global media essay

Open Access is an initiative that aims to make scientific research freely available to all. To date our community has made over 100 million downloads. It’s based on principles of collaboration, unobstructed discovery, and, most importantly, scientific progression. As PhD students, we found it difficult to access the research we needed, so we decided to create a new Open Access publisher that levels the playing field for scientists across the world. How? By making research easy to access, and puts the academic needs of the researchers before the business interests of publishers.

We are a community of more than 103,000 authors and editors from 3,291 institutions spanning 160 countries, including Nobel Prize winners and some of the world’s most-cited researchers. Publishing on IntechOpen allows authors to earn citations and find new collaborators, meaning more people see your work not only from your own field of study, but from other related fields too.

Brief introduction to this section that descibes Open Access especially from an IntechOpen perspective

Want to get in touch? Contact our London head office or media team here

Our team is growing all the time, so we’re always on the lookout for smart people who want to help us reshape the world of scientific publishing.

Home > Books > The Systemic Dimension of Globalization

Explaining Global Media: A Discourse Approach

Submitted: 21 October 2010 Published: 01 August 2011

DOI: 10.5772/17557

Cite this chapter

There are two ways to cite this chapter:

From the Edited Volume

The Systemic Dimension of Globalization

Edited by Piotr Pachura

To purchase hard copies of this book, please contact the representative in India: CBS Publishers & Distributors Pvt. Ltd. www.cbspd.com | [email protected]

Chapter metrics overview

5,341 Chapter Downloads

Impact of this chapter

Total Chapter Downloads on intechopen.com

Total Chapter Views on intechopen.com

Author Information

Ulrika olausson *.

• Örebro University, Sweden

*Address all correspondence to:

1. Introduction

The term “transnational” is here used to describe events, technology, processes, connections, etc. which transcend nation-state borders but do not necessarily encompass the entire globe ( Hannerz, 1996 ).

However, these notions about the media’s pertinent role in globalization processes have also been fiercely challenged by quite a few media scholars, who instead emphasize the continuing stability and centrality of the nation-state paradigm. National propaganda is often present in transnational media as well, not least in CNN, as are stereotypical and negative depictions of the “others” ( Hafez, 2009 ; Thussu, 2003 ). Given the existence of obstacles such as language barriers and the “digital divide,” which separates the “haves” from the “have nots” with regard not only to communication technology itself, but also to the skills necessary for using it, there are no real signs of a media network with the ability to constitute a global public sphere ( Hafez, 2007 ). Severe scepticism concerning the notion of global media has also been expressed by scholars within the political economy tradition who claim that global media are in fact better described as Western or American media, and only contribute to maintaining Western dominance (e.g. Herman & McChesney, 1997 ). Some authors are critical of the very idea of globalization, of the way the concept has developed and been used in the social sciences (e.g. Calhoun, 2007 ; Sparks 2007a , 2007b ). Thus, within the field of global media studies there is an ongoing conflict between the “globalists,” proponents of the fluidity argument, and the “sceptics,” who pursue the stability argument ( Cottle 2009 : 30f).

Nonetheless, these two positions – their obviously conflicting views notwithstanding – have in common one fundamental and largely taken-for-granted assumption about global media: global media are interpreted as media networks or technology whose nature is global (or at least transnational) in terms of geographic reach. I would propose, however, that having global reach is not a necessary condition of global media. From a discourse theoretical perspective, an emergent trajectory of the research field ( Cottle, 2009 ), “global” is instead understood as a discursive feature. From this point of view it could be argued that global media cannot be reduced to transnational media networks; a global discourse might develop in any kind of media, be it local, national, or transnational, as well as in any kind of media content – local, domestic, or foreign ( Berglez, 2008 ; Olausson, 2010 ). Any medium might, in fact, be labeled “global” if it provides its audiences with a global interpretative framework. Thus, the argument put forward in this chapter is that the view on global media as transnational media networks and technology needs to be supplemented with a discourse theoretical approach, which also includes national media and takes the very knowledge production of the global into consideration.

I will develop this position first by examining the arguments of the line of research that equates global media with transnational media networks, including its contradictory arguments about the ability of these networks to contribute to or be part of globalization processes. Following this, the discourse perspective will be introduced and exemplified with some empirical examples from a study on the emergence of a transnational (European) identity in national news reporting on global climate change ( Olausson, 2010 ). The chapter ends with a discussion in which the discourse theoretical approach is put in relation to broader issues of cultural and political transformation, conclusions are drawn about the media’s relationship to globalization processes, and suggestions are made for an integral explanation of global media.

