Beirut, Lebanon - Compared to the abysmal standards for press freedom in the Arab world, the Lebanese media comes out looking relatively free. The paradox, however, is that this is often the result of an abnormality: media outlets are private and mostly represent contending political or other interests, and from that cacophony information emerges that would not in a more centralized, government-controlled media environment.

Self-censorship is practiced, certainly, depending on the circumstances and the topics covered by journalists. Expect no criticism of the Hariri camp in the Hariri-owned Al-Mustaqbal daily, nor many darts directed against Hezbollah in a recently-established newspaper, Al-Akhbar, whose funders sympathize with the party. But both provide distinct insights into an overall political picture in Lebanon. This situation speaks to the advantages of an unregulated (if not, technically, "free") media market.

In praising Lebanon's free press, many will ignore a less hopeful feature of recent years: it's the audio-visual media, not newspapers, that shape public opinion most powerfully. The total distribution of daily newspapers is likely less than 100,000 copies, for a population of some 4 million. That shows the extent to which papers are economically vulnerable, since they are dependent on a small advertisement market. This pushes them to seek alternative financing from other sources, often wealthy investors or governments, which can limit their freedom of expression.

Nor is the audio-visual market in a much healthier state. Local Lebanese stations suffer from limited advertising, while those that broadcast on satellite must compete in a very tight regional ad market, again making them dependent on plutocrats or governments.

Nonetheless, Lebanon's media is still fascinating to wade through. There is also an odd respect for forms. I recall being highly critical of Hezbollah in a piece published several years ago, after party figures found themselves in a dilemma with respect to a part of their electorate in the Bekaa Valley involved in drug production. Hezbollah did not endorse drug production, but a parliamentarian defended those involved, for fear of alienating them. I wrote that he had behaved hypocritically for a member of so allegedly moral an organization, earning me an angry letter from a party representative. The very next week I published the contents of that letter in my weekly column, which I suppose was commendably insolent.

The incident left me with two thoughts: that Hezbollah took the trouble of reading, and taking seriously, whatever was written about it; and that my decision to print the letter was not followed by anything more aggressive on the party's side. I've often faulted Hezbollah, and still do, but in this case its people respected the rules of the game. I like to think that was because the Lebanese are used to a pluralistic, dissonant media. I can only hope that this restraint hasn't changed.