|
Article No. 7
Media Globalization and its Effect upon
International Communities: Seeking a Communication Theory
Perspective
Jeffrey K. Lyons
Hawai'i Pacific University
Abstract
There is a growing body of research on the topic of
globalization, which seems to be a topic of broad-brush interest to
scholars in a variety of fields, such as sociology, political
science, ecology, international business, anthropology and
communication. This paper focuses on the phenomenon of media
globalization and examines a variety of theories that address
multinational corporations with media properties. While there are
many theories that address mass communication (Gerbner, Gross,
Morgan, & Signorielli, 1986; Lazarsfeld, Cantril, & Stanton, 1939;
McLuhan & Powers, 1989; Schramm, 1954), this paper highlights the
need for new theories which specifically address media globalization
and the unique aspects which convergence and new digital
technologies offer to the media-user.
Introduction
In recent years, there has been a growing body of
research on the topic of globalization. Traditional definitions of
globalization focus on economics and the effects of multinational
corporations. In the book Alternatives to Economic Globalization,
authors Cavanaugh and Mader (2002) referred to a number of factors
that are identified with the term globalization. These factors are:
hyper-growth and exploitation of the environment, privatization of
public services, global cultural homogenization, promotion of
consumerism, integration of national economies, corporate
deregulation, and displacement of traditional nation-sates by global
corporate bureaucracies (p. 19).
This paper examines the topic of globalization from
the perspective of the media. The primary vehicle of the phenomenon
of global media is the multinational corporation. Media
globalization has aided in both the production and distribution of
information. Dominick (2002) has noted that the production rate of
information doubles every eight years. In addition, "information is
being produced at a rate that is four times faster than the
consumption of information" (p. 513). The phenomenon of media
globalization along with the increasing abundance of media-text
production has produced various effects which are being researched
by communication scholars. Media globalization is a broad topic,
which includes television, radio, film, music, the Internet, and
other forms of digital media. This paper will first focus upon the
cultural effects of media globalization, and then discuss various
communication theories that address this issue. After examining a
number of media theories which address globalization, there will be
a discussion on the theory which seems to best address the media
globalization phenomenon.
Christopher Dixon, a media analyst for Paine-Webber
has stated that a creation of a "global oligopoly" is taking place
among a handful of multinational organizations which control
worldwide media properties. (McChesney, 2005, p. 81). Compaign
(2005) identified a short list of nine global media corporations,
which represent a variety of nations, as the major players (p. 98).
These corporations and their significance will be discussed in more
detail in this paper. Media globalization shall be defined as the
phenomenon of expanding multinational corporate media investment,
resulting in the emergence of a global oligarchy of first tier
corporations, which own and operate a variety of mass media content
and distribution technologies including: television, radio, film,
music, broadcasting, satellite, telecommunication, cable,
newspapers, magazines, publishing companies, Internet content
providers, and other forms of converged digital media.
[1]
The Climate of Globalization
Globalization is being driven by increasingly strong
international market factors fueled by organizations such as the
World Trade Organization (WTO) and the International Monetary Fund
(IMF). The World Trade Organization was established in 1995 and as
of October 2004 had 148 member nations. The WTO is located in
Geneva, Switzerland. According to the WTO, they are "the only global
international organization dealing with the rules of trade between
nations" ("What is the wto?" 2004). The International Monetary Fund
was founded in 1945 and is located in Washington D.C... The IMF
currently has 184 member nations. The goals of the IMF include:
monitoring and consultation, financial assistance, and technical
assistance to its members ("About the imf," 2003). Other
organizations which promote globalization are: the World Bank (1946)
which makes loans to developing nations, and the Trilateral
Commission (1973) which focuses on trade between Japan, Europe and
North America, "to foster closer cooperation among these core
democratic industrialized areas of the world with shared leadership
responsibilities in the wider international system" ("About the
organization," 2004).
The United Nations Educational, Scientific, and
Cultural Organization (UNESCO) is another significant player
regarding globalization policies and discourse. UNESCO was founded
in 1945 and is headquartered in Paris, France. As an agency of the
United Nations, UNESCO functions as an international cultural think
tank, which "serves as a
clearinghouse
– for the dissemination and sharing of information" to its 190
member nations in the areas of "education, science, culture and
communication." One of the ambitious goals of UNESCO is to "to build
peace in the minds of men" ("About unesco," 2003).
MacBride and Roach (2000) pointed out, that the
UNESCO constitution which was adopted in 1946 addressed the flow of
international information by charging the agency to "collaborate in
the work of advancing the mutual knowledge and understanding of
peoples, through all means of mass communication and to that end
recommend the free flow of ideas by word and image" (p. 287). In
1978, UNESCO published The Declaration on Fundamental Principles
Concerning the Contribution of the Mass Media. Article VII of
The Declaration refers to, "the mass media contribut[ing]
effectively to the strengthening of peace and international
understanding, to the promotion of human rights, and to the
establishment of a more just and equitable international economic
order" ("Declaration on the mass media," 1978).
