The Main Criticisms of the Cultural Imperialism Thesis Made by Media Globalisation Theorists - Coursework Example

DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY SGM100 TRANSNATIONAL MEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS (PRD1A 15) RICHARD COLLINS CULTURAL IMPERIALSIM ESSAY TITLE OUTLINE THE MAIN CRITICISMS OF THE CULTURAL IMPERIALISM THESIS MADE BY MEDIA GLOBALISATION THEORISTS. ARE THESE CRITICISMS VALID? STUDENT NUMBER: 130050783 Table of Contents References 15 Outline the main criticisms of the cultural imperialism thesis made by media globalisation theorists. Are these criticisms valid? Introduction The concept of imperialism is linked with the ability of the state to expand the empire, its influence as well as the sphere of power. The historical context of imperialism examines how various cultural forces have played a significant role in shaping cultural imperialism. Media imperialism, or cultural imperialism, has been defined in different literature excerpts as the notion of strong nations dominating culturally weaker nations. The concept of cultural or media imperialism is also associated with communication imperialism, ideological imperialism as well as cultural colonialism1. The link in between imperialism and culture is primarily concerned with attaining a common currency in the political and academic debate of North-South relations, specifically in the Latin America. The paper will explore the concept of cultural imperialism in the context of media globalisation. Media globalisation results in media imperialism which incorporates the international media as the main channel for circulation of foreign cultural values and local traditions on a global level. The essay aims at outlining the main criticisms of the cultural imperialism thesis that were presented by media globalisation theorists. The essay focuses on proofing the validity of these criticisms extended by the media globalisation theorists. The first part of the essay explores the meaning and definition of the concept of cultural imperialism. It also places emphasis on globalisation of the media and how it has influenced the viewpoint of cultural imperialism. Moreover, the paper demonstrates the concept of globalisation and how it has affected the cultural processes on a global level. The essay gives deeper focus on foreign domination specifically from the United States in terms of media and globalisation. The last part explores the criticism set forth by the media globalisation theorists regarding the cultural imperialism theory and how these criticisms remain valid in nature. Argument Are the criticisms made by media globalisation theorists regarding the cultural imperialism thesis valid in nature or not? Discussion Cultural Imperialism The concept of cultural imperialism is principally the practice of endorsing a strong culture over a weaker or least desirable culture. Cultural imperialism might serve as a reason for taking a form of an active policy formulation or general attitude. The historical context of the term cultural imperialism is considered to have originated within the year 1960 and has been a subject of widespread concern ever since the beginning of that era2. The concept of cultural imperialism, as described by a media critic, can be defined as the sum of processes, according to which society is transformed into a modern world system as well as shaping of the global system based on foreign domination via public media3. According to him, public media has been regarded as a key example of the operating enterprises utilised within the penetrative process on a significant scale, that can be attributed to the commercialization of the broadcasting paradigm. There has been a trend whereby the major criticism is linked with the idea of how these critics have determined the idea of circulation of the American culture on the global level as a thinly shrouded tool and tactic for global economic expansion based on the idea of globalisation4. Additionally, the scientists took the opposite view and entirely rejected the concept of cultural imperialism. The rejection is founded on the idea that various empires have existed before the United States and that those empires were not focused on imposing their culture on weaker nations. Criticism of cultural imperialism is also constructed on the idea that nongovernmental organizations were the most effective exporters of American culture to other countries. However, today some researchers believe that the resistance to the external cultural influence in other countries reduces or completely negates the import of cultural products. American society of the 1960 was an example of the rejection of US foreign policy. The American society raised strong opposition to their desire for presence and influence in other parts of the world. This is largely attributed to the American military aggression in Vietnam, and the desire of the United States to extend the range of its influence during the ideological confrontation with the Soviet Union in the Cold War era. Hence, from the historical context, American scientists begin to actively discuss the term American cultural imperialism and its related problems5. Despite the fact that the term “cultural imperialism” was mentioned before, it was in the 1960s that this critical concept took shape in a full and coherent argument. Very often, in different sources, the term “cultural imperialism” corresponds to the use of political and economic power in order to disseminate and popularize the values and customs of a foreign culture to the detriment of the indigenous culture. Typically, cultural imperialism critics are unanimous that Western culture is an aggressive, predatory force, based on the provision that the biggest capitalist powers can exist only if they are indispensable for economic, geographic, ideological and cultural superiority6. Opponents of the theory fail to provide enough evidence to disapprove the idea that