Wednesday, September 26, 2012
Globalization manifested from Communication
In order to measure the impact of globalization, it is important to recognize key technological developments, which have contributed to it (Hansen). These technological innovations (i.e. internet, television, telephone, radio, satellite, etc.) have created global communication networks that have transcended national borders since the beginning of the 20th century.
Looking at the ICT (Information and Communication Technologies) element, which has led to the continuing revolution of globalization through communication as Hansen states in The Information Revolution and World Politics, many innovative and technological developments have created new opportunities globally. One of the first instances of the largest transnational forms of communication took place during the 1960s, with the launch of the first satellites. Satellite technology, paved the way in establishing 'global communication networks' between developed and developing countries. For example, arising technological advancements transmitted information and telephone services wirelessly across the globe, even to remote areas.
Creating an invisible web of connectivity, satellite technology greatly assisted in globalizing communication. Prior to the early 1990s, ICTs were majorly used by many Western nation-states. However, in last few decades ICTs and the international distribution of cultural production (i.e. movies/ cinema studios) has grown and expanded across the globe. Additionally, global media news today, is now broadcasted and shared, both domestically and internationally, with media outlets transmitting news and information in real-time, via internet (websites & social media sites), television, newspaper, radio, etc.
It is certainly true the world has become more interconnected within the past century. The web of globalization and spread/ creation of new ICTs can no longer be mapped. Manifested through the advancement of communication, globalization or transnationalism has snowballed and taken on a life of its own. Global, national, domestic, societal, and personal connections are now more interconnected because of the development of ICTs. In future decades, our connectivity will only further increase, which will become an important element for building a more globalized world, and society.
Views Behind a Nation
Benedict Anderson posits that the “contemporary national
imagination” began in the 19th century with the novel. Readers who
were geographically apart could relate to one another, developing a common
socio-political consciousness. This idea of a shared worldview has been spread
through mass media systems that have “emphasized the concept of the
nation-state as the primary and natural form of polity” (Karim, Reviewing the “National” in “International
Communication” Through the Lens of Diaspora). Through this enforcement, a
nation “becomes a naturalized political, geographic and ethno-cultural entity
which is distinct from all other nations in the imagination of not only its own
residents but those of others”.
However, with the advent of new media and communications between
countries, the nation-state can no longer enforce a single imagination onto its
people in the same manner.
In
the 20th century, multiculturalism has emerged to redefine the nation
“as moving from comprising an ethnically pluralist populace to one united with
core civic values” (Karim). These values have been enforced in the same way as during
the time of colonialism. Silvio Waisbord explains that we are all swimming in a
symbolic environment in the U.S. with constant reminders of our national
identity, terming it “banal nationalism” in Media
and the Reinvention of a Nation. The media, educational systems, and daily
life routines of all citizens are saturated with American values. This explains
the civic core values that are enforced to everyone in a nation, a patriotism
that unites them all.
Those
who are not originally born into the imagined community of a particular nation
do not assimilate as such. Karim explains how many Diaspora, with their strong
ties to their homelands, experience nationalism as a separate idea than
patriotism. While nationalism has been seen in a negative light with bigotry
and fascism, expressing pride for one’s homeland can also be done without
enforcing it upon others. This act of pride has affected assimilation of Diaspora
into the United States. New technologies allow them to have constant
communication with those at home so they can “exchange symbolic goods and
services” (Karim). With this combination of both nationalism in terms of
connection to the homeland and patriotism as enforced through banal
nationalism, the Diaspora have a new cultural identity in the U.S.
A
different framework to consider is Stuart Hall’s explanation of the Caribbean
in Karim’s article, how its population is made up of immigrants from different
parts of the world. He “emphasizes that the heterogeneity expressed here speaks
not only against colonialism’s hierarchical and essentialist human geography
but also stands in contrast to that notion of Diaspora which necessarily
includes a return to the ‘original’ homeland” (Karim 24). It is interesting to
see how nationalism and patriotism are expressed in nations with different
ratios of immigrants to natives.
