Chapter 4

A WORLD OF IDEAS (Global Media Cultures)

Overview
Global Media Cultures explores the relationship between the media, culture and
globalization. The course approaches past and current challenges concerning international
communication and explores and problematizes the power of media representation.
This chapter deals with how globalization through media affects cultures. It explores
global media across different cultures. Students will engage with debates on different aspects of
global cultures, including national cultural formations, institutional structures, media ownership,
and transnational media. By concentrating on the effects of globalization and new information
technologies in and from different geographical regions, students of Global Media Cultures will
broaden their understanding of the institutional and cultural contexts of global media. This
subject addresses debates on globalization, including those regarding the global-local interaction,
questions of cultural agency, identity politics, and the economic and political functions of social
media. The subject explores key issues on the politics of representation, paying particular
attention to questions of cultural nationalism and media concentration, new technologies, and
technological determinism(
https://handbook.unimelb.edu.au/2020/subjects/mecm30002).

General Objectives:
1. Analyze how various media drive various forms of global integration; and
2. Explain the dynamic between local and global cultural production.
 Lesson 1
Globalization of Media Culture
Pre-discussion

Globalization of culture is one where the entire world has been molded in the image of
Western, mainly American, culture. In popular and professional discourses alike, the popularity
of Big Macs, Baywatch, and MTV are touted as unmistakable signs of the fulfillment of
Marshall McLuhan's prophecy of the Global Village. The globalization of culture is often chiefly
imputed to international mass media. After all, contemporary media technologies such as satellite
television and the Internet have created a steady flow of transnational images that connect
audiences worldwide. Without global media, according to the conventional wisdom, how would
teenagers in India, Turkey, and Argentina embrace a Western lifestyle of Nike shoes, Coca-Cola,
and rock music? Hence, the putatively strong influence of the mass media on the globalization of
culture.
This lesson gives students an idea how media contributes in globalization especially
today we are in 21st Century. It will open their minds on the concept of culture preservation
amidst modernization brought by the swift movement of globalization.
Read more at https://www.encyclopedia.com/media/encyclopedias-almanacs transcripts- and-
maps/globalization-culture-through-media

What to Expect? (Specific Objectives)

At the end of the lesson, the students are expected to:

a. Determine the role of media in globalization and in the spread of western cultures;
b. Link the relationship of Hybridization to Globalization; and
c. Cite problems/issues on the rise of globalization that affects your
culture/beliefs/traditions.
Lesson Outline
The role of the mass media in the globalization of culture is a contested issue in
international communication theory and research. Early theories of media influence, commonly
referred to as "magic bullet" or "hypodermic needle" theories, believed that the mass media had
powerful effects over audiences. Since then, the debate about media influence has undergone an
ebb and flow that has prevented any resolution or agreement among researchers as to the level,
scope, and implications of media influence. Nevertheless, key theoretical formulations in
international communication clung to a belief in powerful media effects on cultures and
communities. At the same time, a body of literature questioning the scope and level of influence
of transnational media has emerged. Whereas some scholars within that tradition questioned
cultural imperialism without providing conceptual alternatives, others have drawn on an
interdisciplinary literature from across the social sciences and humanities to develop theoretical
alternatives to cultural imperialism.