By necessity, the two perspectives on global media are outlined here with rather broad strokes and the presentation might be somewhat lacking in detail and precision. This is the price to be paid when trying to squeeze the complexity of a research field into rather rigid “boxes.” Nonetheless, this categorization will hopefully elucidate the argument that the established understanding of global media as media of transnational reach needs to be complemented with a discourse approach that also includes national media if we want to achieve an integral explanation of global media.

2. Global media as transnational media networks

Cross-border communication technologies such as the internet, mobile phones, and satellites have contributed to the deterritorialization of space over the last decades, and transnational media networks and news services such as CNN, BBC World News, FoxNews, and Al-Jazeera have entered and transformed the media landscape. In a dialectic fashion, these media are believed both to constitute and to be constituted by globalization, transforming understandings of time and space ( Chalaby, 2003 ; Thompson, 1995 ). Due to their deterritorialized nature, diverse audiences, and independence of any national loyalties, arguments about their ability to loosen up distinctions between domestic and foreign have been pursued:

“The cross-border coverage of transnational television networks, their multinational audience and international production operations tear apart the relationship between place and television and challenge the traditional relationship between broadcasting and the nation-state.” ( Chalaby, 2003 : 457)

Global broadcasting corporations not only provide people with a better understanding of global politics ( Chalaby, 2003 ), they also offer new journalistic styles and formats able to transgress the nation-state outlook and, in a dialectic relationship with national news angles, give rise to new horizons for political identity and citizenship ( Volkmer, 2003 ). Accordingly, transnational media have been attributed the potential to constitute a global, or at least a transnational, public sphere ( Chalaby, 2003 ; Volkmer, 2003 ).

The idea that transnational media networks are able to move beyond the nation-state paradigm has, however, not escaped criticism. Hafez (2007 ) argues that there is not enough empirical evidence of a media system that could accurately be described as “global” in the sense of enhancing the possibilities of a global public sphere. On the contrary, the majority of empirical evidence points in the direction of reinforced stability of the nation-state paradigm. Information and news may be transnational in character, but the media in fact still are, to a considerable extent, local and national phenomena. In times of war, Western propaganda is also present in transnational media, as are polarizing perspectives of “us” and “them” and stereotypical depictions of the “other” ( Hafez, 2007 ; Thussu, 2003 ):

“Today’s international exchanges of images and information, it seems, are no guarantee for global intertextuality in news, for growing awareness of ‘the other’s’ stories and perspectives, and for an increased complexity of world views in the mass media and beyond.” ( Hafez, 2009 : 329)

Even though CNN, as the topical case in point, under regular circumstances does contribute various “global” perspectives and viewpoints, it is extremely sensitive to American patriotism and displays bias in times of military conflicts in which the US is involved, such as the 2003 Iraq war ( Hafez, 2009 ). Not even the communication technology most associated with cross-border communication, the internet, has according to Hafez (2007 ) proved to fulfil this expectation. Most people use this technology locally – to communicate with people in their nearby surroundings – not to engage in cultural interaction across nation-state borders. Furthermore the necessary technological means are far from being globally diffused; “no electricity, no internet,” as was pointed out by Sparks (2007b : 152). The nation-state paradigm is, according to this view, as powerful as ever before and has, in several respects, even gained in importance. Hafez (2007 ) illustratively labels this viewpoint in the field of global media studies “the myth of media globalization,” and Sparks (2007a ) dismisses the entire theoretical framework of globalization arguing that current developments are better explained as part of the continuing capitalist and imperialist expansion (cf. Nohrstedt & Ottosen, 2001 ).

The scepticism surrounding global media is far from new. The well-established field of international communication, based on the political economy tradition, has a long history of persistently arguing that global media are in fact best described as Western (or American) media, at most of global scope (e.g. Herman & McChesney, 1997 ; Schiller, 1993 ). The central argument of these scholars is that escalating media conglomeration has led to a notable Western (American) bias both in terms of ownership and with regard to the distribution of media products. The media achieve their global characteristics as a result of purchases made by a small number of Western-, predominantly US-based multinational media giants, who distribute their products – permeated with neoliberal values and Western lifestyles – all over the globe. Even the “glocalization” that takes place when cultural products are tailored to fit a specific local market is viewed as a commercial strategy and as such nothing more than yet another sign of cultural imperialism ( Sparks, 2007b ). The rise of competing non-western media networks such as Al-Jazeera notwithstanding, the westernizing tendencies of global media have not been eliminated since the power of western, and particularly US-dominated media networks such as CNN, is not only restricted to their own large-scale activities; they set the agenda also for other networks ( Thussu, 2003 ).