Tuesday, September 25, 2012
Does war make us better communicators in a weird way?
Governments
for hundreds of years now have sponsored advancements in modern communications
technology, memorably with the advent of submarine cables to aid communications
between colonizers and the colonized. Wars, namely, have spurred such growth in
the communications sector; increased methods of precise coordination are
necessary both to monitor one’s enemy and also to guide one’s own military.
This begs the question: are wars necessary for advancements in technology,
particular for communication?
It would
seem so: the launch of the Russian space satellite Sputnik in 1957 spurred an
influx of government spending in science and math programs across the United
States in a (successful) effort to catch up. This spaceship, which brought
about the fear of Russian capability to send a ballistic missile from space to
any point within the United States (Hanson) allowed for technological advances
leading to President Kennedy’s sponsorship of a global satellite system. What
do we get from this? TV, for one. What was originally a government endeavor has
now been increased communication ability for even the poorest in the world.
What’s
more, everyday people use computers (originally used for military calculations)
and the Internet (originally used to transfer governmental data that could
withstand a nuclear attack). Both the Internet and TV have contributed to a
more global economy and, even with just advertising in mind, have increased the
amount of participation of the bourgeoisie in what was once restricted to governmental
affairs. The following website has an interesting debate on whether or not wars
are the mother of invention or if invention is the mother of war:
Soul Searching: Media's Identity Crisis
Explaining the “Crisis of the ‘National’ Media”, Silvio
Waisbord argues that “the idea of ‘national media’ needs to be revised.” What
particularly caught my attention is his excerpt on the growing challenge of
distinguishing the national identity of media content:
“There is no
longer, if there ever was, a direct relationship between the citizenship of
cultural workers and the national identity of media content. Defining the
cultural citizenship of certain media content has become increasingly difficult
when a multinational workforce produces, for example, a vast array of Hollywood
movies and European coproductions, recordings of rai music in Paris studios or Pan-American salsa in New York and Miami, and news in CNN and BBC newsrooms. The
national identity of content is hard to pin down and cannot be predicted from
the citizenship of cultural workers or the location of production.”
While I certainly agree with most of Waisbord’s argument, at
the same time I can’t help but question whether it really is the case—at least
to the degree of declaring that “There is no longer, if there ever was” a
relation between the nationality of the cultural workers and the identity of
the resulting media content. This brings to mind the schools of globalization
theorists Sinclair mentions. Just as they are divided in their interpretations
of globalization’s effects as the homegenization vs. heterogenization of the
international community, could it not be argued that the transnational
collaboration that marks the 21st century media production process
is not as significant in blurring the content’s national identity as Waisbord
makes it out to be? Maybe national identities of media content are accentuated
regardless of the behind-the-scenes transnational collaboration.
Sure, a K-pop girl group’s latest hit may have been composed
by a Korean songwriter, recorded in a studio in Tokyo and choreographed by New
York’s best. But when these girls visit Paris for a long-awaited concert,
everyone in the audience knows that the song belongs in K-pop kingdom. Is not the
national identity of the song made clear simply by the recognition that the
band is from Korea, the song is sung in Korean and the singers on stage look
very much Korean? Of course, all of this may be inapplicable to those who are
unfamiliar with the Korean band or language. But to the relevant populations
who are actively consuming this form of media content, I wonder if Waisbord’s
argument holds water. Even if the national identity of a media content is
rendered unclear, it is less due to the transnational process by which it was
created and more a result of incorrect or insufficient information and
interest.
In this regard, the national identity of the artist may hold
significant influence over the perceived national identity of the media
content. Crudely put, nine Asian girls singing in Korean is more likely to
hammer home the point that the song is Korean than 9 blondes doing the same. But
appearances can be deceiving. Among the 9, two or three are U.S. citizens and
in other cases, a seemingly Korean band member is actually Chinese or Thai. Indeed
the borderless collaboration in media that Waisbord raises seems to carry over
to the national identities of the artists themselves.
