In the face of poverty, illiteracy, little social cohesion and severe discrimination, the Romani media has grown more quickly than any other national minority media in Eastern Europe since 1989. To a great extent, this development is the result of international organizations, national governments and NGOs taking seriously their obligations to protect the culture and interests of the Roma, as they do other national minority groups. It has been suggested that minority media can aid in identity building and cultural preservation as well as aid the integration process. The EU and other international organizations as well as many NGOs have supported Roma media initiatives in the hope that they will provide better access to information resulting in better political engagement by the historically marginalized Roma population. However, Peter Gross's analysis shows that Romani media outlets appear to defy the customary role of minority media, which calls into question the overall policy of treating the Roma as any other national minority, rather than craft a special policy specific to the needs and characteristics of the Roma.
Gross argued the idea that Romani media can preserve cultural identity and establish one unified Roma voice is only viable if a unified Roma identity exists. Gross's research shows that this is hardly the case. Moreover, the Roma media is less likely to find a Roma voice if it is owned and operated by non-Romani journalists and editors, and simply marketed to the Roma. A viable Romani media is important in combating the mainstream media's constant propagation of negative Roma stereotypes. Unfortunately, the Romani media is trying to develop at the same time as the Romani people are themselves struggling with the issues of illiteracy, poor education and poverty. And while no one has established the exact number of Romani media outlets (which may include up to 58 periodicals, 54 radio stations, 24 television programs, 13 news agencies, and 47 websites), given the limitations of illiteracy and poverty as well as the large number of languages and dialects used by different Roma groups, it is a fair question to ask who does this media serve?
Gross outlines five main problems faced by the Roma media. First, there are no distribution networks for Romani media, which means that periodicals do not reach their targets. Second, there is the shortage of Romani journalists. And while many programs exist to train Romani journalists, these individuals often leave the Romani media to work in the more prestigious, better paid mainstream media. Third, there is a general lack of understanding of the consumption patterns of Romani media, which makes it difficult for journalists and media owners to respond to their audience's needs. The fourth problem is that poverty among Roma means that there is no economic base to support independent Romani media. The final obstacle is the poor state of technical development of Romani media. Gross gives the example of a radio station in Macedonia, which works with obsolete equipment and inadequate manpower.
The EU-funded Roma Media Network Project has made several claims on the roles and functions of the Romani media. The Project claims that the Romani media plays a significant role in how the Roma perceive themselves, their culture, their history and their rights. Gross argues, however, that Romani media is seen and heard by only a small fraction of the population and only a small portion of its content is social or political. The Project also claims that the Romani media serves as a means of self-assertion for an oppressed people. But, when so many people who work in these media outlets are non-Roma and the few who are represent only the Roma elite, Gross argues that we can hardly expect Romani media to speak for the wider Roma community. In its current state, the Romani media, therefore, appears to be entirely ineffective as a means for cultural preservation or for the creation of a unified Roma identity