Cultural Imperialism and the Global Media Debate

In international communication theory and research, cultural imperialism theory
argued that audiences across the globe are heavily affected by media messages emanating from
the Western industrialized countries. Although there are minor differences between "media
imperialism" and "cultural imperialism," most of the literature in international communication
treats the former as a category of the latter. Grounded in an understanding of media as cultural
industries, cultural imperialism is firmly rooted in a political-economy perspective on
international communication. As a school of thought, political economy focuses on material
issues such as capital, infrastructure, and political control as key determinants of international
communication processes and effects.
In the early stage of cultural imperialism, researchers focused their efforts mostly on
nation-states as primary actors in international relations. They imputed rich, industrialized, and
Western nation-states with intentions and actions by which they export their cultural products
and impose their sociocultural values on poorer and weaker nations in the developing world. This
argument was supported by a number of studies demonstrating that the flow of news and
entertainment was biased in favor of
industrialized countries. This bias was clear both in terms of quantity, because most media flows
were exported by Western countries and imported by developing nations, and in terms of quality,
because developing nations received scant and prejudicial coverage in Western media.
These concerns led to the rise of the New World Information Order (NWIO) debate, later
known as the New World Information and Communication Order (NWICO) debate. Although
the debate at first was concerned with news flows between the north and the south, it soon
evolved to include all international media flows. This was due to the fact that inequality existed
in news and entertainment programs alike, and to the advent of then-new media technologies
such as communication satellites, which made the international media landscape more complex
and therefore widened the scope of the debate about international flows.
The global media debate was launched during the 1973 General Conference of the United
Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) in Nairobi, Kenya. As a
specialized agency of the United Nations, the mission of UNESCO includes issues of
communication and culture. During the conference, strong differences arose between Western
industrialized nations and developing countries. Led by the United States, the first group insisted
on the "free flow of information" doctrine, advocating "free trade" in information and media
programs without any restrictions. The second group, concerned by the lack of balance in
international media flows, accused Western countries of invoking the free flow of information
ideology to justify their economic and cultural domination. They argued instead for a "free and
balanced flow" of information. The chasm between the two groups was too wide to be
reconciled. This eventually was one of the major reasons given for withdrawal from UNESCO
by the United States and the United Kingdom— which resulted in the de facto fall of the global
media debate.
A second stage of research identified with cultural imperialism has been associated with
calls to revive the New World Information and Communication Order debate. What
differentiates this line of research from earlier cultural imperialism formulations is its emphasis
on the commercialization of the sphere of culture. Research into this area had been a hallmark of
cultural imperialism research, but now there is a deliberate focus on transnational corporations as
actors, as opposed to nation-states, and
on transnational capital flows, as opposed to image flows. Obviously, it is hard to separate the
power of transnational corporations from that of nation-states, and it is difficult to distinguish
clearly between capital flows and media flows. Therefore, the evolution of the debate is mainly a
redirection of emphasis rather than a paradigm shift.
It has become fashionable in some international communication circles to dismiss
cultural imperialism as a monolithic theory that is lacking subtlety and increasingly questioned
by empirical research. Cultural imperialism does have some weaknesses, but it also continues to
be useful. Perhaps the most important contribution of cultural imperialism is the argument that
international communication flows, processes, and effects are permeated by power. Nevertheless,
it seems that the concept of globalization has in some ways replaced cultural imperialism as the
main conceptual umbrella under which much research and theorizing in international
communication have been conducted.