Without question, the driving force behind
globalization is motivated by economic interests. Much of the
current climate of international investment and global business is a
direct result of global reconstruction, which followed World War II.
Both the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund were founded
within a few years after the end of World War II. Critics of
globalization say that capitalism is the driving force behind world
economics. According to Amnesty International (2000), "of the 100
largest economies in the world, 51 are now global corporations; only
49 are countries" (p. 187). Critics of globalization, such as
Amnesty International (AI) are concerned that developing nations are
losing their national sovereignty and that human rights violations
are taking place. According to AI, "They [developing nations] have
diminishing power to control mergers, take-overs and liquidations,
may not know who plans to buy or sell a major industry or utility; a
telephone, TV or water company may change ownership overnight" (p.
188).
Media Globalization and Corporate Expansion
Media globalization has been a natural extension of
corporate expansion on an international scale. Post World War II
reconstruction through organizations such as the World Bank and the
International Monetary Fund helped to spread globalization through
financial investment. In 1974, UNESCO published a study by
researchers Nordenstreng and Varis. MacBride and Roach (2000)
reviewed the 1974 UNESCO study and noted that, "The study
demonstrated that a few Western nations controlled the international
flow of television programs, with the United States, the United
Kingdom, France, and the Federal Republic of Germany accounting for
the largest shares" (p. 289). According to MacBride and Roach
(2000), media globalization gained further momentum in the 1980's,
when a prevailing policy of deregulation of media in many developing
nations along with openness to private investment occurred (p. 289).
McChesney (2005) also noted this trend of free-market deregulation
occurring in the eighties and the nineties, in the cable and digital
satellite systems around the world.
Head, Spann and McGregor (2001) noted that in the
mid-1980's privatization and deregulation gained momentum in Europe,
in the cable and telephone industries, through foreign investment
from companies such as: Ameritech International, Deutsche Telecom,
U.S. West, and Bell Atlantic (p. 414). Some nations have only
recently allowed foreign investment in communications industries. In
the case of China, the admittance into the World Trade Organization
was a benefit that outweighed the past reluctance towards foreign
investment in their national telecommunications infrastructure.
China changed its official policy in 1999, as a
required component of its acceptance into the World Trade
Organization. Under the new policy, China will allow foreign
investors to hold up to 49 percent of certain telecommunications
companies, including Internet firms. (Head et al., 2001, p. 414)
Critics of media globalization have long held that
the United States is far too powerful and that it exercises cultural
imperialism over smaller nations by overwhelming them with movies
and television programs produced in the United States (McChesney,
2005). According to Dominick (2002), there has been international
reaction to charges of cultural imperialism by certain nations
"including Canada, Spain, and France [that] have placed quotas on
the amount of foreign material that can be carried on their
broadcasting systems" (p. 475).
Economist Benjamin Compaine (2005) answered the
criticism of American cultural imperialism directly, by stating that
in the twenty first century the major players are corporations from
a variety of nations:
While Viacom, Disney, and AOL Time Warner are U.S.
owned, many non-U.S.-owned companies dominate the roster of the
largest media groups: News Corp. (Australia), Bertlesmann (Germany),
Reed-Elsevier (Britain/Netherlands), Vivendi, and Lagardere/Hachette
(France), and Sony Corp. (Japan). (p. 98)
Effects of Media Globalization
Researchers have noted a variety of effects
resulting from media globalization. Some of these observed effects
are open to interpretation while others are acknowledged by most
communication scholars. Certain researchers tie their observations
to their own theories which attempt to explain certain observed
effects. In contrast, other researchers may take on a more
descriptive approach preferring to describe detailed effects and
apply the theories of other scholars as models for explanation.
According to researcher George Gerbner, the most
successful television programs are no longer made for national
consumption but rather for international distribution. Gerbner
further noted that content is affected by the desire to increase the
marketability of international television program distribution.
Programs that contain violent material are considered to "travel
well" according to Gerbner (Jhally, 1994). In contrast, comedy
programs which may be quite successful in the United States do not
necessarily do well in other countries. Comedy is culturally
defined, and what is deemed funny by one cultural group may in fact
be offensive to another. In comparison, violent material has a very
simple story line of good versus evil. It is universally understood
and in many ways culturally transparent.
Robert McChesney is a media historian and political
economist. In a recent article by McChesney (2005), he criticized
multinational corporations in a number of ways. First, that the
global media market is dominated by eight multinational corporations
which also dominate U.S. media. These companies are: "General
Electric, AT&T/Liberty Media, Disney, Time Warner, Sony, News
Corporation, Viacom and Seagram, plus Bertelsmann, the Germany-based
conglomerate" (p. 93). Second, multinational corporations are
becoming increasingly horizontally integrated, meaning that these
companies both create content and own publishing companies or
broadcasting networks, and are able to distribute their own product.
