The Connection Between Media And Globalization

The mass media play an important to enhance globalization, facilities cultural

exchanges and varied flows of information and image between countries through
international news broadcasts, television, programming, new technologies, film, and
music. Most communication media have become increasingly global going beyond the
nation-state scope. During 1990’s, the mainstream media then were relatively only
national or local in perspective. The deregulation policies of the various states in Europe
and the US have allowed the proliferation of cable and the satellite channels. The
development of capitalism, new technologies, and the increasing commercialization of
global television have a huge impact in the international flows of information.
The cultural dimensions of globalization have a profound influence on the whole
globalization process. As far as the 21st century can be traced, there was a rapid
development of the global communications with the introductions of the telegraph in
1837, the growth in the postal services, cross-border telephone, radio communications,
and the creation of the modern mass circulation press in Europe. A very striking
progress was the evolution of technologies capable of transmitting messages through
electromagnetic waves. The birth of international news agencies during thee 19 th
century lighted the path towards the global system of codification. Until the 1960’s, the
launch of the first geo-satellite communication satellites through electromagnetic
transmission became completely global in character. This later paved the way in the
globalization of communications as a distinguished phenomenon in the 20 th century.
Mass media is a deceptively simple term encompassing the countless array of
institutions and individuals who differ in purpose, scope, method, and cultural context.
Mass media include all forms of information communicated to large groups of people,
from a handmade sign to an international news network. There is no standard for how
large the audience needs to be before communication becomes mass communications.
There are also no constraints on the type of information being presented.
Globalization may result to cultural imperialism both within and between
countries. The media in developing countries would import foreign news items, cultural
and television genre formats and such values of capitalist consumerism and
individualism. Unfortunately, the scenario led to a relationship of subordinations of the
developing states in relation to the First World countries. The letter had an established
relationship with the historical roots in European colonialism, which culminated in a core
periphery relationship. Moreover, the development of the transnational corporation and
the strategic planning of the US government as external factors further molded the
historical evolution of the commercial broadcasting systems amon the Latin American
countries.
However, Oliver Boyd-Barrett (1977-1998) modified the concept of the media
imperialism by showing relevance to media globalization. He contented that the merit of
the cultural imperialism theory is based on the fact that it was more concerned with
inequalities between nations and how these reflected a wider political and economic
conflicts or dependency. One limitations of the cultural imperialism theory is its tendency
to result in a hypodermic needle, which is a model of American values being inculcated
into the Third World countries. But, the theory did not recognize fully the intra-nation
media relations through which the media contributed to oppression patterned class,
gender, and race. The Western dominance of news broadcasting has reproduced the
prejudice of colonialism. Specifically, the United Nations Educational, Scientific ad
Cultural Organization or UNESCO conducted a debate about international
communications. Hence the news agencies came under attack by the developing
countries during the New World Information and Communication Order or NWICO.
The cultural imperialism thesis declined with the rise of the post modernism
theories. Here, there was the embrace of the neo-liberal discourse by the US and UK
governments from the 1980’s onwards. This as the later followed by the decline of the
grand narratives, which is regarded as part of the modernist discourse in the 1970’s. the
criticism of this approach is based on its focus on the exclusive American cultural
dominance and a historical context mainly attached to the Cold War paradigm. Hence
the theory is no longer considered as appropriate to properly discuss the shifting
economic and media environment and the growth of the Asian tigers. The restructuring
of the European powers and the multiplication of media corporations are no longer
regarded as exclusively American at the end.
Thompson (1995,169) stressed on how symbolic power overlaps with the
economic and the political aspects in the globalization process. This explained how the
appropriation of globalized media products interacts with the localized practices, which
can either serve to consolidate relations of the power or create new forms of
dependency. Moreover, Schiller 1960s had changed. But highlighted that cultural
domination remained American in form and contenct while the economic basis had
become globalized.
Herman and McChesney (2004) presupposed that the active audience
perspective will be beneficial to the resistance against media globalization and
commercialization. But this tends to undermine the perspectives concomitant with the
grand narrative using the micro textual analysis. The audience is always a co-producer
and dismissed the consequences of de-politicization as a result of a media
entertainment-led diet. It is a misnomer though that every American programme or
cultural product is necessarily packaged with the consumerist capitalist values. Such
that there is no diversity and complexity in the form of American cultural production and
the ways in which it is accepted by audiences in the different states. Tomlinson (1999)
highlighted reasons in favour of the cultural imperialism approach, stating the real
nature of global culture and growing paradigm of capitalism.
Neverdeem Pieterse (2004) discussed the concept of hybridization as more
appropriate to understand the complexity of flows and cultural mixing of current
globalization processes. Some critics defend that a global media system is not really
replacing the national communication media. There are indeed dsitictive differences
between political systems and cultural particularities, which prevent complete
homogenization. There is a need to recognize the blending of local cultures with global
foreign influences switching then to global culture as a ground of hybridization and not
homogenization or just mere cultural diffusion of the American values.
Thus Nederveen Pieterse (2004) considered hybridity as being part of a certain
postmodern sensibility. This is a liberation from the West’s historical legacy of
Eurocentric thinking and colonialism. According to the hybridization view, the impact of
global culture does not necessarily lead to the extinction of the local. Hence the hybrid
styles are in the essence the consequence of the combination of modern styles with
national and political traditions or regional identities.
Curran (2002) mentioned one criticism to hybridity reflecting on the reluctance in
looking at economic power and the impact of giant media corporations in influencing the
cultural preferences. Moreover, the effect of the blending of the global with national
influence does not in the end comprise ‘authentic’ cultural practice, but rather the
commodification and appropriation of the ‘exotic’ by the capitalist media corporation.
The latter can sell these multicultural product in a global market. These can include
world music to Bollywood films and tourism paraphernalia. Consequently, these
difference and diversity are exploited by the global market to earn profits. Such a
genuine recognition of the other non-Western or Third World cultures became too ideal.
The Western self- identities have become more in contact with the post-colonial
‘other’ as a result of the increasing media globalization and the growing multiculturalism
in the West. This situation challenges the rigid cultural assumptions about the West’s
cultural superiority in relation to the rest of the World. But given the decline of Western
imperialism and the intricacies of the flows between people, trade, and culture across
the world, this has made the image of globalization as one of a decentered network of
unstable and shifting patterns of power distribution. Both have undermined the core-
periphery model.
The relationship between localities and the social circumstances became
changed with the global communication systems. Held(1999) noted how the global
communication media facilitated the birth of cultural cosmopolitanism, or a cosmopolitan
sensibility caused by the increasing speed and intensity of its functioning. Thus the
image brought about by the media of distant events and on how people from the
different parts of the world live resulted in the celebration of difference. But this further
stimulated a cosmopolitan orientation in the public sectors, the creation of a global civil
society, global public sphere or international community. It is worth knowing though that
a global media and the increasing global flow of people and goods across borders have
not completely destroyed the local ties. Globalization as an aggregation of cultural flows
or networks is a less coherent and unitary process than cultural imperialism and one is
which cultural influences move in many different directions.
 Analysis of both media power and media markets draws attention to the nature of
media institutions or what occurs within the institutions that solicit, produce, manage
and distribute media content. It also points to the importance of media policy as a
sytems of institutionalized governance mechanisms over the structure, conduct and
performance of media organizations by, for the most part, national governments. Large-
scale corporate organizations came to dominate the media and related industries in the
20th century, as they did in most sectors of the economy, as there was both greater
concentration of media ownership and the absorption of small-scale commercial media
producers and distributors by larger corporate conglomerates.