Media, Globalization, and Hybridization

Several reasons explain the analytical shift from cultural imperialism to globalization.
First, the end of the Cold War as a global framework for ideological, geopolitical, and economic
competition calls for a rethinking of the analytical categories and paradigms of thought. By
giving rise to the United States as sole superpower and at the same time making the world more
fragmented, the end of the Cold War ushered in an era of complexity between global forces of
cohesion and local reactions of dispersal. In this complex era, the nation-state is no longer the
sole or dominant player, since transnational transactions occur on subnational, national, and
supranational levels. Conceptually, globalization appears to capture this complexity better than
cultural imperialism. Second, according to John Tomlinson (1991), globalization replaced
cultural imperialism because it conveys a process with less coherence and direction, which will
weaken the cultural unity of all nationstates, not only those in the developing world. Finally,
globalization has emerged as a key perspective across the humanities and social sciences, a
current undoubtedly affecting the discipline of communication.
In fact, the globalization of culture has become a conceptual magnet attracting research
and theorizing efforts from a variety of disciplines and interdisciplinary
formations such as anthropology, comparative literature, cultural studies, communication and
media studies, geography, and sociology. International communication has been an active
interlocutor in this debate because media and information technologies play an important role in
the process of globalization. Although the media are undeniably one of the engines of cultural
globalization, the size and intensity of the effect of the media on the globalization of culture is a
contested issue revolving around the following question: Did the mass media trigger and create
the globalization of culture? Or is the globalization of culture an old phenomenon that has only
been intensified and made more obvious with the advent of transnational media technologies?
Like the age-old question about whether the egg came before the chicken or vice versa, the
question about the relationship between media and the globalization of culture is difficult to
answer.
One perspective on the globalization of culture, somewhat reminiscent of cultural
imperialism in terms of the nature of the effect of media on culture, but somewhat different in its
conceptualization of the issue, is the view that the media contribute to the homogenization of
cultural differences across the planet. This view dominates conventional wisdom perspectives on
cultural globalization conjuring up images of Planet Hollywood and the MTV generation. One of
the most visible proponents of this perspective is political scientist Benjamin Barber, who
formulated his theory about the globalization of culture in the book Jihad vs. McWorld (1996).
The subtitle, "How Globalism and Tribalism Are Reshaping the World," betrays Barber's
reliance on a binary opposition between the forces of modernity and liberal democracy with
tradition and autocracy.
Although Barber rightly points to transnational capitalism as the driving engine that
brings Jihad and McWorld in contact and motivates their action, his model has two limitations.
First, it is based on a binary opposition between Jihad, what he refers to as ethnic and religious
tribalism, and McWorld, the capital-driven West. Barber (1996, p. 157) seemingly attempts to go
beyond this binary opposition in a chapter titled "Jihad Via McWorld," in which he argues that
Jihad stands in "less of a stark opposition than a subtle counterpoint." However, the evidence
offered in most of the book supports an oppositional rather than a contrapuntal perspective on the
globalization of culture. The second limitation of Barber's book is that he privileges the
global over the local, because,
according to him, globalization rules via transnational capitalism. "to think that globalization and
indigenization are entirely coequal forces that put Jihad and McWorld on an equal footing is to
vastly underestimate the force of the new planetary markets. It's no contest" (p. 12). Although it
would be naíve to argue that the local defeats the global, Barber's argument does not take into
account the dynamic and resilient nature of cultures and their ability to negotiate foreign imports.
Another perspective on globalization is cultural hybridity or hybridization. This view
privileges an understanding of the interface of globalization and localization as a dynamic
process and hybrid product of mixed traditions and cultural forms. As such, this perspective does
not give prominence to globalization as a homogenizing force, nor does it believe in localization
as a resistive process opposed to globalization. Rather, hybridization advocates an emphasis on
processes of mediation that it views as central to cultural globalization. The concept of
hybridization is the product of interdisciplinary work mostly based in intellectual projects such
as postcolonialism, cultural studies, and performance studies. Hybridization has been used in
communication and media studies and appears to be a productive theoretical orientation as
researchers in international media studies attempt to grasp the complex subtleties of the
globalization of culture.
One of the most influential voices in the debate about cultural hybridity is Argentinean-
Mexican cultural critic Nestor García-Canclini. In his book Hybrid Cultures (1995), García-
Canclini advocates a theoretical understanding of Latin American nations as hybrid cultures. His
analysis is both broad and incisive, covering a variety of cultural processes and institutions such
as museums, television, film, universities, political cartoons, graffiti, and visual arts. According
to García-Canclini, there are three main features of cultural hybridity. The first feature consists
of mixing previously separate cultural systems, such as mixing the elite art of opera with popular
music. The second feature of hybridity is the deterritorialization of cultural processes from their
original physical environment to new and foreign contexts. Third, cultural hybridity entails
impure cultural genres that are formed out of the mixture of several cultural domains. An
example of these impure genres is when artisans in rural Mexico weave tapestries of
masterpieces of European painters such as Joan Miró and Henri Matisse, mixing high art and
folk artisanship into an impure genre.
SUMMARY
In media and communication research, the main question is "Have transnational media
made cultures across the globe hybrid by bringing into their midst foreign cultural elements, or
have cultures always been to some extent hybrid, meaning that transnational mass media only
strengthened an alreadyexisting condition?" There is no obvious or final answer to that question,
because there is not enough empirical research about media and hybridity and because of the
theoretical complexity of the issue. What does exist in terms of theoretical understanding and
research results points to a middle ground? This position acknowledges that cultures have been
in contact for a long time through warfare, trade, migration, and slavery. Therefore, a degree of
hybridization in all cultures can be assumed. At the same time, this middle ground also
recognizes that global media and information technologies have substantially increased contacts
between cultures, both in terms of intensity and of the speed with which these contacts occur.
Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that transnational mass media intensify the hybridity that is
already in existence in cultures across the globe. Consequently, the globalization of culture
through the media is not a process of complete homogenization, but rather one where cohesion
and fragmentation coexist.
 LESSON 2
THE GLOBALIZATION OF RELIGION

Pre-discussion
Religion is a “system of beliefs and practices.” More specifically, the word comes from
the Latin “religare” which means “to bind together again that which was once bound but has
since been torn apart or broken.” Indeed, with the globalization of economics and politics,
individuals feel insecure “as the life they once led is being contested and changed at the same
time.” Hence, “in order for a person to maintain a sense of psychological well- being and avoid
existential anxiety,’’ individuals turn to scripture stories and teachings that provide a vision
about how they can be bound to a “meaningful world,” a world that is quickly changing day-by-
day.
Nonetheless, the relationship between globalization and religion is one with new
possibilities and furthering challenges. On the one hand, while religion takes advantage of
communication and transportation technology, it is at the same time the source of globalization’s
greatest resistance by acting as a haven for those standing in opposition to its power. On the
other hand, because globalization allows for daily contact, religion enters a circle of conflict in
which religions become “more self-conscious of themselves as being world religions.”
Globalization has brought an utmost change to everyone’s life; it does not only divert the
economic system, but also religions. Its liquid movements through social media, and other forms
of mass media dominantly change the perspectives and beliefs of the people. In fact, there are
lots of people around the globe unite in one common religion. Others are being influenced by
other religions through globalization. Indeed, globalizations plays a vital role in the spread of the
religions globally. As Scholte (2005) made clear: “Accelerated globalization of recent times has
enabled co-religionists across the planet to have greater direct contact with one another. Global
communications, global organizations, global finance, and the like have allowed ideas of the
Muslims and the universal Christian church to be given concrete shape as never before.
 This lesson acquaints students with knowledge on how globalization plays its vital role in
religion through the use of media. Students will also appreciate how globalization revived and
scattered ideas about religions in the world.
This lesson will also open the minds of the students towards the value of their respective
religion amidst globalization.