Third, international deregulation and free-market policies have
created a climate that has been conducive to foreign investment in
media. Fourth, that the World Trade Organization is threatening
local culture by encouraging foreign investment in local media.
McChesney has observed a trend of cultural protectionism form
developing nations:
In the summer of 1998 culture ministers from twenty
nations, including Brazil, Mexico, Sweden, Italy and Ivory Coast,
met in Ottawa to discuss how they could 'build some ground rules' to
protect their cultural fare from 'the Hollywood juggernaut.' (p. 93)
Fifth, there is a well defined second tier of media
conglomerates which are increasingly competing on the international
level through foreign investment, mergers, and acquisitions. Half of
these corporations are based in North America while the others are
based in Western Europe and Japan. (This observation by McChesney is
interesting since the Trilateral Commission encourages economic
trade between precisely these three regions.) Second tier
corporations include, "Dow Jones, Gannett, Knight-Ridder, Hearst,
and Advance Publications, and among those from Europe are the Kirch
Group, Havas, Media-set, Hachette, Pisa, Canal Plus, Pearson,
Reuters and Reed Elsevier" (p. 94). Sixth, merger mania seems to be
the rule of day when it comes to multinational corporations.
McChesney noted that sixty or seventy first and second tier
multinational corporations control a major portion of the world's
media in the areas of publishing, music, broadcasting, television
production, cable, satellite distribution, film production, and
motion picture theater exhibition. Seventh, McChesney concluded that
the effect of the spread of multinational media corporations has
resulted in cultural imperialism, a loss of local cultural identity.
McChesney summarized the motivation of multinational media
corporations as such, "The global commercial-media system is radical
in that it will respect no tradition or custom, on balance, if it
stands in the way of profits" (p. 95).
Benjamin Compaine (2005) has disagreed with many of
McChesney's criticisms of the effects of globalization of the media.
Compaine tackled a number of major criticisms head on in his article
"Global Media." First, Compaine disagreed with the view that a few
large companies are taking over the world's media. Compaine has
compared international media mergers to "rearranging the furniture,"
as companies are repeatedly sold and re-sold:
In the past 15 years, MCA with its Universal
Pictures was sold by it U.S. owners to Matsushita (Japan), who sold
to Seagram's (Canada), who sold to Vivendi (France). Vivendi has
already announced that it will divest some major media assets,
including textbook publisher Houghton-Mifflin. (p. 98)
Second, Compaine disagreed that corporate ownership
is having a toll on effective journalism. A study by the non-profit
organization Freedom House in 2000 researched 186 countries; it
suggested "that press independence, including journalists' freedom
from economic influence, remained high in all but two members
(Mexico and Turkey) of the Organisation [sic] for Economic
Co-operation and Development" (p. 99). Third, Compaine disagreed
that global media can hurt local content. MTV in Brazil plays music
and videos that are selected by local producers. Star TV,
distributes satellite TV in India. Star was initially unsuccessful
when it showed American television programs. Star TV only succeeded
after it hired an Indian television executive who created Indian
soap operas. Fourth, Compaine disagreed that the public would be
better served by stricter regulation of the media. Media
concentration can be beneficial in the case of two small struggling
newspapers merging in order to survive, as opposed to one of them
going out of business. Licensing and antitrust regulation can act as
a barrier to new players entering the competitive landscape.
Relaxing broadcast regulation expands competition. News Corp. began
its investment in American media when the FCC raised the limit of
national television station ownership from seven to twelve, and also
struck down the rule that prohibited TV networks from owning their
own programming. As a result, Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. was able
to build an audience with a core group of television stations and
purchase 20th Century Fox. Compaine noted, "Fox was thus
able to launch the first successful alternative to the Big Three in
30 years. Its success also paved the way for three other large media
players to initiate networks" (p. 101).
Marjorie Ferguson has similar views to Compaine.
Ferguson (2002) has stated that cultural homogeneity is a myth which
is predicated upon McLuhan's theory of a global village. The myth is
not evidenced by real-world observation since identical consumer
products, movies, clothes and architectural expressions are not seen
in every nation. The new world order and economic globalism is not
marching forward in an unchecked manner. As Ferguson has stated,
"Paradoxically, we witness an antifederalist ethos competing with a
resurgent regional economic protectionism in the EC, the North
American Free Trade Area (NAFTA) and the proposed South-East Asian
trading bloc" (p. 245).
In a significant historical article, Pike and
Winseck (2004) argued that media globalization is not a recent
phenomenon at all. Globalization began in the 1850's when "domestic
telegraph systems had greatly extended their reach and become linked
to a worldwide network of cable communications. . . . British
companies dominated, maintaining almost complete control over the
manufacture and laying of cables and owning two-thirds of the
world's cables by 1900" (pp. 645-646). Pike and Winseck make three
major points in their article. First, globalization is not a recent
phenomenon. Some scholars have interpreted the early stages of
globalization as being synonymous with imperialism, since "competing
western nations utilized communications to aid in the expansion of
their empires" (p. 643). Second, there is the technocratic view of
globalization. This view linked the technical aspects of
globalization with the global spread of modernity and civilization.