Globalization Of Media
Sparks (2000) argued that no media is genuinely global in nature. Hence
globalization of media is not a term of global character. The concept of global media’s
audience is broad to be understood as too small, too rich, and too English-speaking to
be inclusive. The existence of a global public sphere is largely state-oriented. However
there is no dispute that all these globalizing forces are made possible with the aid of
mass media at both domestic and global level. Globalization is looked at as a positive
force unifying widely different societies and integrating them into a global village. The
said concept is described as an inevitable product of human evolution and progress; as
if it were an organic developmental process ruled by the natural laws. But it must be
noted that globalization is not necessarily a natural progression coming out from the
regular communication and interaction of people and cultures worldwide. But rather it
should be treated as a result of international human decision by the influential group of
nations, transnational corporations, and international organizations, and international
organizations. With the help of the modern communications and infromations
technologies, these large firms and businesses maximize profits by associating
themselves in the global foreign markets.
To reiterate, globalization is not a new phenomenon as a buzzword in the 1990s.
At the turn of the millennium the characterization of interdependence more than 20
years ago also now becomes applicable to globalization. The same widespread feeling
that the very nature of politics keeps on changing. It is meant to cover different
phenomena with globalization and interdependence encompassing various meaning
Grieco and Holmes (1999) said that globalization has been driven by the
interests and needs of the world. This is related to the fact that global developments are
characterized not by their growth dynamics but their linkages to globalization itself.
Hence it cannot be avoided to tackle the huge aspects of global economy as units of the
analysis (Woods, 1988, Tussie, 1994, Cerry, 1994, Krugman and Venables 1995, Tebin
and Estabrooks, 1995, Biersteker, 1998, De Vet, 1993, Kahler, 1993, Dunning 1998,
Obadina, 1998, Madungu 1999, Colle, 2000, Ohuabunwa, 1999, And Otokhine, 2000).
 Based on the ideas of Wildman and Siwek (1998), language is regarded as the
delicate divider of media markets, which provides a strong barrier to media imports. The
trade relations on television among countries become highly influenced by language. In
the case of the United States most of what little imported television and films Americans
watch derives from the Great Britain, New Zealand or Australia. The same is true with
the British pop music, which is widely accepted; other musicians like the Icelander Björk
have to sing in English to engage into the US market.
There are several aspects of culture which are important in defining the kind of
audiences, apart from language. These include jokes, slang, historical and political
references, gossip about stars, and remarks on the current people and events that are
culture-oriented and even nation-specific. These are shared across borders but are
helpful in building cross-national markets. These cultural-linguistic markets emerge at a
smaller level than global but definitely larger than national. These markets are based on
common cultures that span borders. This is happening in America as it grows beyond its
own market to export in the global field. A number of companies have grown beyond
their original local markets to serve this cultural-linguistic world. Examples include
Mexico, Brazil, and Valenzuela, which dominate more of the intra-Latin America trade in
music, film, and television. This is also evident in Hong Kong, which originally
dominated much of the Asian Market when it comes to the material arts and gangster
films and pop music.
There are economic and organizational forces behind cultural globalization.
Hence the latter requires an organizational infrastructure. The numerus activities in the
advanced state on news and entertainment media is a form of globalization, which are
distributed to countries all over the world. Hence it can be gleaned that the dominance
of a specific country in the global media marketplace is more of an economic functions
rather than cultural. In reality though, a small number of media conglomerates dominate
the production of global distribution of film, television, music, and even book publication.
The globalization of communications media is a challenge due to several factors
like the trans border date flow, cultural imperialism, media and information flows, the
flows of information, media trade, and the effects of national developments. Hence the
media imperialism during the 1980s and 1990s became attacked. The global flows are
considered multi-directional. This is contradictory to the idea of one-way flow of
communication and influence from the West. The increasingly hybridized western and
eastern cultures can complicate the Western image of domination. Giddens (1999)
pointed to the reverse colonization like the case of the export of Brazilian television
programs to Portugal and the Hispanization of the South California. For the global
media enterprise to sustain their expansion, it must adapt to the local cultures and link
up the with local partners.
Cultural imperialism is a big international issue in communication due to the
unequal flows of film, television, music, news and information. This situation appears
alarming to many nations. First, this scenario is regarded as one cause of the cultural
erosion and change. Some fear the American ideas, image, and values as replacement
to the traditionalists perspectives. But some French authorities kept American words
such as drugstore and weekend from creeping into the common use by the French
people. Wood(1998); Straubhaar & LaRose(2004) disclosedthe serious consequences
of this media flow.
According to the cultural imperialism theory, the global economic system
dominated by a core of advanced countries while Third World countries remain at the
periphery of the system with little control over their economic and political progress. The
key actors of the system include the multinational or transnational corporation, which
produce goods, control markets, and disseminate products by using similar techniques
and strategies. Hence this cultural imperialism is the kind of cultural domination by the
powerful nations over weaker nations. It is regarded as purposeful and deliberate as it
corresponds to the political interests of the United States and the other powerful
capitalist societies. The effects of this paradigm are viewed as extremely pervasive and
leading to the homogenization of the global culture.

