members to the rule of law, by incorporating senior judiciary into the CSCE process. The editorial voice also needs to be reinforced within the vital area of continuing dialogue. The proprietors and trade union interests are already well-served by FIEJ and the IFJ but when one looks at the necessary mechanisms for achieving self-regulation much supported throughout the seminar, the gap can be seen quite clearly. Who will police self-regulation? It should, in my submission, be editors and I would commend the formation of national groups linked under the umbrella of a pan-European association. I know my own association of British Editors and the Association of European Journalists would be happy to work with any other organisation to make that possible and I hope the CSCE might also use its influence in this area. Although most delegates are confident that the historical use of the term "press freedom" applies to all media, this needs to be underlined and, in view of the explosion of new technologies, we ought to consider developing the use of "media freedom" as a more appropriate term. In doing so, we should also recognise that there are additional problems for radio and television professionals. A combination of economics and the regulated system of signal distribution make it unlikely that television stations in the Eastern European countries will be able to take short-term advantage of the new technology. A colleague from Slovakia appealed for help in the creation of some form of sustaining service to be available to all countries across the region. This provoked much discussion about national and regional identity and some scepticism about the feasibility. However, our Washington colleague, David Webster, who has been working on the idea for some time asserts that it is technically possible but - and I quote - "it will need political will and a leap of the imagination to make it happen with a mix of public and private finance." Whether or not that will exist or can be stimulated remains to be seen. I hope the CSCE and interested NGOs might make a serious study of the possibilities. I know Mr. Webster will be more than ready to co-operate. One of the special features of this seminar has been the quality and range of written material submitted by a sometimes bewildering array of individuals and organisations. I suspect the volume is such that it will take some weeks to properly digest the information the documents contain but I do strongly commend them to delegates and urge the ODIHR to consider publishing them in some form. Within them are solutions to many problems and that allows this report to be much briefer than would otherwise have been necessary. Please, fellow delegates, use these papers to light your imaginations rather than your bonfires! I am indebted to a colleague from Norway who reminded us that freedom - and in our context that means media freedom - must be put to the test every day if it is not to vanish. I cannot think of a better watchword for journalists throughout the world. Mr. Jock Gallagher, U.K. Executive Director, Association of British Editors Discussion Group 2, Journalistic Freedom and Responsibility in a Democratic System: Our topic was journalistic freedom and responsibility in a democratic media system - a Janus-like formulation that is the hallmark of any good-faith effort to discuss the topic of contending claims in the constant clash known as democracy. Ambivalence ran through our exchanges: freedom versus responsibility, democracy versus system, the rights of individuals as journalists or as citizens. This dynamic is inherent in the media's role in democracy, where press freedom is always a process, never an end state. Like the vote, it can never be captured permanently. If it is constricted by over-zealous regulation, the media will re-invent itself - but in underground forms less likely to function in the daylight of democratic give and take. Shooting the messenger because one does not like the message is a CSCE ODIHR BULLETIN Vol. 2, No. 1 27