Critical Examination Of Media Role In Globalization

Daniel Stanley

In what way(s) do the media contribute to the process of globalization?

It could be said that the term globalization refers to ‘development’ (or not in some cases) in all facets of society through an ever-more interconnected web of communication. The more connections, be they cultural, sociologically grounded or economically based, forged by a nation the more globalized one could interpret it to be. The flow of information across the globe therefore would determine this process of globalization, not only its velocity, but also its geographical and economical path. As the force sitting atop this mountain of information, and chief distributors thereof, the media plays an integral role in the formation of ‘globalized’, and indeed ‘de-globalized’ nations. The power afforded the media is effectively handing control of a vast amount of the processes of globalization over to it. As Hallin describes the gravity of media‘s power in relation to the world: ‘journalism gives the world political meaning’ (1994: p.1). The differing societies, certainly in the western bloc, engage with the media from a fundamental level, ergo the media corporations form the front line for the flow of all information, from which their respective public sphere will feed. In this piece, I intend to highlight the magnitude of such an assertion of power and the ideological implications of this. If ‘the journalist, first of all, is not only a provider of information but also a political ideologist’ (Hallin 1994: p.1), then the responsibility afforded them is vast. The flow of information that grounds globalization has distinct political affluence, and with this there has

Daniel Stanley

formed a power structure based around the holders and distributors of this flow. One of the key tools used by the media to harmonise and strengthen the process of globalization is the ‘Media Event’. I shall involve the work of Hallin to discuss the use of the media event, although he primarily discussed in relation to the American media lens, this can be transposed to other nation’s media. The introduction and continuing development of technology has inspired many to claim that a global community has been created, in which all beings are welcomed; a claim that I shall discuss and refute. Indeed technology has had great impact on the process of globalization within a media forum; however, I shall indicate how it is a fallacy to afford this the creation of a global awareness, and highlight that the key basis of exclusivity has hindered this notion. The distribution of wealth across the world has rendered technology useless in including all, until it is free of charge. The resultant ideological implications of this essay shall be that the media indeed control a vast amount of the processes of globalization, however, the power and economical gain from such an endeavour has led to the western media retaining of the fruits of globalization, whilst leaving other nations out in the cold. It is worth noting that the vastness of the debate surrounding globalization is extremely difficult to encompass in one piece, and so a relatively small portion will be tackled. I shall centre the topic on the western media in relation to non-western countries and the effects this has on a potential ‘global village’

Daniel Stanley

If one key part of globalization is imagined community, how do the media create such an illusion? One of the tools used is the creation and coverage of a ‘Media Event’. Historically, media events have been used to instil communal togetherness throughout nations, for example, the nationalised televised coronation of the Queen in 1953, or the Michael Jackson trial in 2008. The creation of an event, through which people can make connections on opinions and discussions moves to include the public in an interconnected communal debate. According to Hallin ‘the experience, shared primarily through television, is for everyone’ as ‘media events tend to integrate societies: they dissolve or de-emphasize social divisions, and bring members of a community together around shared values and a shared sense of identity’ (1994: p.153). The use and creation of public figures engages the public to bask in a shared sense of identity, as members of an imagined community. In the more contemporary era of globalization, the use of these events has sought to be broadcast across the globe, an example being the inauguration of Barrack Obama into office in 2009. The inclusion of non-American nationals in the process of gazing at the election and subsequent parading of the new president broke down previously established barriers. This too may be considered a reflection of the power of the globalized political system in America; economically we are now, if not always were, aware that their decisions impact us through the intricacy of globalization. This bringing together of people’s attention, if nothing else, ‘constitutes international society for a brief period as a tangible, salient

Daniel Stanley

community’ (Hallin 1994: p.156). Although the community is not real and in fact imagined, for a temporary period, we are encouraged to feel part of ‘us’ instead of ‘them’. The popularity of the media event depends solely on the power of the media format to promote its communality. As Hallin describes ‘the media are active, first of all, in building up a global audience for the event’ (1994: p.155) and it is this global promotion that instils community and further develops the processes of globalization. Although these media events are often centred on an individual, indeed ‘the event is as much a celebration of the common identity of the audience [...] as it is a tribute to the individuals who stand for the community’ (Hallin 1994: p.153). Hallin continues ‘media events tend to integrate societies: they dissolve or de-emphasize social divisions, and bring members of a community together around shared values and a shared sense of identity’ (Hallin 1994: p.153). Effectively, the importance of the person taking focus of a media event is matched by the need for a universal feeling of community and identity, elevating the media event as not just entertainment but a tangible process of globalising and harmonizing an audience. Speaking largely of televisual example Hallin continues to state ‘the power of television to override social boundaries should combine with the integrative effect of ritual to produce at least temporarily a global sense of community’ (1994: p.156). The phrase ‘global community’ is indeed problematic as it relies solely on access to television to be included, a problem that shall be addressed further in this essay.