cultural imperialism has had a major influence on globalization. Globalisation and Media Media Imperialism The idea of media imperialism particularly relates with the theory which corresponds to the centralization of mass media from strong nations such as United States, France and the United Kingdom in negatively affecting weaker and less influential nations7. The prime consequence of such foreign domination via mass media include lessening or complete loss of the national identity of the weaker nations merely due to media homogeneity inherent to mass media from more influential nations. It has been alleged by the critics of globalisation that the media remains the prime essence of American culture and one of the main instruments of its distribution. However, on the one hand, the modern Western culture serves as a reason for creating a deadlock for other cultures and local traditions of the weaker nations or states8. American culture is a prisoner of itself, due to the distributed media and other cultural trends; American culture has to play by the rules and market conditions in advance. The concept of media imperialism eminently found support from a number of American scientists. In a series of papers and media researches on associated problems, H. Shiller identified a close link between higher business, the military, and the government on the one hand, with the so-called “Manipulators of minds”, who are basically the heads of leading US media corporations9. Thus, between these two forces, according to Schiller, is a relationship with the main aim of controlling and manipulating minds, both within the country and abroad leading to the concept of cultural imperialism. The concept of cultural imperialism is seen as global dominance of one state, exploiting the power of mass media to globalize their ideals. A number of globalisation theorists have noticed within their researches how the spreading and imposing of Western cultural values in other countries through respective governments is an attempt to “nationalise” the global political system in the quest for global leadership10. American culture, in this case, acts as a universal language understood by a majority of people globally. Proponents of this view argued that in the twentieth century, American politicians began to deliberately spread their local tradition and norms, highlighting the concept of an open and free economy in order to establish a market for American goods11. This resulted in making culture a tool that facilitated the integration of different countries in a single international economic system that simultaneously led to cultural unification and standardization. However, based on theories by Liebes and Katz, the view that cultural unification was possible meets opposition because of the differences in understanding and retention of American values among people of diverse cultures worldwide. Mass Communication in the Globalisation Globalisation, in the context of media discourse, has served as a reason for making the world a global village by establishing a virtual world space. The evolution of the communication patterns of the media has resulted in new ways and patterns for human interaction and blending of cultures12. The concept of globalisation particularly correlates with the international integration of views, ideas and culture, but the globalisation of mass media has resulted in giving rise to media imperialism making media the key factor of globalisation. Global communicative space is closely linked with the development of a global village and how it has enhanced the communication and information conveyance patterns of the globe13. Today, mass media has reached an altitude which had never been achieved before the conception of television and internet. The magnitude to which mass media has effected globalisation is evident from how the access to information is global in nature, making the local traditions and norms of a particular culture widespread on a global level. Globalisation and Its Impact on Cultural Processes Globalisation is defined as the international integration of processes and ideas, which typically correlates with how the consumption and prevalence of certain particular cultures have been the by- product of mass media and internet14. The process of globalisation has not only enhanced the trade relevant procedure amongst the countries, but has also given rise to spread of culture and value, primarily through media globalisation. The term globalisation is fixed in the scientific revolution, illustrating the different approaches to the understanding of this phenomenon15. The main thesis of this concept is that culture is basically a reflection of the new state of humanity. Key points of the demonstration of global change are worldwide tourism and the emergence of cultural hybrids, postmodern culture, and new forms of reconstruction experiences16. The spread of cultures through mass media and the internet often results in intermixing of the cultures. Media globalisation theorists have highlighted how media has enabled the intermingling of cultures and often resulted in giving rise to the perception of media imperialism, which remains the most visible aspect of cultural globalisation17. The model of a global community, as proposed by Sklerom, is based on the significance of international relations and the development of the world community as a special partner network without a centre, where a significant role in solving global problems belongs to a network of non-governmental organizations. The basis of this approach is the concept of “transnational practices”, which cover the area much wider than the scope of international relations at the level of national states18. Transnational practices affect the economic, political and cultural institutions of society, forming specific education in every area. The Postmodern model of globalisation is typically based on the latest understanding of space and time. In this