4 global village and cultural imperialism 2015
57
WHO RUNS THE GLOBAL VILLAGE? Cultural imperialism and the convergence of cultures
-
Upload
chris-mcmilan -
Category
Documents
-
view
219 -
download
5
description
Â
Transcript of 4 global village and cultural imperialism 2015
WHO RUNS THE GLOBAL VILLAGE?
Cultural imperialism and the convergence of cultures
Our progress
We introduced the development of globalisation and its impact on local cultural identities
We considered the impact of transnational media conglomerates in developing a global communications system
We will now examine how this system impacts upon cultures and people around the world
The Situation
The processes of globalisation mean that many cultures are now heavily exposed to ‘foreign’ cultural influences
These influences are primarily American and are dominated by transnational media conglomerates
But does it result in cultural change that produces greater cultural sameness?
Are our cultural identities becoming increasingly homogenised?
From sameness
“Globalisation as a concept refers to both the compression of the world and the intensification of consciousness of the world as a whole” (Roland Robertson, 1992, p.8)
“Globalisation refers to all those processes by which the peoples of the world are incorporated into a single world society, a global society” (Martin Albrow, 1990, p.45)
To difference
Globalisation “is best considered as a complex set of interacting and often countervailing human, material, and symbolic flows that lead to diverse, heterogeneous cultural positionings and practices, which persistently and variously modify established
sectors of social, political and cultural power” (Lull, 2000, p.150)
Today
An introduction to cultural imperialism
Mediating the global imagined community
Social media and cultural pluralism
The stubbornness of local audiences
Hope, or pessimism?
The commercialisation and centralisation of the ownership of global media has created a threat of cultural imperialism
Conversely, technological and economic developments have led to the possibility of more independent voices and a more diverse global world
Cultural imperialism
This predominance of Western media has led many to suggest that these forms of media, along with the spread of ‘Western values’, are the latest form of ‘cultural imperialism’
Cultural imperialism occurs when the ideas, practices and systems of one culture are imposed upon or adopted by another culture
Imperialism once involved the active takeover of one civilisation for another (colonialisation), now it can often be a voluntary process
An imagined community
When defining the nation, Benedict Anderson (1983/1991) argued that because large communities cannot be cohered through face-to-face interaction, cohesion must occur through an imaginary identification with others
This imaginary is based upon an identification with symbols and ideas that allow for the construction of a common identity and common bond with other people
Global media provide the primary source of these points of identification – but primarily from one dominant form of culture
We can identify with certain shared cultural ideas, practices, images and ‘sayings’ on a global scale
Spread of western values
English has become the dominant global language and primary means of global communication Whilst English is regarded as the 3rd most common
native language, it is ‘spoken’ by an estimated 1 billion people
American brands are globally ever-present, although their message is not entirely dominant
The ‘idea’ of Western culture is spreading, but this has also produced strong resistance
The culture industry
For many these global, or American, brands wholly represent Western values
They become an aspirational point of identification that mediates cultural identity
The concern is that ‘local’ culture is being replaced by a consumer culture that works for the benefit of global capital rather than local people
Here a large ‘culture’ industry has developed that promotes and sells cultural images and ideals in a commodified form
The more commodified it is, the more homogenised it is likely to be
What idea or image represents:
1. Los Angeles 2. Birmingham 3. Dhaka, Bangladesh
For you?
Owning culture
Privately owned media focus on what is profitable, not what is culturally valuable
Re-makes, cross-overs and re-runs are becoming increasingly common to avoid the risks of originality
The drive for profitability has led to the reproduction of similar forms of entertainment, even if the content is different
McDonaldization
Cultural imperialism and the ‘End of History’ are captured by George Ritzer’s (1993) concept of McDonaldization
Comparing global cultural process to those of McDonald’s restaurants, Ritzer argued that global cultures are becoming increasingly standardised and calculable
Similar concepts of ‘Disneyification’ and ‘McWorlds’ portray the homogenisation of culture through commercialisation, mass reproduction and inauthenticity
Chinese mimicry
This trend of ‘architectural mimicry’ or duplictecture in China (Bosker, 2013), is consider ‘self-colonisation’
These towns are entirely ‘themed’ around Western icons, but are Chinese interpretations or ‘re-mixes’
This pattern of replication is repeated in other industries with China and South-East Asia
Why?