Daniel Stanley

Within the process of globalization lies an intricate network of flowing political power, findings its base within western society, both contemporary and historically. The media of western countries has bullied and cajoled its way directly into mainstream society in a number of countries based outside its geographical remit. Certainly in the theorization of globalization, there has been a tendency to centre thoughts from a western perspective as if ‘they stand-in for the rest of the world’ (Gurevitch, Bennett, Woollcott & Curran 1986: p.3). The concentration of study based around western media is a reflection of its dominance in contemporary globalization debate. There are many western-produced media that dominate the ‘air-time’ of countries thousands of miles away, in particular sporting events such as the English Premier League football. Broadcasted to over 100 countries allows such a media, not only to reach a wide audience, but allow access to the cultural canon of that country. To put it another way, by being a regular fixture within a society, the media cements itself as a fundamental facet of its culture. If ‘media systems reflect the prevailing philosophy and political system of the society in which they operate’ (Gurevitch, Bennett, Woollcott & Curran: p.3), then the impact of this amalgamation into other countries culture places the media in a politically important role. The reception of such media invasion has important reflective meaning for the successful transition towards globalization. The acceptance of western media within non-western countries plays an important role in facilitating the continuation of what some theorists

Daniel Stanley

declare the culturally corrosive elements of globalization. According to Arvind Rajagopal in his essay titled Mediating Modernity: Theorizing reception in a non-western society, a non-western society will emit ‘the customary response of mounting another rung on the ladder of progress’ (1982: p.293). The political implications of Rajagopal’s statement are stark in terms of what or whom decides on the ‘ladder of progress’. Where is the decision made regarding what constitutes a rung on this ladder? Who decides what is progress? The answer of course, although often more complex in structure than first realised, lies with the media systems of western society. Through the process of globalization, western media are allowed access to the hegemonic ideals of neighbouring (and also remote) societies, and in turn manipulation of these ideals. An example of one of the facets of western society that invariably becomes ingrained is apparent as ‘mass consumer culture invades one more domain’ (Rajagopal 1982: p.293). Through the constantly evolving networks of political influence, the media systems based in the west are given jurisdiction over prevailing ideals of the images of success, beauty and other hegemonic values. As De Jong, Shaw and Stammers articulate, ‘decisions that will have an immediate effect upon the lives and prospects of individuals, or even whole nations, are taken in institutions located thousands of miles away in other countries’ (2004: p.34). Every part of the production process of western media has an impact on the ideological implications for nations located across the globe. The political world and the media industry are

Daniel Stanley

obviously interlinked as ‘all political conflict takes place largely within and through organised media of communication’ (2004: p.1). With the political world so entrenched in media outlets, the effective control, or influence at least, of the voting public makes the media an invaluable resource for political success. Therefore, western media have an important role in shaping not only the ideological images of a society but, in extremes, even the political regime governing such societies. In effect, ‘national and other boundaries that constrained activism and media alike have not disappeared; but both have been transformed by expanded possibilities of interconnection’ (De Jong, Shaw & Stammers 2005: p.1). The use of media outlets to engage the public in political thought and discussion allows the media to feed information pertaining to individual political representatives in the frame and context of how the media establishment sees fit. Therefore, the interconnection referred to here leaves the mediator in charge of the flow of information, dictating to the public the positives and/or negatives of a political representative. When the introduction of new media occurs, what follows is usually a flurry of claims that this new medium will revolutionise globalization as we know it as the new format will bring people together like never before. Looking through history, the television set, the printing press and the internet appear as prime examples of such mediums that promised to galvanise societies across the globe as access to information transformed the connections made from country to country. Placing these inventions on such a pedestal however is indeed not without its problematic side.