model, the change is stated as the spatial and temporal forms of human perception of reality, which in turn leads to a change pattern of values in the world. The development of information technology and electronic media removed the feeling of space and eliminated so-called resistance of the space19. The consequence of this corresponds to the emergence of cultural hybrids, which are largely the construction of new cultural forms from different fragments, having independent value and new meanings. However, the problem triggered by the rise of globalisation, has led to the threat of loss of “locality”, which is results in a gap between the roots forming the local paradigm of behaviour due to global migration flows of labour20. Loss of locality is better understood via an example which states that, being physically separated from their ethnic roots, migrants tend to maintain connection with their ethnic homeland due to modern means of communication, whereas the deepening impact of western traditions prevails subconsciously within the minds of people leading to the idea of cultural imperialism. The Globalisation of Culture The Socio-Cultural Dynamics of Globalisation The socio-cultural dynamics of globalisation relates to conceptualising of the term ‘globalisation’ as a series of empirically observable changes, heterogeneous but united by the logic of turning the world into a single socio-cultural space21. The decisive role in the systematization of the global world is given to global human consciousness. The usage of the concept of “culture”, considering its content reflects only the empty and unsuccessful attempts as anthropologists talk about primitive and illiterate communities without involving sociological terms and concepts. Therefore, in accordance with a number of media globalisation theorists, it remains necessary to raise the question of socio-cultural components regarding the process of globalisation within the historical and cultural dimension22. The increasing cultural contact on the basis of wide spread of traditional practices has served as a reason for the socio-cultural dynamics of globalisation. The historical bearers of global human consciousness served as a reason for the formulation of the socio-cultural continuum of world history. The Socio-cultural history of globalisation served as societal unit started in this model, as “national society”, or nation-state-society23. The concept of the socio-cultural dynamic of globalisation also correlates with the idea of how a locality with a weak national identity or under heavy influence of foreign media results in the loss of its identity. The inception of such foreign domination relates with the formation of new translation communities, particularly bound together on the basis of profession, common interest, geographical closeness or cultural pervasiveness through mass media and the internet24. Global Culture and Cultural Expansion The concept of “global culture” is built in accordance with the criteria laid down by scientific designation of a phenomenon of social life. It has been argued by a number of sociologists that the original concept of “culture” is defined in the conventional social-scientific sense, which is the belief, values ​​and way of life of ordinary people in their everyday existence25. In addition, further discourse unfolds on a standard for cultural studies, which identifies the historical and cultural background of the viewpoint of cultural expansion in regard to its carriers, space-time characteristics, and the dynamics of development.  The concept of global popular culture, which evidently promotes Western businesses, chiefly includes retail, food and entertainment companies such as Adidas, Mcdonald’s, Disney, Mtv etc. The sway of western business has served as a reason for expanding westernized culture through mass media. According to the media globalist theorists, the core bearers of mass culture remains in accordance with the criterion of belonging and uncomplicated consumption26. Therefore, the involvement in the consumption values, symbols, beliefs and other Western mass culture resulted into media imperialism, which subjugated the weaker cultures due to the power of media and globalisation. The social and cultural dynamics of the concept of globalisation also corresponds to certain trends. The first trend is understood as a deliberate hybridisation synthesis of Western and local culture in business, economic practices, religious beliefs and symbols27. The basis of such an interpretation of the process of implementation of ideology and practice of global culture is the texture of gradations of strong and weak culture. The concept of strong culture was regarded as those who are capable of creative adjustment of culture, for processing samples of American culture on the basis of their own cultural traditions28. The Cultures of East Asia, South Asia, Japan, China and India were being referred as strong cultures. Whereas, the cultures corresponding to African and European countries were regarded as weak in regards to integration of American culture. Critics of Cultural Imperialism Theory The concept of cultural imperialism inculcates various imprecise and unsettled methodological and theoretical issues and concerns. According to various media globalisation theorists, it has been highlighted how the cultural imperialist theorists have projected significant provincialism, overlooking the prevalence of empires in front of the United States. Ever since the beginning of the 16th century, the origination of various cultural programs has resulted in the exchange and influence of culture through exporting it through various channels29. The concept of how people and governments imposed their cultures within other countries comprises the examples of the British imposing their culture in India and the Middle East and Germans in Africa via trade, commerce or political influence. This has been the case from the historic perspective, emphasising