well as their technological and semiotic differences, justify the analysis of the remediations between the two media. The approach of a study of this type involving similar media may be less relevant, firstly because such remediations are more obvious, and secondly because this type of work is more common, as in the case of studies that relate radio (analogue or digital) to podcasting, one of which is the case of Ramos-Ruiz (2015), Espada (2017), Rodríguez-Pallarés (2017), López-Villafranca (2019), Moreno-Espinosa and Román-San Miguel (2020).

As indicated above, this study aims to demonstrate the existence of continuity in terms of production, scope, objectives, and the role of the user when comparing two clearly differentiated alternative media. We maintain that despite the ontological and semiotic distance of both media, there is a common thread in terms of citizen engagement and communication empowerment that challenges perspectives that state that participation in the media is linked to the digital explosion. The possibilities of communication empowerment of citizens have not arrived with the advent of the digital world. Certain participatory and inter-creative practices between users and media were already in place in the pre-digital alternative media era. This is why participatory media do not exist in themselves. What exist are systems of participation (therefore subject to a multitude of factors) that each media project is able to design, regardless of the media category to which they belong. Therefore, instead of focusing on a single aspect, we approach the analysis of both types of media from a holistic and systemic perspective based on Atton’s model (2002) described in Alternative Media, a reference work (focused on zines) related to the analysis of alternative media. Following their model, we carried out an analytical observation of both the zine and the podcast by looking at the following aspects: financing and scope, longevity of the projects, the aspect of being a personalised medium, instrumental capacity, and finally, the extent of creative strategies and experimental characteristecs (IDIC logic).

4. Zine-podcasting remediations

4.1. Financing and scope

Podcasting, as was generally the case in zine culture, is far from monetising its production and making a profit, since the vast majority of projects are clearly amateur, and there is even much less capital investment than what can be found in many other alternative projects. For example, in the case of zines the subscription model was a common method to obtain financing. This influx of capital provided at least some financial security, offering the medium the opportunity to carry out a certain amount of planning. However, in order to support podcasting projects, the acquisition of financial resources is not as crucial as it was in supporting zines, as the zines had to bear higher costs since they did not have a digital platform for the development of their operations. In spite of this, zines represented a relatively cheap form of communication thanks to reprographic technology that played the role of massive newspaper printing presses. During the 1970s and 1980s, the alternative media made extensive use of reprographic equipment, which made them at least independent technically, if not financially.

In podcasting, this lack of capital investment is beneficial due to the fact that there is practically no need for investment when starting a project. The free use of digital services, the progressive decline in the cost of the necessary audio