I think the main problem in our media system is the twofold. One is about the public. Most of the pubblications don’t think about the recipients: which recipient we are writing to and why? The impression is that one writes for oneself. In the s.c. Western world this has to do with racism. The other is the lack of an overall vision that can include the issues that a global world inevitably brings with it. We have the privilege of knowing what happens in other spaces thanks to journalism – not always – but we never make the most of this thing. I believe it is essential to be able to create alliances between even very distant territories, to share experiences, knowledge and practices. If the world-system commands us to atomize then we must respond with the exact opposite. What does this have to do with economic sustainability? I honestly don’t know. We live in a world that is increasingly controlled by private company social media, in an extreme capitalist system. I think we need to question the concept of the public, and from there derive an answer. Journalism is at the service of the public. And the public must be involved in the information process. Did people read more during the construction of imagined societies called nations? Did people have more desire to read? I think we need to rethink the concept of the imagined community, and therefore of the public. Make it global. But the question remains of understanding who the economic subjects are that can finance it all. Perhaps the answer lies in a system of self-financing of a global public service. That rejects profit and that places itself at the constant service of the most general interest possible. In this I believe that the African anti-colonial experience can be of great help. If we all want to be free, someone has to pay the price. Otherwise, we will continue to go round like hamsters in a wheel, playing the game of capital, and ending up delegitimizing the very task of the profession we have chosen to do.