the idea that trade and commerce at that time were the most powerful tools of influencing culture30. However, with the advancements in technology, the world has evolved into a global village, giving rise to the concept of “technological imperialism”. The attempt regarding how the state officials remain keen on scientific learning for the sole purpose of formulating an international network of communication. This is evident from the German influence in Argentina, China etc31. The rapid development of technology has also resulted in the rise of the influence of the media and internet which has led to the evolution of technological patterns. A number of case studies within the private interest group correspond to the idea that neither the American policymakers nor businessmen had an active role in expanding the influence of American or Western culture abroad. On the other hand, non-governmental American organisations were the leading and most active advocates of American culture, circulating and impressing their values abroad through different means32. The most vigorous attack against the cultural imperialism critic’s is associated with the names of Frederick Buell and Tomlinson following the footsteps of Schiller. Fredrick Buell states that the three-world theory is largely responsible for the way people predominantly perceive cultural order33. Buell further states that global cultures merge to form one large cultural network taking characteristics of strong cultures. The rhetoric idea of Tomlinson states that the first world of the countries as males and third world as being females who have submissive cultures34. This corresponds to how various theorists including Schiller later assumed from the imperialist perspective, that the weak, helpless or less preferred cultures are primarily of the third world countries and outlined how the western modernity and western cultures acts as supreme cultures, dominating the weaker ones. The critics of cultural imperialism also instigated a theory of suffering, which relates with the inefficient means of the language of domination and imposition. The concept of cultural imperialism in accordance with a theorist called John Tomlinson primarily related with spreading the modernity, which is specifically illustrated as not a process of cultural expansion but a process of cultural loss35. However, within this technological era, it is not the set of people or group of conspirators, attempting to circulate any specific culture. Rather, global technological integration as well as economic progress has served as a reason for articulating the more powerful culture, by exploiting the means of broadcasting, media and the internet36. Hence, media has played an important role in reducing the power of a particular national culture based on the increase of the influence of western media across the globe. The idea of imperialism in this regard remains a purposeful conquest of a particular culture corresponding to being irrelevant of the location, being victimised of a worldwide cultural change. Ever since the year 1980, a number of scholars have paid increased attention to both local as well as global aspects of the western and Americanised cultural transfer37. Within the context of resurfacing nationalism, various scholars and theorists have conducted a research based on outlining detailed analysis of individual communities who came under contact and influence of western culture (particularly American culture) after World War II. The concept of globalisation and cultural imperialism is often derived from unilateral imperialism, which relates to the concept of global modernization38. A number of scholars have also illustrated their views regarding the American culture, the response to which efficiently addresses certain pre-conceptions regarding the increasing influence of multiple human reactions being exposed to various external impressions such as visual perception, text or sound effect. The response theory also demonstrates the viewpoint of audience and gauges their reaction regarding the broadcasting paradigm. The response theory has received support from cultural theorists who argue that the recipient of a message will understand it based on their past experiences and cultural training. The response theory further states that audiences are bound to interpret messages the same way if they share cultural values, attitudes and norms. The influence of U.S. cultural imperialism corresponds to the response theory, which emerged in the mid 80’s. It efficiently studies the specific aspects of a culture which may include music, literature, television, religion etc for calibrating the effects of American culture abroad39. The core findings of the author surrounds the assessment of the influence of American culture. However, the acceptance of a culture by the local people is not restrained to only consumer goods, but rather accepts the cultural formulation as well. The example of opinion is evident from the fact that the youth of Australia has revised the original meaning of coca cola, jeans etc into something that is local and fits within their culture, offering freedom from social constraints40. Various scholars demarcated a thoughtful appeal of western cultures to non western countries. At the same time, these scholars have challenged how the United States policy makers sought to manipulate certain weaker cultures and target groups. Multiple other studies focus on the effects of cultural imperialism underlining the prime difference between the foreign government and foreign people41. Various other theorists including Charles Whitney and James Ettema (2006) highlighted within their researches how the audience makes conscious choices regarding what they listen to, see and read42. According to various researches and studies regarding Eastern Europe and the underground movement in China illustrate how television programs and media broadcasting has served as a reason for