Take Wang Leehom, a New York born and raised Chinese-American singer who is a mega star in Taiwan and China. He barely uttered a few greetings in Mandarin when he first began his career in Taiwan. Now he’s spending months venturing out into the remote mountains of China in search of obscure Chinese musical instruments that are in risk of being forgotten. He incorporates them into his songs in hopes of instilling a love for Chinese heritage among younger generations. Perhaps it doesn’t come as a surprise, then, that this New Yorker sang ‘Beijing, Beijing, I Love Beijing’ to mark the closing ceremonies of the 2008 Olympic games. Karim Karim seems to be on to something—“Diasporics have strong or weak identifications with various global ethnicities; these allegiances may grow or diminish according to the passage of time or the unfolding of events in one’s individual or communal life.”
Take Wang Leehom, a New York born and raised Chinese-American singer who is a mega star in Taiwan and China. He barely uttered a few greetings in Mandarin when he first began his career in Taiwan. Now he’s spending months venturing out into the remote mountains of China in search of obscure Chinese musical instruments that are in risk of being forgotten. He incorporates them into his songs in hopes of instilling a love for Chinese heritage among younger generations. Perhaps it doesn’t come as a surprise, then, that this New Yorker sang ‘Beijing, Beijing, I Love Beijing’ to mark the closing ceremonies of the 2008 Olympic games. Karim Karim seems to be on to something—“Diasporics have strong or weak identifications with various global ethnicities; these allegiances may grow or diminish according to the passage of time or the unfolding of events in one’s individual or communal life.”
Wednesday, September 19, 2012
Nationalism Portrayal in the Media
The system of nation-states exists by mutual recognition among states (Karim). The idea of the nation, as well as nations themselves is a fairly recent phenomenon in human history. Communication, and continued linkages between people from different regions has played a major role in the development of an international system; and the emergence of globalization.
In harnessing communication to suit the needs of pre-modern societies, the idea of national cultures (Waisbord) occurred. In looking at the effect of nationalism and development of nation-states today, there is a communal set of shared practices, values, and rituals. These nationalistic traits are continuously portrayed in the media, as a form of influence and promotion. In essence, the media nurtures a sense of collectivity and community linked to nationhood (Morley, 2000).
This can be seen around the world in how the national media outlets (e.g. CNN, ABC, NBC, etc.) provide a shared media experience on the present 2012 presidential elections, but depart on views when discussing the two presidential candidate parties, by portraying a sense of inclusion and exclusion when highlighting differences between both two candidates.
For defining national-cultures, a continuum of commonness and difference is needed. This is because nation-states have a future as long as human beings require a basis to establish unity and difference from each other; and a group identity based on inclusion and exclusion (S. Hall, 1996). Based off of this argument brought forth by Waisbord, nationalism portrayal in the media establishes various forms of cultural differences.
Whether positive or negative, these cultural differences portrayed within the global media, can induce and perpetuate long term cultural transformations. While there is
"no persuasive evidence" (Waisbord), global exposure can assist in not only helping to shape a national culture, but promote its growth as was seen in the development of global media events, such as international sport tournaments like the FIFA World Cup, and the Olympic games. For both of these events, the selected host countries receive much global media attention, which highlight the nation and its uniqueness.
The global media portrayal of the nationalistic characteristics of a state, which express a community linked to nationhood (Morley, 2000) is often times viewed positively. However, this is not always true if national culture differences of a nation-state, are viewed negatively, which remains presently the case of Iran and North Korea (deemed the 'axis of evil' powers by Former Pres. Bush).
Tuesday, September 18, 2012
Caught in the Web: Power and Counterpower in the Network Society
Acclaimed Chinese director Chen Kaige’s new film, ‘Caught in the Web’, screened a few days ago at the Toronto International Film Festival. The film raises the issue of the controversial web investigations voluntarily carried out by the Chinese public via the tools provided them by the information highway despite obvious limitations enforced by their government. I have not yet watched ‘Caught in the Web.’ But as its ominous name suggests (and according to the NYT’s take on it), Chen illustrates the dark side of a populace frenzied to action within what Manuel Castells would deem a manifestation of the network society.
