over sporting features and the big mergers of media companies with production houses can be understood more readily if we look at them as strategic positioning for the future supply of programs. It is likely that the industry of the future will be dominated by a few companies collectively attracting a large proportion of the audience at one end of the spectrum and a proliferation of very small specialised channels serving special interest groups at the other. The current print media industry, with its handful of major newspapers catering for large audiences and a large number of newsletters each catering to a small special interest group provides a good analogy. The commercial interests would certainly like to see that happen.