Imperial imaginations
If communities are imagined on the basis of shared resources, globalisation provides a much wider range of symbolic points of identification
Culture is no longer ‘naturally’ attached to certain locations, instead global brands and media allow virtual connections beyond the local
These global influences are not evenly spread, but tend to originate from American/Western sources
Consequently, our virtually produced shared cultural imaginations might be an example of cultural imperialism
Name these celebrities
What do they represent?
Do you share more in common with a distant or virtual cultural community than your current
geographical location?
How are these relationships and attachments maintained?
But…
Cultural and media imperialism is based on a mass media model in which media have a direct and unmediated impact upon audiences
Not only are there multiple local sources of media, but audiences are always active and embedded in cultural traditions
The plurality of social media
The internet promotes cultural pluralism because it allows for collective audience participation and interpretation, as opposed to ‘top down’ ideologies and journalism
This participation can be facilitated through forums and chat rooms
The primary mechanism, however, has been the development of social media, which allows for the conglomeration of shared interests through user participation
Social media thus allows for users to construct cultural identities that are not strictly tied to local geography or traditions
The local on a global scale
Facebook and other social media appear to embody the potential of McLuhan’s ‘Global Village’
Social media users become producers of media as well as consumers
Consequently, a much wider range of views are available to a global audience
Nonetheless, it is how local users engage with the technology that matters
Social media networks are often local and diverse voices may not necessarily connect with each other
What proportion of your social media connections
are from your local culture?
The stubbornness of the local
Despite the availability of global cultural influences, for many people the most meaningful cultural interactions are locally orientated
Cultural identities and practices and not just constructions but are emotional attachments
Audiences are inherently local and remain embedded within cultural traditions
As a consequence, local cultures are resistant to change
Interpretative audiences
Audience reception theory suggests that the meaning of a text is not inherent to that text
Instead it is produced through audience interpretations, which can be dominant, negotiated or oppositional
Audiences thus have some control over the influence of global media, but this control occurs within a framework that limits these options
Does everyone who plays
violent video games kill people?
Hybridisation
Local cultural interpretations construct different varieties of ‘local globalism’
Hybridisation is, according to Rowe and Schelling (1991, p.231, cited in Rantanen, p.93) ‘the way in which forms become separated from existing practices and recombine with new forms in new practice’
Consequently, we see ‘hybrid’ cultures that are expressed in the media, such as in reality TV where a global concept is reinvented in local terms
Indigenisation
Arjun Appadurai (1998) defines indigenization as the local appropriation of global forces
Global media may appeal to local consumers, but they bring cultural traditions or ‘memories’
These ‘resources’ create differing interpretations and reproductions of culture, either through existing channels or by creating new ones
Conversely, corporate global media also appropriate this process
Do you participate in any cultural practices
that originated elsewhere?
Glocalisation
Glocalisation describes the process of adapting products for local markets
Glocalisation occurred as capitalism sought to be more flexible in its approach to global consumers
This allows for the reproduction of the commodity form through the appropriation of local content
Is this local or global?
Local culture, global commodities
Herman and McChesney (1997, p.8-9 in Rantanen, p.95) argue that globalisation does not mean more cultural sameness, just an extension of the ‘commercial model of communication’
This means that global media will adapt to local culture in order to generate profits
Consequently the globalisation of culture is less about one cultural dominating another, but about the constant stimulation of change
Summary
We are increasingly exposed to images and ideas from outside of our cultural traditions and locations
These ideas tend to be Western or American
However, audiences are always critical and interpretative and social media technology allows for consumers to be producers of media and culture
Next week
WEEK 5 GLOBALISING SOCIALISING: FROM THE GLOBAL TO THE PERSONAL
READING:
Beck-Gernsheim, E. (2007) From 'the family' to 'families': How individualisation and globalisation are changing our
personal lives. Soundings 35, March 2006, pp.105-114
Assessment
Now due February 23rd!