The New York Times gives a summary of the film:
ONLOOKERS first stared in consternation. Then
they began to hurl insults at the attractive young woman refusing to give her
seat to the elderly man next to her. Ignoring him, Ye Lanqiu stared out the bus
window though near-opaque sunglasses. Then she smartly patted her knee,
inviting him to perch on her lap.
A couple of days later the episode, caught on
film, had gone viral. China’s netizens had rallied together to identify and
punish her. Yet another online “human flesh search” had set off frenzied
action.
The term, “human flesh search” is a literal translation of
its original Chinese phrasing. They are “collective and unofficial
investigations” that “harness voluntary Web surfers to track down identities,
contact details and personal history” (NYT). Chen Kaige’s heroine in the film is the
victim of precisely such a search, and the director comments that to him the
phenomenon bears reminders of the Cultural Revolution.
In Communication Power, Castells defines the network
society as “the social structure that characterizes society in the early
twenty-first century, a social structure constructed around (but not determined
by) digital networks of communication.” Indeed various foriegn news services and social networks have been blocked in China. Nevertheless, the network society very much exists in the country, as evidenced by
the online mobilization and collaboration of countless everyday Chinese on conducting human flesh searches.
Although Chen Kaige’s film only highlights the negative
effects of these searches, according to the New York Times these online investigations "have been lauded
in some cases for their capacity to expose corruption among local officials
when the government does not take action, and national newspapers are prevented
by censorship from doing so.” This exemplifies Castells’ logic about power and
counterpower in the network society. He asserts that “resistance to power is
achieved through the same two mechanisms that constitute power in the network
society: the programs of the networks and the switches between networks.” Recognizing the critical role of communication in establishing, maintaining and
exerting power, the Chinese government is infamous for its control of the
in-country media environment, including Internet searches. In a recent example,
it blocked searches for “back injury” in reaction to the rumors that circulated
surrounding Xi Jinping’s absence from the public eye. Ironically, it is
precisely through Internet searches and other forms of communication that the
Chinese government seeks to regulate that the Chinese public is empowered to
engage in “countervailing processes that resist established domination on
behalf of the interests, values, and projects that are excluded or
under-represented in the programs and composition of the networks” (Castells). After
all, human flesh searches are employed by everyday citizens who are “motivated by a sense of social and moral outrage” (NYT) to expose “truths” like
the extravagant lifestyles of the government elite and their family members, shedding light on facts and opinions obviously left out from the dominant
state-controlled media.
Chen Kaige’s take on human flesh searches in ‘Caught in the
Web’ appears to be quite negative, aligned with the perspective of the Chinese
government. Some say this may have been to avoid the film from being banned, as
many of Chen’s previous films have been. Ironically, despite the government-approved
content of ‘Caught in the Web’, the film itself serves as a medium that sparks
debate about the effectiveness of attempting to control communication while also drawing attention to the very issues Beijing would be keen on avoiding. On a final note, the impact of a viral video in stirring a populace to violent action against
another party illustrated in ‘Caught in the Web’ is eerily timely in light of
recent developments in the Arab world and the video that triggered it. What insight, if any, can Chen's new film offer? I'll have to embark on quite a web search myself to uncover showtimes and find out.
European Borders and Nation Building
<iframe width="640"
height="360"
src="http://www.liveleak.com/ll_embed?f=88648d830b5c"
frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
The above video (or link to video)
provides a glimpse of European borders from AD 1000 until present day. After
the 1648 Treaty of Westphalia, European leaders cemented borders and
territorialized their nations by recognizing exclusive control over the people
within measured borders. This European idea has since been diffused throughout
the world with colonization, and the idea has persisted throughout time and, as
Waisbord notes, the questions isn’t whether or not the nation-state will
continue to exist but how the nation will continue to exist. As seen by the
video above, the West has a preference for distinctively drawn lines
designating what is French or what is Austrian, English, Spanish, et cetera. We
have seen how this nation-building technique worked after decolonization in the
Middle East, and with the introduction to the modern world of mass diasporas
(largely, according to Karim, due to colonization) borders and drawn lines
matter less and less to those professing nationalities in direct opposition to
the nations in which they live.