Third, globalization is a natural extension of "laissez-faire
capitalism," which broke through national boundaries to extend the
free market economy to a global-world market (p. 644).
Communication Theories that Address Media
Globalization
The trends and effects of media globalization will
continue to be both observed and debated by communication scholars,
sociologists, economist, and politicians alike. With the fall of
communism in the USSR in August of 1991, private investment and the
proliferation of multinational corporations has continued to march
across Europe and the other continents of the world. The trend of
continuing media globalization has showed no recent signs of
retreat. Both critics and advocates of media globalization agree
that there is fierce competition taking place between the first and
second tier corporations. The smaller regional second tier
corporations don't want to loose market share to the larger
multinational corporations. It seems that market forces and shrewd
political maneuverings on the part of multinational media
corporations will determine the competitive landscape of the future.
While this fierce battle is taking place in the corporate boardrooms
of some of the worlds largest multinational corporations,
communication researchers search for a theoretical basis to
interpret various phenomena related to global mass media. What
follows is a variety of theoretical perspectives from scholars that
are addressing these questions.
Cultural Imperialism and Marxism and Critical Theory
One of the oldest theories of mass media which is
also critical of globalization is cultural imperialism. John
Tomlinson (2002) has addressed a number of issues related to
cultural imperialism discourse. First, Tomlinson recognized that
traditional Marxism divided the world into a political-economic
dialectic struggle between an elite ruling class and a larger
working class. For the Marxist, capitalism is interpreted as a
"homogenizing cultural force" (p. 228). The idea is that capitalism
propels a sort of "cultural convergence" which people are not able
to resist and that cultural imperialism implies a spreading culture
of worldwide consumerism. Second, cultural imperialism is used as a
term which described a foreign culture invading an indigenous
community. Tomlinson has criticized this common view by pointing out
that indigenous culture can be an ambiguous term. Tomlinson
asked, "How does a culture belong to an area?" (p. 226). Since
culture is constructed by human beings, how can it be geographically
grounded in the same way that plants and animals are? Tomlinson's
second point is not a very sound one. Anthropologists and linguists
alike can describe how the very words and customs that are
incorporated into most indigenous cultures and languages are a
reflection of the environment in which the people live (Geertz,
1983). Third, Tomlinson saw cultural imperialism as a critique of
modernity. According to Tomlinson, "But on another theoretical level
the critique of modernity becomes an argument against the dominant
trends of global development. Indeed, it involves an argument about
the meaning of 'development' itself" (p. 229).
Critical Theory as popularized by the Frankfurt
School, was founded in 1923. It continues to be an important
methodology in the study of mass communication. According to
Littlejohn (2002), the Frankfurt School is well known for its
Marxist traditions. The criticism of the mass media from the
Frankfurt School was tied to a "harsh critique of capitalism and
liberal democracy" (p. 212). Critical theory and cultural
imperialism theory share common roots in Marxist ideology, which are
both anti-capitalistic and generally anti-Western in their approach
to the study of media globalization. Everett Rogers (1994) detailed
how the Frankfurt school was a combination of Marxist and Freudian
theories. According to Rogers, the term "critical school" refers to
"not only a dozen or so important intellectuals originally
affiliated with the Frankfurt school but also to hundreds of other
contemporary scholars who consider themselves intellectual
descendants of the original Frankfurt scholars . . ." (p. 109).
Cultivation Theory
George Gerbner (1977) has developed cultivation
analysis theory. Gerbner's theory asserts that television has
displaced traditional sources of socialization such as: the family,
the church, and school:
A culture cultivates the images of a society. The
dominant communication agencies produce the message systems that
cultivate the dominant image patterns. They structure the public
agenda of existence, priorities, values, relationships. . . . The
mass media – printing, film, radio, television – ushered in the
modern world as we know it. Mass communication changed the
production and distribution of knowledge. (p. 205)
According to Gerbner, Gross, Morgan and Signorielli
(1986), "television has become the primary common source of
socialization and everyday information (mostly in the form of
entertainment) of an otherwise heterogeneous population," Gerbner
believed that mass media produced images from, "the mainstream of a
common symbolic environment" (p. 18). Stephen Littlejohn (2002)
commented that Gerbner's theory "is not a theory of individual media
'effects' but instead makes a statement about the culture as a
whole" (p. 317). Gerbner predicted that heavy television viewers are
far more likely to be socialized through television than light
television viewers. Gerbner went on to describe what he called the
"mean world syndrome" which suggests that the violent nature of
television content will affect heavy television viewers to believe
that the world is a violent place, where people cannot be trusted.
According to Gerbner, violent television programs "travel well"
across political borders since violence is easily understood
cross-culturally. In contrast, comedy does not translate well in
other cultures since it is inherently culture-bound.
