Wednesday 17 June 2009

Academic snippet of relevance

So instead of blogging about the role of British media abroad recently, I have been writing about it. On paper. I thought I would just share a bit of my research on here as it is quite relevant. This bit is about the role of the internet in breaking cultural imperialism patterns created by the diffusion of western media.

.....................

Cultural imperialism is often applied to audio-visual media because of the top-down structure of the communication vehicle. As Servaes (1999) argues, radio and television are predominantly one-way forms of communication. Furthermore, developing countries are dependent on imports from developed countries for the production on distribution of these technologies (p.36). The shape of the communication vehicle in this case therefore installs both economic and ideological reliance. However, new media - the internet in particular - is based on a different model of communication. As Hedley argues, the technology represents “a significant break with the previous one-way, top-down, mass communication media, and consequently the potential for mass indoctrination” (1997, p.82). According to some scholars, the information revolution has, or will transform global communication powers. Indeed, Melkote and Steeves note that “New information technologies have inspired new and more elaborate arguments about the power of these technologies to deliver information…” (p.31).

One such argument put forward by Brown and Brown (1994) is that this new technology “will provide a virtually seamless world communications network capable of reaching every inhabitant on earth” (Hedley, 1999, p.82). The romantic concept that the internet could break down cultural imperialism has transcended the academic sphere and reached the media production world itself. For instance, Bill Gates, Microsoft CEO said: “The information highway is going to break down barriers and may promote a world culture, or at least a sharing of cultural values.” This exchange would form multi-directional communication models opposed to the linear imperialism paradigm.

Similarly, the US media has in turn heralded the death of media imperialism. The New York Times quoted Geoge Yeo, Singapore’s Minister for Information and the Arts saying, “The widespread use of English will eventually be contested and the Internet itself will become multicultural,” in order to diffuse the ‘spectre’ of American cultural domination (Demont-Heinrich, 2008, p.381).

In reaction to this statement, let us look at the importance of language in the internet’s transmission of cultural imperialism. According to Albert Einstein (1954), “The mental development of the individual and his way of forming concepts depends to a high degree upon language”. Therefore, with regards to the internet, language determines both access and identity. Dermont-Heinrich found that many media producers believed that the internet’s ability to offer multiple languages simultaneously could limit ‘Americanization’. For instance, The International Herald Tribune printed in 2000: “The internet is more likely to widen choice than to narrow it. The Web site of CNN, a major purveyor of the new global culture, offers several languages, such as Japanese, Portuguese and Danish” (2008, p.384). Dermont-Heinrich attacks this assumption that individual choice automatically equals diversity. What he does not highlight in his study however, is the focus on languages originating in, if not purely Europe, developed countries. This imperialist bias will exclude rather than include new audiences in developing countries, where numerous different languages and dialects may be spoken within the same borders.

Furthermore, Hedley builds upon Dermont-Heinrich’s assertion that language on the internet upholds the relevance of the cultural imperialism paradigm, by arguing that the internet is inherently based on language and therefore cultural dominance. He points out that even though computer software commands computers in binary code, which could be seen as culturally neutral, the software originates in words, the effective currency of culture (1999, p.81). According to this argument therefore, as predominantly western, often English speaking nations design the bulk of software, new technology actually increases the role of cultural imperialism in media. This view is shared by Comor, who argues that “new information will widen the gap and in fact strengthen US imperialist influence” (1997, p.202).

Similarly, Castells believes that the information society will drive a deeper divide between the world’s “haves” and “have nots” (Melkote and Steeves, p.64,…) Hedley’s study supports the assertion that, despite offering multi-directional communication, it is mostly the “haves” who are able to use the internet. Hedley set up an online discussion about development issues over a month in 1997 and found that its participants constituted four major occupational groups: 30 percent were government affiliated professional development workers (half of whom worked for UN agencies), 22 percent were academics, 18 percent were NGO representatives and the remaining nine percent were graduate students (1997, p.83). This shows that the internet is predominantly used by the educated elite, and while the internet does permit individuals to communicate over huge distances at practically no cost, the people who could use media towards self-determination and improvement in their quality of life are dramatically under represented.

Furthermore, analysis of the internet shows that it is overwhelmingly American based, English speaking and Western focused. Hedley claims that 63 percent of the 16.15 million users connected to the internet in 1997 were in the United States, 74 percent in English-speaking nations and 90 percent of users were in Western countries (p. 80, 1997). It is necessary to recognise that these figures date back to a decade ago now and technology is developing at a rapid rate. Nevertheless, Hedley’s findings remain significant as the bias towards western domination is so heavy. Factors such as economic and cultural - namely linguistic - dominance are leading to the creation of a “Fourth World”. Therefore, the internet does not seem to be closing the gap between developed and developing countries but rather increasing cultural imperialism. Consequently, the cultural imperialism paradigm is more relevant than ever with regards to global media flows.

No comments:

Post a Comment