immensely affecting and inspiring the audiences for initiating a revolution paradigms, often against their own leaders. On the contrary, another group of theorists and scholars have concluded that audiences do not simply accept the influence of cultural imperialism brought about by Western culture, rather, sometimes they develop a strong resistance against Western culture and products43. Conclusion The concept of cultural imperialism in the context of media globalisation consequent into the media imperialism which correlates with international media as a major source of circulating and broadcasting the foreign cultural variation and local traditions on a global level. Various response theorists correspond to the model of unilateral attempt, which primarily attempts to force consumer products as well as ideas over foreign nations. In this particular regard, cultural identity as well as resistance served as a reason for playing a strong role for receiving the norms and values of American culture abroad. Media played a huge role in this regard and lead towards the concept of media imperialism, which was particularly regarded as conquering the world through American pop culture. Media globalisation theorists and critics have imposed the idea of globalisation of media is affecting and giving rise to the concept of cultural imperialism, and foreign domination, particularly imposed by western countries (such as United States) through their strong media and broadcasting powers. References Barker, C. (1999) Television, Globalization and Cultural Identities. Buckingham: Open University Press, pp. 1-7; 33-59. Baylis, J., Smith, S., & Owens, P. (Eds.). (2013). The globalization of world politics: An introduction to international relations. Oxford University Press, pp. 35-65. Retrieved From: http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=kH0oAgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP2&dq=Global+Transformations:+politics,+economics+and+culture,+Cambridge:+Polity+Press&ots=OEypU44Uho&sig=QeJOSwPN9tCXp0i8y42MQJ3YHF4#v=onepage&q=Global%20Transformations%3A%20politics%2C%20economics%20and%20culture%2C%20Cambridge%3A%20Polity%20Press&f=false (Accesed 20 June 2015) Beck, U. and Levy D. (2013) Cosmopolitanised Nations: Re-imagining Collectivity in World Risk Society. In Theory Culture Society, pp. 10-21. Castells, M. (2000) The information age: economy, society and culture, vol 1: The Rise of the network society, 2nd edition, Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 12-25. Chalaby, J. (2009) Transnational Television in Europe: Reconfiguring Global Communications Networks. London: IB Tauris. Chapter 10, pp. 35-55. Collins, R. (1994). Trading in Culture: The Role of Language. Canadian Journal of Communication, 19, pp. 377-99. Curran, J. and Park, M. (2000). “Beyond Globalization theory” in De-Westernizing Media Studies, Routledge, London, 3-19 Featherstone, M. (1990). Global Culture – Nationalism, Globalization and Modernity, pp. 55-80. Held, D. and McGrew, A. (2000). The Great Globalization Debate: An Introduction. In The Global Transformations Reader. Eds Held, D and A McGrew. Cambridge. Polity, pp. 3-8. Herman, S. and McChesney, W. (2004). The Global Media – the New Missionaries of Corporate Capitalism. London : Continuum. pp. 44- 58. Mattelart, A. (1979). Multinational corporations and the control of culture: the ideological approaches of imperialism, Hassocks: Harvester Press, pp. 68-75. Morley, D. (2005). Globalisation and cultural imperialism reconsidered. Media and cultural theory, London: Routledge. pp. 32-45. Retrieved From: http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=ON82ks7j40IC&oi=fnd&pg=PA30&dq=+%E2%80%9CMedia+Imperialism&ots=SH2gqyapU1&sig=rGLzxxnaclVHoKobPiK_ymI2Rn8#v=onepage&q=%E2%80%9CMedia%20Imperialism&f=false (Accesed 20 June 2015) Neyazi, T. A. (2010). Cultural imperialism or vernacular modernity? Hindi newspapers in a globalizing India. Media, Culture & Society, 32(6), pp. 907-924. Retrieved From: http://mcs.sagepub.com/content/32/6/907.extract Pieterse, J. N. (2004) “Globalization as Hybridization” in Globalization and Culture – Global Melange, Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield, pp. 59-85 Rantanen, T. (1997) ‘The Globalization of News in the 19th Century’, Media, Culture & Society, 19(4), pp. 605-620. Rantanen, T. (2005) The Media and Globalization, London: Sage, pp. 35-55. http://smpsebastiao.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/the_media_and_globalization.pdf Schiller, H. (1969). Mass Communication and American Empire, New York: A. M. Kelley Publishers. Sommier, M. (2014). The Concept of Culture in Media Studies: A Critical Review of Academic Literature. InMedia. The French Journal of Media and Media Representations in the English-Speaking World, pp. 121-130. Retrieved From: http://inmedia.revues.org/768 Sparks, C. (2007). Globalization, Development and the Mass Media, London: Sage Publications pp. 135-140. http://eprints.qut.edu.au/28624/1/28624.pdf Thompson, J. (1995). The Media and Modernity: a social theory of the media, Cambridge: Polity Press, pp. 20-35. Thussu, D. (2006). International Communications – continuity and change, London: Hodder Education, pp. 58-77. Tomlinson, J. (1991) Cultural Imperialism: A Critical Introduction. London. Continuum, pp. 79-90. Tomlinson, J. (1999). Globalization and Culture, Cambridge: Polity Press, pp. 98-120. Vogel, H. (2011). Entertainment Industry Economics. A Guide for Financial Analysis. Cambridge [u.a.] : Cambridge Univ. Press, Chapter 1, pp. 3-40. Whitney, D. C., & Ettema, J. S. (2006). Media Production. A Companion to Media Studies, John New Jersey: Wiley & Sons pp. 159-162. Retrieved From: http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=m6E_BHxPWiwC&oi=fnd&pg=PA157&dq=Whitney,+D.+C.,+%26+Ettema,+J.+S.+(2006).+Media+Production.+A+Companion+to+Media+Studies&ots=1euy-h6K55&sig=YH2z14ZfZZvY5e_-cAHDxvPE4I4#v=onepage&q&f=false (Accesed 20 June 2015) Read More