Nancy Signorielli (1990) has done research which
seems to substantiate Gerbner's theory, suggesting that heavy
television viewers are more prone to be mistrustful of others and to
see the world as a meaner place, than do lighter television viewers.
Signorielli and Morgan (1990) have written a book titled,
Cultivation analysis: New directions in media effects research,
which contains a wide variety of research regarding cultivation
analysis theory, from critics and adherents alike. The Museum of
Television has summarized the research and controversy surrounding
cultivation analysis theory:
The literature contains numerous failures to
replicate its findings as well as numerous independent confirmations
of its conclusions. The most common conclusion, supported by
meta-analysis, is that television makes a small but significant
contribution to heavy viewers' beliefs about the world. . . . In
sum, cultivation research is concerned with the most general
consequences of long-term exposure to centrally-produced,
commercially supported systems of stories. Cultivation analysis
concentrates on the enduring and common consequences of growing up
and living with television. ("Audience research," 2004)
Spiral of Silence Theory
Similar to Gerbner, Noelle-Neumann also argued for
the dominating effect of mass media upon the public.
Noelle-Neumann's spiral of silence theory proposed that people are
more likely to publicly express their opinions when they perceive
that others share their views. The spiral of silence effect refers
to individuals choosing to be silent when faced with the potential
of criticism by others. According to Littlejohn (2002), "the spiral
of silence seems to be caused by the fear of isolation" (p. 19).
Eliju Katz (2002) has made the following statement regarding the
relationship between spiral of silence theory and the media:
Central to Noelle-Neumann's thesis is the notion
that the media have come to substitute for reference groups. It is
strongly implicit in the Noelle-Neumann papers that people decide
whether or not to be silent on the basis of the distribution of
opinion reported (often incorrectly) by the media. (p. 387)
Katz criticized Noelle-Neumann's lack of discussion
regarding an individual's participation in reference groups. There
remains a delicate balance between reference groups and mass
communication. While a person may feel the effects of the spiral of
silence in the face of mass media messages that are different than
one's personal beliefs, being a member of a reference group with
shared values may counter the silencing effect. Katz further pointed
out that both Gerbner and Noelle-Neumann agreed that the "media are
active agents of false consciousness, constraining people to
misperceive their environment and their own place in it" (p. 386).
Dependency Theory
Dependency Theory is a means to address the role of
news agencies in the international distribution of news content.
Oliver Boyd-Barrett and Terhi Rantanen (2002) discussed the roots of
dependency theory as stemming from the viewpoint that agencies such
as Reuters, were seen as significant in certain British territories
during the 1930's, in promoting British trade interests. Dependency
theory itself arose from South American nations in the post-colonial
stage. The theory maintained that prior colonial nations which had
been exposed to North American capitalistic investment had become
dependent upon western news agencies since the news-system provided
a critical link between the developing nations and the larger world
economy and corresponding value system. Dependency theory had an
impact as part of the nonaligned nations movement, which began in
1955 (MacBride & Roach, 2000). In 1976, Mustapha Masmoudi, the
Tunisian Secretary of State for information, spoke at the nonaligned
news symposium in Tunis. The outcome of the meeting was to challenge
the nonaligned nations to form a new world information and
communication order (NWICO). The purpose of the NWICO was to
advance among the nonaligned nations a "reorganization of existing
communication channels that are a legacy of the colonial past"
(287).
Megaphone Effect Theory
Bloch and Lemish (2003) have created a new term
which they call the megaphone effect. They theorize that cultural
texts which become adopted into the popular culture in the United
States can be transformed into a global cultural phenomenon, through
the international media. The theory suggests a two-step process.
First, cultural texts cross the Atlantic (or Pacific) and enter into
the culture of the United States. The second step occurs when these
texts are then perceived as having wider international appeal, and
are then marketed and distributed to the global community. The study
analyzed: television programs, news networks, children's culture,
and pop music. It suggested that the adoption of local cultural
texts into mainstream U.S. culture provided a greater opportunity
for their voices to be heard on a global scale. This theory is quite
new to the globalization literature and as yet there are few
published articles on the subject.
Global Imaging Theory
In his book, The Roar of the Crowd (1993),
Michael J. O'Neill built a strong case for a more homogenized world
culture, as the result of television and mass media. O'Neill is the
former editor of the New York Daily News, and a member of the
Council on Foreign Relations. O'Neill contends that, "communications
technology always influences human organization. . . . As the speed
of communication rises, social distance shrinks and ever larger
numbers of people, widely separated by space, are drawn together
into common experiences" (p. 24). O'Neil's book viewed media
globalization from the point of view of a news reporter. Winston
Churchill was opposed to using television but later conceded to its
necessity. O'Neill attributed Margaret Thatcher's rise to political
power as stemming from her television appearances in the 1974
election (p. 121). O'Neill's main thesis is that mass communication,
on a global scale, drives public opinion:
Whatever the country-by-country variation, a central
force in all that is happening is obviously public opinion,
mobilized and distributed by mass communications on an unprecedented
scale. The rise in people power is having a heavier impact on
political institutions than at any other time in history, not only
in Western democracies but in many areas of the world where it has
never existed before. (p. 104)
O'Neill's view of communication technology as a
major force behind human organizations and political movements is
similar to Marshall McLuhan's theory of technological determinism.