Media And Economic Globalization

The media have made economic globalization possible by creating the conditions
for global capitalism and by promoting the conceptual foundation of the world’s market
economy. Media makes capitalism seem not only natural but necessary to modern life.
Media scholar Robert McChesney(2001) reminds us, Economic and cultural
globalization arguably would be impossible without a global commercial media system
to promote global markets and to encourage consumers values. Together with Edward
Herman (1997) call global media the new missionaries of global capitalism.
Media now are huge transnational global corporations that embody globalizations
even as they celebrate globalization. Modern media are the epitome of economic
globalization. MchChesney in his study contends that the media oligopoly of the global
village or the evangelizing of the cultural values. It is only interested in on thing profit.
Katharine Sarikakis (2008) in her study of the European Unions says, the
normative framework, necessary for the legitimization of policies that transformed the
media across Europe, redefined the public in its relation to the media, as consumers of
media services and accumulators of cultural goods, rather than as members of an
informed and active citizenry.
Adorno and Horkeimer (2002) a critical theorist, argued that a culture industry
which produced mindless entertainment, had great social, political, and economic
importance. Such entertainment, can distract audience from critical thinking, sapping
time and energy from social and political action. Transnational conglomerates
encouraged people to think of products not politics. They are consumers not citizens.
The global oligopoly of media thus helps create a passive apolitical populace that rises
from the couch primarily for consumption.
The oligopoly’s single-minded interest in profits results in mass content rather
than local content. Media in economic globalization has disastrous influence on news
and what used to be called public affairs reporting. Rather than producing homegrown
programming on public affairs and issues, local media outlet carry the mass-produced
content of their conglomerates owners. With this, one scholar call the results the mass
production of ignorance.
Daya Kishan Thussu decries the poverty of news and says that the issues
concerning the worlds poor are being increasingly marginalized as a softer lifestyle
variety of reporting appears to dominate global television news agendas
Shahira Fahmy (2010) studied foreign affairs reporting after 9/11. She suggested
that an events surrounding the terrorist bombing of the World Trade Center, and the
subsequent wars in Afganistan and Iraq, would combine with the expolosion of new
media to produce a wealth of Coverage. “How Could So Much Produce So Little” is the
title of her essay.