Daniel Stanley

These claims of magnificence lie at the heart of the utopian view of globalization producing an all encompassing ‘global community’ existing in abject harmony. Whilst my intention here is not to demonize forms of media that have progressed the cause of globalization and had an undoubtedly large impact on all facets of life, it would be wrong to leave this notion unchallenged. The introduction of such media formats has seen information reach peoples and places never imaginable before, however, the utopian argument relies very heavily on the mechanical, technological aspects of these inventions. As Hallin records ‘It is the common hypothesis that electronic communication tends to break down the barriers of established groups’ (Hallin 1994: p.156). However, to obtain access to these interconnected highways of information, one needs a piece of (relatively expensive) technology to do so. With the majority of the worlds wealth concentrated in countries in the western canon, a huge percentage of the global population remains un-contactable through these means. Indeed ‘access remains the preserve of the globally privileged’ (De Jong, Shaw & Stammers 2005: p.1). To ignore such issues with access is not to ‘confront soberly the realities of the contemporary world, in which states remain the dominant forces, and in which the inequalities of wealth and power are central features’ (2004: p.45). If one was to overlook such issues (briefly), another barrier to overcome in the pursuit of an exalted ‘global community’ is the natural human tendency to remain firmly set in a comfort zone. Although, the ‘globally privileged’ have ever-increasing access to a plethora of media

Daniel Stanley

formats and institutions statistics show, certainly when considering internet-based formats, that the most visited institutions are those set within ones own country (De Jong, Shaw & Stammers 2004: p.45). In Britain, during 2002 the BBC website claimed a landslide victory in hits for news-seekers, highlighting the power of a single media institution in terms of audience reliance. One could argue that although the facilities are largely present in western society, it is not guaranteed that they will be used to further entrench oneself in a globalized perspective. It is still pertinent to acknowledge that although western society, above all else, awards itself the title of ‘highly globalized’, even the most intrepid of internet explorers, on average, seeks their own countries news broadcaster before seeking out another’s. Of course, this would be largely due to local content however, when news breaks of international stories, the BBC is heavily relied upon for presenting the information through the familiar British lens. So retrospectively, the claims that inventions like television and the internet are single-handedly revolutionising contemporary life for the entire fallacy that is a ‘global community’ are heavily flawed. In fact ‘in neither case, is there some magical force called ‘globalization’ that is pushing these developments forward’ (De Jong, Shaw & Stammers 2004: p.47). A utopian view on the matter leaves no room to account for the under-privileged classes the world over, and once again places the hegemonic gentry of the west as the first, last and only members of a ‘global community’.

Daniel Stanley

Throughout this piece, I have concentrated on 3 particular areas of a media that has contributed greatly to globalization as it is understood today. Firstly, the use of media events has worked to galvanise and harmonise a community far wider than any previously experienced. It is possible through the use of western media systems to elevate one nations event, into a global phenomenon watched and discussed across the globe. Through the uses of the different technological developments experienced within the industry the audiences are wider, and definitively more involved due to the complexities of web-based facilities. The media has effectively taken control of the direction of information and with it the control of a vast amount of wealth. The media are somewhat able to increase or decrease a nations wealth through the promotions of tourism, trade and even political industries. Politics and the media prove an interesting and powerful courtship and nations and states in both western and non-western countries have been influenced at the core as a result. My argument has formed on the basis that the western media have eclipsed all non-western media in terms of wealth and power accredited to them. For instance, whilst Bollywood films have a larger audience in terms of numbers than its western counterpart, the political and economic significance of this audience pales in comparison. Hollywood has bigger friends, in higher places. Finally, as is well documented, the claims that the technological advances aiding globalization are utopian and revolutionary are flawed and problematic. There is of course, a vast amount of positive effects that television and the internet have offered to the cause of globalization, however, due to economic inequality, these

Daniel Stanley

benefits are largely felt by those who can pay for it. A significant number of people are excluded through financial inadequacy and until such a time has ended, the notion of a ‘global community’ will be imagined, firmly in the minds of those atop the global food chain.

References Dayan. D & Katz. E, ‘Articulating Consensus: the ritual and rhetoric of media events,’ in J. C. Alexander (ed.) Durkenheim Sociology: Cultural Studies, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1998

Gurevitch, M. Bennett, J. Curran, J. Woollacott, J. (1986) (eds) ‘Culture, Society and the Media’, Routledge, London & New York

Lull, J (2000) ‘Media, Communication, Culture: a global approach’, Cambridge: Polity Press

Daniel Stanley

De Jong, W. Shaw, M. and Stammers, N. (2004) ‘Global Activism, Global Media’, London: Pluto Press

Jameson, F. Miyoshi, M. (1999) ‘The Cultures of Globalisation’, Duke University Press

Curran, J. Myung-Jin, P. (2000) (eds) Introduction in ’De-westernizing Media Studies’, Routledge, London

Rajagopal, A, Mediating Modernity: Theorizing reception in a non-western society in Curran, J. Myung-Jin, P. (2000) (eds) ’De-westernizing Media Studies’, Routledge, London

Hallin, D (1994) ‘We keep America on top of the world’, Routeledge, London

Van Ginneken, J. (1998) Which are the worlds most influential media? The economics of the rich and poor media markets in ‘Understanding Global News’, London: Sage