In this view, television like the printing press, and the telegraph
before it, are signature technological inventions which affect
society as a whole. McLuhan understood that technologies such as the
telephone, television and undersea communications cables connected
the world's societies together. According to Straubhaar and LaRose
(2004), McLuhan used the term "global village" in the 1960's, before
the advent of the Internet.
Tetrad Theory
Perhaps one of the most interesting theories
regarding media globalization is one developed by Marshall McLuhan
and Bruce Powers (1989) in their book The Global Village.
[2]McLuhan
and Powers present a model which they refer to as a tetrad. The
tetrad is a made up of three elements. The first element is visual
space which refers to a Western civilization mind set, based on
logical systematic, linear, and Platonic reason. The second element
is acoustic space, which is more holistic and Asian in approach. The
third element is the tetrad itself which is a collision of these two
opposing philosophies in a four part metaphor, consisting of
enhancement, reversal, retrieval and obsolescence. According to
McLuhan and Powers, "The tetrad helps us to see 'and-both' the
positive and the negative results of the artifact" (p. 11).
The example is given of the invention of the
automobile which greatly aided the need for transportation, but also
changed society by transforming workers into distance commuters,
dooming the inner city to skyscraper landscapes, while at the same
time creating the need for suburbs. The practicality of verifying
tetrad theory with social science research seems limited since it
seems to be as much a philosophy as a theory of communication.
Gordon Gow (2001) has written an article about
tetrad theory and relates it to special metaphor, from an
ontological perspective. This approach is used as a model for the
study of culture and technology. In this sense, tetrad theory is
more of an epistemological perspective than a methodological
approach to global mass media research.
In any case, McLuhan and Power's work does offer a
number of interesting and almost prophetic observations, considering
that the book was written in 1989. Before the Internet existed, the
authors describe the interactive nature of the World Wide Web:
For example, the new telecommunication multi-carrier
corporation, dedicated solely to moving all kinds of data at the
speed of light, will continually generate tailor-made products and
services for individual consumers who have pre-signaled their
preferences through an ongoing data base. Users will simultaneously
become producers and consumers. (p. 83)
Seeking an Interactive Model for Media Globalization
With the exception of tetrad theory, all of these
theories have one thing in common. They all view mass communication
from the perspective of the traditional model proposed by Wilber
Schramm (1954). Schramm's theory proposed a one-to-many model in
which a highly complex mass media organization (newspaper,
television network, radio network, or news agency) created and then
distributed messages to a mass public. In Schramm's model, the media
organization is depicted as the gatekeeper of information flow. It
is from this model that volumes of media effects research such as
gate keeping and agenda setting studies have been based (Head et
al., 2001, p. 323; Whetmore, 1993, p. 5).
George Gerbner's cultivation theory describes the
effects of a top-down, one-to-many mass communication model. It does
not offer an explanation for bottom-up content from a large
heterogeneous audience. Noelle-Neumann's spiral of silence theory
offers an explanation for why people do not speak up, when faced
with intimidating messages from an impersonal mass media system,
with which certain publics do not agree. Spiral of silence theory
could also be used in a converse manner. What happens when the media
provide a gathering place for similar points of view and expression
of meaning? In the case of the Internet, the recent popularity of
web logs (a.k.a. blogging) suggests that the antithesis of spiral of
silence produces new communities of shared sense-making, which
stimulate expression.
Dependency theory and the theory of cultural
imperialism are traditionally grounded in Marxist ideology. The
criticism of Marxist ideology is that the entire world is reduced to
an economic-political struggle between the classes. Culture is seen
as being dominated by economics. In contrast, sociologists with a
constructivist epistemology believe that humans (not economic
struggle) create meaning. Movements such as NWICO are an attempt for
local cultural expression to have a voice, in opposition to
dominating foreign cultures. Some of these movements are reactionary
in nature, and make little attempt to integrate local media-texts
into the larger scope of global media. An alternative, Bloch and
Lemish's megaphone effect theory offers the opportunity which
Marxist critical theories deny their publics. In short, megaphone
theory suggests that local media-text production can have
international appeal, and that mass media organizations are seeking
new sources of media content for global distribution.
There is now a significant shift which is taking
place regarding the globalization of media. As media convergence
continues, and a higher percentage of media-texts and content are
reduced to the digital domain, a new model of mass communication is
unfolding. As Joseph Dominick (2002) pointed out, this new model is
not one-to-many but rather, many-to-many (p. 23). Users of Internet
content are suddenly empowered with the ability to post messages on
web sites; they can also create their own web sites. These messages
and sites can then be viewed by millions of Internet users around
the world. When McLuhan and Powers' book was published in 1989,
there was no Internet, as we know it today. Their prediction that
"Users will simultaneously become producers and consumers" has been
prophetic (p. 83). Today, anyone with access to the Internet can
easily create a web page or post a message on a bulletin board. The
traditional one-to-many model has been replaced by a new interactive
paradigm.
