The oligopolies behind globalisation

In my last post I wrote about the links between globalisation and the media. I attempted to argue that the media has not unified society into a 'global village'. I considered that the concept of a 'global village' was simply an example of Western homogenisation and, furthermore, that cultural and non-western media are playing an increasing role in the process of globalisation. 


However, after considering the current state of global media ownership I am reconsidering my argument. It seems that there are fewer individuals and organisations that control 'the media', leaving media industries highly concentrated and dominated by a small number of organisations who dictate the media agenda. 


Therefore, have we become oblivious to the oligopolies behind the media that have a stronghold on what we read, hear and see?


First of all, what is an oligopoly? 


In the context of the media, Steven (2003, p. 41) defines an oligopoly as 'where a group of the largest companies control the industry'. Steven writes that oligopolies can tactically agree on standards, regulations, division of markets and even prices within the confines of the law (2003, p. 41). Whilst Steven (2003) argues that there are various economic and political benefits as a result of oligopolies there are also many negatives. In particular, the media organisations who dominate the media market can decide whether or not to suppress media items that don't serve their own agendas or monetary interests. 

The clip above argues that the concentration of media ownership in the US has reached dangerous levels. The five companies listed above own more than 90% of the media holdings in the US which. Such market concentration results in these companies not only deciding what media we should consume but they also decide what media to leave out. It is arguable that it is what we don't see that is often the most important and we, the public, suffer as a result. 


Therefore, when we consider the links between the media and globalisation and whether we are living in a 'global village' remember the oligopolies....



References:



Steven, P 2003, The no-nonsense guide to the global media, 
New Internationalist, Oxford, pp. 37–59

The flows of globalisation

There is a link between that buzz word 'globalisation' and that other buzz word 'the media'. Rantanen (2005) states that the words 'media' and 'globalisation' go together like 'a horse and carriage' or a 'computer and screen' (p. 1) to create a global media landscape. 

But how do globalisation and the media work together and what is the relationship between them?

Globalisation and the media can work together in many ways to shape our behaviour, opinions and our perception of the world around us. Jan argues that the media is used as a tool in the process of globalisation to unify different societies and integrate them into a 'global village' (2009, p. 1). 


However, can there really be such thing as a global village? Is it possible to unify the world through media and new media technologies?

This idea of a 'global village' reminds me of the 'Americanisation' of the global media. 'Americanisation' arguably refers to the powerful influence that American society and American media had and still has on other western and non-western countries. Non-western media apparently became 'Americanised' by adopting and incorporating American ideals, techniques, values into non-American national media. 

Image 1: An example of 'Americanisation'. An image from the 1949 Japanese film 'Late Spring' by Yasujiro Ozu...

Is this idea of a global village or global media landscape the new 'Americanisation'? 

The clip above demonstrates that that non-western media has become increasingly global, popular and available by virtue of of new media technologies and the relative ease of accessing this kind of information. For example, Indian 'Bollywood' films are now being exported beyond India to the Middle East, Europe and the Americas. However, this doesn't necessarily mean that we are now part of a 'global village' and capable of being unified and integrated with one another. Rather, it is a Western attempt to homogenise the 'globe' under the cloak of 'globalisation'. 

References:


Rantanen, T 2005, The Media and globalization, Saga, London, pp. 1-18.


Jan, M 2009, Globalization of the Media: Key Issues and Dimensions, European Journal of Scientific Research, Vol. 29, pp.66-75. 

Defining globalisation

Globalisation has become a ubiquitous term in modern day society. We are confronted with the word 'globalisation'on television, in advertising, in newspapers and all over the internet. 


But what exactly is globalisation?

The dictionary definition of globalisation is 'wold wide integration and development'(Online Dictionary 2012). However, globalisation can extend beyond general, open ended trends (Pieterse 2004, p. 17). 


Pieterse states that globalisation refers to 'an objective, empirical process of increasing economic and political connectivity, a subjective process unfolding in consciousness as the collective awareness of growing global interconnectedness, and a host of specific globalising projects that seek to shape global conditions' (2004, p. 17). In this respect globalisation is a diverse concept that is capable of multiple meanings definition. Furthermore, there are differing and often conflicting perspectives about the meaning of globalisation.  


Globalisation can also be understood in terms of its 'flows'. 


1. Physical Flows


This refers to the movement of people across national borders whether voluntary or involuntary, legal or illegal. 


2. Cultural Flows


This refers to the cultural objects, beliefs, values, skills and practices that we carry with us when we travel. However it also refers to cultural traits that are carried across national borders through the internet or other forms of media and communication. For example, foreign films, food and music. 


3. Information Flows


Information flows refer to the exchange of information across national borders through new and old media technologies. 


4. Media Flows


Media flos refers to the global media empires and audiences and the increasingly mobile and transnational nature of media today. 

5. Flows of Capital


This refers to the flow of capital whether it be through tourism, consumerism or otherwise. In this respect, the capital flow is dependent on other flow such as information and media. 


It is important to understand that the flows of globalisation are interconnected, interrelated and linked together. However globalisation does not flow equally throughout the globe. There are still divides and cracks in its global flow.  

Over the coming weeks I will be interrogating the concept of globalisation further....stay tuned.  


References:


Nederveen Pieterse, J 2004, ‘Globalization: consensus and controversies’, Globalization and culture: global mélange, Rowan & Littlefield, Lanham, Md. 


The Online Dictionary, viewed 22 July 2012, <http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/globalisation?s=t>


The World Health Organisation, Trade, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy and Health, viewed 22 July 2012, <http://www.who.int/trade/glossary/story094/en/index.html>

Welcome

Welcome to my blog for ALC215 - Globalisation & The Media


Each week I will post a blog discussing the weekly topics. Looking forward to reading your postings are hearing your comments.


Hannah