What to expect?
Objectives:
1. Explain how globalization affects the religious practices and beliefs; and
2. Analyze the relationship between religion and global conflict and, conversely, global peace.

Lesson Outline
Globalization has played a tremendous role in providing a context for the current revival
and resurgence of religion. Today, most religions are not relegated to the countries where they
began. Religions have, in fact, spread and scattered on a global scale. Globalization provided
religions a fertile milieu to spread and thrive.
Information technologies, transportation means, and the media are deemed important
means on which religionists rely on the dissemination of their religious ideas. Furthermore,
media also plays an important role in the dissemination of religious ideas. In this respect, a lot of
television channels, radio stations, and print media are founded solely for advocating religions.
Modern transportation has also contributed considerably to the emergence, revivalism, and
fortification of religion. Turner (2007) cited the case of Islamic revivalism in Asia which “is
related to the improvement in transportation that has allowed many Muslims to travel to Mecca,
and return with reformist ideas’’.

Conflicts among the World Religion

Globalization has also allowed religion or faith to gain considerable significance and
importance as a non-territorial of identity. Being a source of identity and pride, religion has
always been promoted by its practitioners so that it could reach the level of globality and be
embraced by as many people as possible. By paving the way for religions to come
in contact with each other and providing a context foe their flourishing and thriving,
globalization has brought such religions to a circle of competition and conflicts.
Such conflicts among the world religions exhibit a solid proof confirming the erosion and
the failure of hybridization. Globalization makes religions more conscious of themselves as
being “world religions” reinforcing their respective specific identities. These identities are
strengthened by globalization and cannot, in any way, intermingle or hybridize. Since religions
have distinct internal structures, their connections to different cultures and their rituals and
beliefs contradict.
Though religion is strengthened and fortified by globalization, it represents a challenge to
globalization’s hybridizing effects. Religion seeks to assert its identity in the light of
globalization. As a result, different religious identities come to the fore and assert themselves.
Such assertions of religious identities constitute a defensive reaction to globalization. It has been
difficult for religion to cope with values that accompany globalization like liberalism,
consumerism, and nationalism. Such phenomena advocate scientism and secularism.
On the other hand, it can be said that the anti-rationalist qualities ascribed to religion can
be the characteristics of fundamentalist and extremist forms of religion. We cannot consider
religion as purely anti-rationalist since many religious people reconcile reason and faith and
make moderate trends within their religions. Nevertheless, globalization’s strict rationalism
manifested in such phenomena as liberalism and secularism can be incompatible with the norms
and the values of certain religions.

Westernization and Americanization

Globalization is also associated with Westernization and Americanization. The
dominance exerted by these two processes, particularly on the less developed countries, makes
religion-related cultures and identities take defensive measures to protect themselves.
Sometimes, extreme forms of resisting other cultural influence are being done, such as that of the
Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).
Challenges of Globalization to Religion
The challenges of globalization to religion link automatically to the challenges of religion
to globalization. In other words, while religion takes caution against the norms and the values
related to globalization, it challenges the latter since religion does not approve its hybridizing
effects. The idea of dehybridizing effects of religion is approved also by Samuel Huntington’s
clash of civilizations, which maintains that such dehybridizing upshots spring also from religion
partitioning and clashes.
Read more at: https://www.e-ir.info/2014/07/16/religion-and-globalization- newpossibilities-
furthering-challenges/

SUMMARY
Globalization of culture is one where the entire world has been molded in the image of
Western, mainly American, culture. In popular and professional discourses alike, the popularity
of Big Macs, Baywatch, and MTV are touted as unmistakable signs of the fulfillment of
Marshall McLuhan's prophecy of the Global Village.
The role of the mass media in the globalization of culture is a contested issue in
international communication theory and research. Early theories of media influence, commonly
referred to as "magic bullet" or "hypodermic needle" theories, believed that the mass media had
powerful effects over audiences.
Though religion is strengthened and fortified by globalization, it represents a challenge to
globalization’s hybridizing effects. Religion seeks to assert its identity in the light of
globalization. As a result, different religious identities come to the fore and assert themselves.
Such assertions of religious identities constitute a defensive reaction to globalization. It has been
difficult for religion to cope with values that accompany globalization like liberalism,
consumerism, and nationalism. Such phenomena advocate scientism and secularism.
Moreover, globalization is also associated with Westernization and Americanization. The
dominance exerted by these two processes, particularly on the less developed countries, makes
religion-related cultures and identities take defensive measures to protect themselves.