Interactive Global Media Theory
A theory of media globalization based on an
interactive platform is sustainable for many reasons. First, the
global spread of the Internet and the increasing trend of digital
media convergence. Pavlik and McIntosh (2005) pointed out that
feedback in the converged world of digital communication is
instantaneous in comparison with traditional analog mass
communication (p. 71). Second, television is becoming increasingly
interactive. Millions of viewers call in to vote, as in the case of
the popular television program American Idol. High Definition
Television in 2007 will have built in two-way interactive
capabilities. Cable television currently has interactive
capabilities allowing viewers to order a pizza directly through the
cable connection. Third, there is an increasing competitive pressure
between first tier multinational media corporations to offer more
locally produced content. Compaine (2005) noted that the key to
success for Star TV in India was the development of an Indian soap
opera created by a local television executive. Jocelyn Cullity
(2002) pointed out that cultural nationalism has been the key to
success for MTV India. Indrajit Banergee (2002) argued that there is
a significant trend in local and regional programming in developing
nations, and that much of this is in response to charges of cultural
imperialism. Forth, the entire discussion of communication
convergence in the digital realm, which affects the Internet,
telecommunications, television, movies, radio, and satellite
distribution of content, is based on increasing interactivity.
Consumers and media users increasingly seek interactive environments
in which they can use these types of services in a seamless manner
(Rushkoff, 2005). Consumers in Europe are already able to use cell
phones to make purchases from vending machines. The successful
marketers of the future will be those who discover new interactive
solutions for a public which seeks ubiquitous solutions from a
variety of digital devices. Fifth, interactive capabilities create a
new growth curve, which in turn will expand the customer base of
mature media technologies. Talk radio has exploded in popularity in
the United States. According to Head (2001), "Arbitron reports that
national shares for talk radio have risen steadily from 15.4 in 1993
to more than 17 today" (p. 305).
Conclusion
This paper has looked at the phenomenon of
globalization from the perspective of the media. The effects of
media globalization have been discussed as presented by a variety of
communication scholars. Current theories of the mass media that
address globalization have been presented and criticized. Finally,
this paper has noted the need for more theory which specifically
addresses media globalization from an interactive many-to-many
model. It is time to break from the traditional one-to-many model as
proposed by Schramm (1954). In addition, current communication
theory needs to address the rise of the multinational first tier
players, and to develop models which take into account the unique
aspects of interactivity, which digital technologies provide. As
Pavlik and McIntosh (2005) pointed out, the traditional analog mass
communication model saw the audience as a large, anonymous public,
which was passive in its use of the media. In contrast the new
paradigm of digital mass media sees the audience in a completely
different manner. The audience is now fragmented, known and
addressable. This new audience is engaged, and active in
participation. It actively creates media content and new communities
of content exchange. This paper is a call for new communication
theory to be created which will address these emerging phenomena.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
References
Declaration on fundamental principles concerning the
contribution of the mass media to strengthening peace and
international understanding, to the promotion of human rights and to
countering racialism, apartheid and incitement to war. (1978,
November 28). Retrieved November 19, 2004, from
http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=13176&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html
About the imf. (2003, December). International
Monetary Fund Retrieved November 19, 2004, from
http://www.imf.org/external/about.htm
About unesco. (2003, October). United Nations
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization Retrieved
November 19, 2004, from
http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=3328&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html
About the organization. (2004, May). The
Trilateral Commission Retrieved November 19, 2004, from
http://www.trilateral.org/about.htm
Audience research: Cultivation analysis. (2004,
January). Retrieved November 28, 2004, from
http://www.museum.tv/archives/etv/A/htmlA/audienceresec/audienceresec.htm
What is the wto? (2004, October). World Trade
Organization Retrieved November 19, 2004, from
http://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/whatis_e/whatis_e.htm
AI. (2000). Ai on human rights and labor rights. In
F. J. Lechner & J. Boli (Eds.), The globalization reader (pp.
187-191). Malden: Blackwell Publishers.
Banerjee, I. (2002). The locals strike back? Media
globalization and localization in the new asian television
landscape. Gazette: The International Journal for Communication
Studies, 64(6), 517-535.
Bloch, L.-R., & Lemish, D. (2003). The megaphone
effect: The international diffusion of cultural media via the USA.
In P. J. Kalbfleisch (Ed.), Communication yearbook (Vol. 27,
pp. 159.190). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Boyd-Barrett, O., & Rantanen, T. (2002). Theorizing
the news agencies. In D. Mcquail (Ed.), Mcquail's reader in mass
communication theory (pp. 216-221). London: Sage Publications.
Cavanagh, J., & Mader, J., et. al., eds. (2002).
