How to achieve media pluralismThere are two main challenges regarding how to capture pluralism: one is related to how to measure it and, on this, what kind of regulations could and should be improved for the purpose of guarantee standards that contribute to strengthening democracy. Regarding this effort, Behmer analyzes, compares and discusses some of the international attempts to measure freedom of expression. It highlights the weaknesses and strengths of four international rankings (Freedom House, Reporters Without Borders and two other studies in a qualitative framework). In general, Behmer highlights methodological problems (what and how is measured, and also who does it); behind-the-scenes NGO programs (especially in both Freedom House and RSF) and a libertarian conception of freedom of expression as negative freedom (“freedom from”) rather than positive freedom (“freedom to”). This implies that the analyzed measurement emphasizes the role of states in problems of freedom of expression, but omits other structural problems. Behmer's criticism has denaturalized the rankings of freedom of expression and opens up ways in which to help improve this debate. Despite their limitations, all these investigations demonstrate the international interest in the topic and also provide a valuable service. Therefore, a set of regional regulations was built on previous national experiences. As several authors point out that despite the pressure to loosen regulations on public media systems and the enormous influence of technologies in reshaping the media landscape as a whole and public media in particular, they are still central to the societies in which they operate currently (Curran et al., 2014; Benson and Powers, 2011;,