Waisbord
argues throughout his piece Media and the
Reinvention of the Nation that early, Western nation building and the media
that helped construct the nation-state largely served bourgeois elite in
creating a standardized, mass market for an ideal capitalist society. Certain
cultural behaviors must be taken into consideration in order to guarantee a
successful capitalist society, and obviously all cultures possess these values.
The idea of a borders and nation-states, then, might not be the best solution
for every society across the world. What works in Europe does not necessarily
translate in the rest of the world, and today with diaspora communities the
West is seeing “pay back,” as Karim phrases, by the colonized inside the
nation-states of those who were once colonizers. Diaspora communities do not
need borders and drawn lines to feel a common identity, especially with the
(mostly Western) advent of increased communications: radio and Internet, for
example. This, as hypothesized by both Karim and Waisbord, prove challenging
for the future management of the traditional, Western-ideal nation-state.
Public Diplomacy = Interconnectedness
“Public diplomacy complements and reinforces traditional diplomacy by communicating directly with foreign publics through a wide range of international information, educational and cultural exchange activities”, states the opening paragraph of the United States Information Agency’s brochure. Formed in 1953 and shut down 50 years later, the USIA was a foreign affairs agency that conducted public diplomacy for the U.S. government. The end of the USIA has negatively affected how diplomacy is carried out overseas.
This is the conclusion I came to while listening to the panel at American University last week on the new book, The Last Three Feet: Case Studies in Public Diplomacy, edited by William Kiehl. Members of the Public Diplomacy Council who contributed to the book spoke about the field of Public Diplomacy (PD) and how the U.S. government would benefit from restructuring its PD efforts. One of these efforts is promoting cultural awareness and understanding. Two examples were used to describe this – the Shanghai World’s Fair Expo and “American spaces” abroad in the form of libraries.
Beatrice Camp, Consul General in Shanghai in 2010, managed the Expo and explained how the Chinese spent a decade creating the “biggest Expo in the world”, only to result in the U.S. Congress not wanting to put money into attending. If Hillary Clinton hadn’t thought otherwise and raised public money for the U.S. to attend, America would have been indebted to China for not supporting their effort, stated Michael Anderson. As the former public affairs officer in Indonesia, he also talked about how libraries used to be built worldwide, calling them “American spaces”, which held information on American culture. When these diminished along with the USIA, I’m assuming people in other countries could only learn about American culture through the news and word of mouth within their communities.
Despite the lack of support for the Expo and canceling the USIA, the U.S. has promoted cultural understanding much more than in the past. Thussu explains the main theories behind International Communications in Approaches to Theorizing International Communication, the framework for what PD, international education, and other related fields have grown from. His discussions of the modernization and dependency paradigms, which emerged during the Industrial Revolution in Europe, show that we have come a long way in our PD efforts.
The modernization paradigm asserts how the mass media “modernizes” countries, influencing them away from their traditional lifestyles and values. The dependency paradigm is similar, stating how developing nations are subordinate to and dependent on the developed, dominant nations. The dominant influence the subordinate by projecting their values and political structures onto them. Both of these paradigms conclude that cultural understanding does not take place; cultures are either intensely promoted or diminished, not exchanged. This was the case when the world was split between the First and Third Worlds.
Although the West does exert dominance on the world today, the onset of globalization has brought an increased acceptance of traditional, non-Western values. Cross-cultural understanding has increased with easier communication between cultures and transportation. Csaba Chikes, a retired senior Foreign Service officer in the USIA, talked about how even Ambassadors who attend Q&As with students in other countries make a difference. Having important U.S. government officials presenting to youth abroad shows respect and openness to understanding, just as attending (and therefore supporting) the Shanghai Expo presented the U.S. story and spirit to the Chinese. The USIA shutting down may have caused PD to backtrack a bit, but bringing realizations such as those in The Last Three Feet to light will keep the world in a new paradigm of interconnectedness.
