A long‐standing division in positions on media policy reflects differences in faith regarding the efficacy of market versus government processes for achieving important communications policy objectives. The debate over content diversity between the advocates of market solutions and those who are critical of them reveals that the standard arguments of both camps rest on differences in assumptions that have not been subjected to careful analysis. Furthermore, analysts in each camp have failed to acknowledge or incorporate into their own analyses the other camp's legitimate insights. The result is a flawed policy dialogue that shows no signs of iterating toward a consensus or of making much progress toward an improved understanding of the requirements for effective communications policy. This failure reflects, in part, limitations in the constructs implied by the “marketplace of ideas” metaphor that has guided much of the thinking by both camps and the ways these constructs have been employed. New metaphors are needed to guide an expanded research agenda designed to assist in the development of more effective communications p