The political economic ideas of philosophers John Rawls and Robert Nozick are compared in this paper, and their implications for mass media public policy are explored. The paper first examines the position of each philosopher, noting the major principles set forth in their works, historical antecedents for their ideas, and possible applications to the mass media. Rawls' position is that only inequalities that cause greater productivity and therefore greater benefits to all are justified, while Nozick maintains that since most inequalities are caused by innate or acquired individual differences in capabilities, individuals are entitled to what they have justly acquired. The paper then examines precedents for incorporating political economic theory into public policy, points out shared and individual weaknesses in the ideas of Rawls and Nozick, and discusses possibilities for developing reasonable compromises between the clashing values of equality and individual liberty in media system policy issues. (GW)