Effects Of Globalization On Mass Media

Mass media defined as collectively all the media technologies that are intended
to reach a lagre audience through mass communication. Broadcast media is also known
as electronic media, which transmit the information electronically and comprise of
television, film, and radio, movies, CDs, DVDs, and some other gadgets such as
camera or video consoles. While print media utilize a physical object as a means to
send information, inclusive of newspaper, magazine, brochures, etc. Photography is
also communicated via visual representation (International Journal of Asian Social
Science 2(1o): 1672-1693). The New-age Media include the mobile phones, computers,
and internet. The term print media composes such organizations, which control
technologies like TV stations or publishing companies.
Globalization refers to the increasingly global relationships of culture, people, and
economic activity. This has a strong impact in economics, which includes the global
distribution of the production of goods and services through the reduction of barriers to
international trade like tariffs, export fess, and import quotas. Undeniably globalization
contributed to the economic development for both the developed and developing states.
This also include the transnational circulation of ideas, languages, and popular culture.
Anthony Mcgrew considered globalization as a multidimensional phenomena.
There are components attached to this like communication, which regard globalization
as the increasing mutual communication. Such that social, political, and economic
activities influence and are influenced by the trans-national events. Globalization
strengthens mutual interactions thus creating a new global system. The intensity growth
and communications extent would result to the elimination of the distance between
domestic and international issues. The people on their local lives feel the global
aspects of their existence when these communications become strengthened and
depend. Through global cooperation, the growing communications establish some
issues at the transnational level.
The media has much impact in a world of increasing globalization. The past
made it difficult to get diverse views but with the aid of globalization, the information has
spread possibly to places. This contributes to democratic process and influences
especially on countries, which are not democratic. But on the negative note,
globalization has the ability to push the ideas and cultures of more dominant interest.
Cultural imperialism becomes a skepticism to many countries since people
become afraid that their culture will be lost or be in a back seat because of the growing
demands and influence of globalization. The people around the world become
transformed into model consumers, which is patterned after the Western standards
while their local cultures become gradually eroded. The query now is on whether or not
the local cultures and traditions will exert efforts to influence the local forms of
globalization. The varied reactions and responses now become evident worldwide.
In a general sense, globalization provides an adequate timely processing of
information. Almost all people in the news organization are able to get a reach on the
international news. However, this led to the costs of worldwide communication which
had decreased. Nowadays, a broad coverage of international print media output can be
accessed on the domestic or local grounds. What used to be suppressed as news and
features have now become a worldwide knowledge.
Street (2001; 173-74) explained that globalization promotes homogeneity, which
means there are similar thoughts and principles, identical films and songs carried on
worldwide. Everyone must take pleasure in equivalent advantage in a democratic state.
Globalization develops ideas. It is plausible to communicate ideas and information from
one area to other parts of the world because of the advent of the internet and mobile
phone systems. Herman, et al. (2004: 133) gave Bangladesh as an example where
people having an Internet connection can easily share ideas with other parts of the
world. This enhances communication inequality within and between countries.
Freedom of the press is signified for the successful operation of democracy. It
becomes a conflict for every government to control media, as a consequence of
globalization and global media. This globalization encourages competition among the
different media sectors, which further facilitate the construction diversities of the neutral
programmers. Particularly in Bangladesh, there are now 19 private TV channels and
more than 10 are pending the government approval. The overall standard of this
programme is growing. One of the important features of democracy is that the different
political parties, ethnic, and religious groups can set up a website and enhance
deliberations to raise their voices over a particular issue. Globalization helps to develop
media and communication affecting the traditional patterns of social interaction.
 This helps to build up good social relationship and strengthens democracy,
Thompson (1995) enunciated that the development of new media and communications
does not exist simply in the establishment of new networks for the transmission of the
information between individuals whose basic social relationship remains untouched.
The growing development of media and communications will create new forms of action
and interaction.
Globalization is inseparable in the outburst of such values as the rights of women
and minority. These can aid human causes and agitate customary roles. Hence the
poor woman in the society are also getting mobile phones and are doing their
businesses. There has been changed of role from housewife to income generating
functions. They are now in chare of making family decisions. To make people aware
about any events immediately, convergence becomes the new dimension of media.
Mass media are now used to encourage active political citizenship, even in the case of
electronic voting (Tambini, 1999:306).