Tuesday, September 11, 2012
The International Communication Mystery
“International communication” can be elusive. Creative
interpretations of what it is and who it involves are diverse and many. Some
see it as another word for international relations, others imagine media
professionals producing multinational advertising campaigns.
As someone who will be graduating with a Master’s degree in
precisely “international communication”, this ambiguity has bothered me more
than once. At the core of the problem was that I myself, proclaimed practitioner-in-training
and student scholar of the field, am often at a loss of words when it comes to
spontaneously and concisely describing “international communication.” Thankful
for an aptly-named core requirement, an introductory glimpse into the scholarly
literature providing a context for the field of international communication is
where I begin.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, scholars of the field also seem
divided in their approach and definition of international communication. In his
2005 speech at Aoyama Gakuin University, Professor Gary Weaver takes on a more
personal approach, shaping the field of international communication through a
lens of cross-cultural understanding and interaction. It can at once be an
academic field based on social and anthropological research, as well as a
brutally practical field upon which lives and dollars are saved and lost.
For Daya Thussu in “The Historical Context of International Communication”, the
field is marked by the transfer of information--advances in communication technology and the power politics
that surround it.
From wartime propaganda and broadcasting journalism to
the complexities of cultural sensitivity training and educational exchanges, it
is indeed true that the field we label as “international communication”
encompasses a great deal. What remains constant in this diverse and
difficult-to-define field are two simple facts: it cannot be stopped and cannot
be missed. It cannot be stopped in that international communication as the
transfer of information across national boundaries will continue to exist,
evolving with the technologies and mediums that emerge with each generation. It
cannot be missed in that communicating internationally is becoming increasingly
interlinked to interests from the individual to global levels, and
cross-cultural competency is no longer a pleasant option, but a critical
requirement.
Ritualistic Communication in Developing States
Thussu in Approaches to Theorizing International Communication lists several
theories in approaching the topic of development in the third world, such as
the Modernization and Dependency paradigms. Through the modernization paradigm,
first world nations use media as a “mobility multiplier” (Thussu, 43) in order
to diffuse information from the first world to the third world. He mentions
that those espousing this approach try to transform thinking in underdeveloped
nations from a culture of fatalism and fear of change to one of personal and
national goal setting, or in other words, risk taking. A culture that is not
risk averse is, of course, great for capitalism.
This top down approach brings back
the memory of Lawrence Harrison’s efforts to show that Western, Protestant work
ethic contributed to the success of a society, and that if a less developed
country wished to succeed it would need to have a change in its values and
beliefs. While infusing Western cultural values in the Eastern hemisphere in
order to secure development mainly for the sake of the West might be a good
short term strategy, modernizations theorists’ “assumption that the modern and
the traditional lifestyles were mutually exclusive, and their dismissive view
of culture…” can clearly end badly. Nationalism usually takes over, i.e. the
nationalization of Iran’s oil to which the US responded with a CIA-backed coup.
Look at where Iran is today.
Carey also touches on third world
interpretations of communication in Communication as Culture, calling “ritualistic communication” of
fatalist nature, “directed not toward the extension of messages in space but
toward the maintenance of society in time; not the at of imparting information
but …shared beliefs,” (Carey, 18). Whereas transmission communication is meant
to disseminate ideas and spread knowledge, ritualistic communication acted as a
means of preaching. It seems implied by Thussu, however, that the West’s use of
transmission communication is used to spread the knowledge via “free press” in
order to expand capitalist markets for the West. Regardless, evidence of
ritualistic communication can be seen across the world in nation states that
actively fight against Western influence. Propaganda in the Middle East in
particular against the US and Israel, whatever the level of validity of their
arguments, aims not to force people to question but to reaffirm beliefs that
the outside is the aggressor.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)