Alternatives to economic globalization: A better world is possible -
a report of the international forum on globalization. San
Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.
Compaine, B. (2005). Global media. In E. P. Bucy
(Ed.), Living in the information age: A new media reader (2nd
ed., pp. 97-101). Belmont: Wadsworth Thomson Learning.
Cullity, J. (2002). The global desi: Cultural
nationalism on mtv india. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 26(4),
408-425.
Dominick, J. R. (2002). The dynamics of mass
communication: Media in the digital age. (7th ed.) Boston:
McGraw Hill.
Ferguson, M. (2002). The mythology about
globalization. In D. Mcquail (Ed.), Mcquail's reader in mass
communication theory (pp. 238-248). London: Sage Publications
Ltd.
Geertz, C. (1983). Local knowledge: Further
essays in interpretive anthropology. New York: Basic Books.
Gerbner, G. (1977). Comparitive cultural indicators.
In G. Gerbner (Ed.), Mass media policies in changing cultures
(pp. 199-205). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Gerbner, G., Gross, L., Morgan, M., & Signorielli,
N. (1986). Perspectives on media effects. In J. Bryant & D. Zillmann
(Eds.), Living with television. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
Gow, G. (2001). Spatial metaphor in the work of
marshall mcluhan. Canadian Journal of Communication, 26(4),
519-536.
Head, S. W., Spann, T., & McGregor, M. A. (2001).
Broadcasting in america. (9th ed.) Boston: Houghton Mifflin
Company.
Jhally, S. (1994). The killing screens
[videorecording]. Northampton: Media Education Foundation.
Katz, E. (2002). Publicity and pluralistic
ignorance: Notes on 'the spiral of silence'. In D. McQuail (Ed.),
Mcquail's reader in mass communication theory.London: Sage
Publications Ltd.
Lazarsfeld, P. F., Cantril, H., & Stanton, F.
(1939). Current radio research in universities. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 23, 201-204.
Littlejohn, S. W. (2002). Theories of human
communication. (7th ed.) Albuquerque: Wadsworth Thompson
Learning.
MacBride, S., & Roach, C. (2000). The new
international information order. In F. J. Lechner & J. Boli (Eds.),
The globalization reader (pp. 286-292). Malden: Blackwell
Publishers.
McChesney, R. W. (2005). The new global media. In E.
P. Bucy (Ed.), Living in the information age: A new media reader
(2nd ed., pp. 92-96). Belmont: Wadsworth Thomson Learning.
McLuhan, M., & Powers, B. R. (1989). The global
village: Transformations in world life and media in the 21st
century. New York: Oxford University Press.
O'Neill, M. J. (1993). The roar of the crowd: How
television and people power are changing the world. New York:
Times Books Randomhouse.
Pavlik, J., & McIntosh, S. (2005). Convergence,
content, and interactivity. In E. P. Bucy (Ed.), Living in the
information age: A new media reader (2nd ed., pp. 67-73).
Belmont: Wadsworth Thompson Learning.
Pike, R., & Winseck, D. (2004). The politics of
global media reform, 1907-23. Media Culture & Society, 26(5),
643-675.
Rogers, E. M. (1994). A history of communication
study: A biographical approach. New York: The Free Press.
Rushkoff, D. (2005). Renaissance now! Media ecology
and the new global narrative. In E. P. Bucy (Ed.), Living in the
information age (2nd ed., pp. 21-32). Belmont: Wadsworth Thomson
Lerning.
Schramm, W. (1954). The process and effects of
mass communication. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Signorielli, N. (1990). Television's mean and
dangerous world: A continuation of the cultural indicators
perspective. In N. Signorielli & M. Morgan (Eds.), Cultivation
analysis: New directions in media effects research (pp. 85-106).
Newbury Park: Sage.
Signorielli, N., & Morgan, M. (Eds.). (1990).
Cultivation analysis: New directions in media effects research.
Newbury Park: Sage.
Straubhaar, J., & LaRose, R. (2004). Media now:
Understanding media, culture, and technology. (4th ed.) Belmont:
Thomson Wadsworth.
Tomlinson, J. (2002). The discourse of cultural
imperialism. In D. McQuail (Ed.), Mcquail's reader in mass
communication theory (pp. 223-237). London: Sage Publications.
Whetmore, E. J. (1993). Mediamerica, mediaworld:
Form, content and consequence of mass communication. (5th ed.)
Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
[1]
In this paper, the term first tier corporation shall refer to
significant multinational media organizations. The term second
tier refers to regional corporations, while third tier
are the smallest players, with only local influence.
[2]
McLuhan and Powers collaborated on the project. The book was
published nine years after McLuhan died.
About the Author
Jeffrey K. Lyons, M.A., is a
faculty member in the College of Communication at Hawaii Pacific
University. He is currently working on his Ph.D. in Communication
Studies at Regent University, Virginia Beach, VA. He is a member of
Broadcast Education Association. He can be reached at
jlyons1@campus.hpu.edu
|