The first argues that in the era of international markets and the global Internet, regulations become increasingly unsuitable. The maximalists, on the other hand, assert that media policies and regulations should promote social, cultural, and ethical values. The author confirms the continuing need for regulations, but argues these should not exclusively regulate the social control of content. I would argue here that neither the national nor the international media or legal authorities can control the rapid and intensive flow of information around the world unless they apply two proposals. First, intensively censor the content of the new media.
All contributors confirm the existence of regulatory frameworks in the countries examined.
According to Kyu Ho Youm, David Flynt, Teodory Y. Yabes, and Ang Peng Hwa, the cases of South Korea, Australia, the Philippines, and Singapore, respectively, are examples of this. Countries where there has been a gap in time between the introduction of the new electronic and transitional media and the governments' initiative to regulate these new media. The cases of India and Pakistan, according to Arun Mehat, Venhat Iyer, and Javed Jabbar, belong in this category. In the concluding chapter, the editor summarizes the workshop's resolutions by recommending that Asian governments should treat new media technologies as powerful tools, not as a threat. In the section on print media, no single indication is made about the future of the print media in the era of new media, nor any connection envisioned between the two types.