Thus, claims about cultural imperialism and cultural homogenization have been made, and warnings have been issued about the democratic dangers that surface when it is no longer possible to hold media institutions accountable to political regulation at the nation-state level. The prospects for democracy do not seem any brighter if we add the argument that active citizens, due to the commercial logic of global media, over time transform into pure consumers in Western-dominated markets (e.g. Herman & Chomsky, 1988 ; Herman & McChesney, 1997 ). The consequences of the ravages of seemingly global media, it is alleged, are harmful both to indigenous cultures and to democracy. In this fashion global media counteract rather than promote a global public sphere, and contribute to the maintenance and stability of Western (US) dominance.

In this research tradition, media conglomeration, concentration, and commercialization have functioned as the analytical point of departure – restricting the interest to the shape and structure of transnational media institutions – and claims about media effects have been made without much analytical attention being paid to the actual reception and use among locally situated audiences. As a counterbalance to this macro-perspective, the research field of cultural studies has instead focused on the micro-dimension of global media (e.g. Barker, 1999 ; Crane 2002 ; Tomlinson, 1999 ). Instead of viewing the impacts of global media as a one-way process that completely erases local cultures, scholars within this research tradition emphasize processes of cultural “creolization” ( Hannerz, 1996 ) or “hybridization,” i.e. the creation of completely new cultural expressions in the encounter between different cultural forms:

“Most forms of culture in the world today are, to varying extents, hybrid cultures in which different values, beliefs and practices have become deeply entwined.” ( Thompson, 1995 : 170, emphasis in original)

The idea of the “active audience,” quite capable of negotiating and opposing media information, has been a guiding principle in cultural studies. Suggestions have even been made (though not uncontested) that the opportunities to “pick and choose” cultural forms due to the rapid development of communication technologies and the creative hybridization that follows, will most likely lead to new and improved conditions for global dialogue ( Lull, 2007 ). Thus, cultural studies have to a considerable extent problematized the idea of the homogenizing effects of global media and questioned the cultural imperialism thesis of the international communication field.

The perspectives accounted for above are fairly well established in the research field of global media. The main arguments of international communication and of cultural studies respectively are frequently discussed in the literature (e.g. Rantanen, 2005 ), as are the “globalist” and the “sceptic” perspectives (e.g. Cottle, 2009 ). Despite their conflicting opinions when it comes to the media’s relation to globalization, the “globalists” and the “sceptics” share at least one basic viewpoint on global media, namely that the proper objects of study first and foremost are those media whose global nature is defined in terms of geographic reach. The discourse perspective that will now be discussed takes a somewhat different stance towards this assumption.

3. Global media as global discourse

The discourse approach to global media proposed here does not direct specific attention to the geographic reach of the media, but focuses primarily on the very epistemology of the global ( Berglez, 2008 ). As pointed out by Cottle (2009 : 28) in his discussion of the principle paradigms structuring the field of global media studies, it is necessary to go beyond the paradigms of “global dominance” and “global public sphere,” since these approaches to global media fail to explain how issues such as crises of different kinds are mediated and constituted in practice and how they, through their formation in the news media, achieve their “global” characteristics:

“Global crises are principally constituted epistemologically as ‘global crises’ through the news media where most of us get to know about them and where they are visualized, narrativized, publicly defended and sometimes challenged and contested.” ( Cottle, 2009 : 165, emphasis in original)

Admittedly, local or national crises, such as 9/11, the 2010 flooding in Haiti, or the 2011 Egyptian revolution, need the connectivity that a cross-border communication infrastructure provides in order to become known, more or less simultaneously, to people around the globe. But, to achieve their global features – to become global crises, involving people and generating action across the world – they are entirely dependent on discursive constructions of them as such.

Extending this line of argument, when studying the production of knowledge about the global it is necessary to acknowledge national media as equally important objects of study as any media of transnational reach. As Robertson (2008 ) argues, the issue of media globalization is an empirical question, and the assumption of most authors that global broadcasters are, or at least should be, more inclined to produce global outlooks than national broadcasters, must be empirically demonstrated rather than axiomatically asserted. In the debate on global media, however, national media, which doubtlessly still are the media that most people turn to, are most often dismissed as not significant knowledge producers concerning the global due to their inclination to depict the world according to nation-state logic ( Altmeppen, 2010 ; Hafez, 2007 , 2009 ). This logic saturates much of their contents, not least in the form of what Billig (1995 ) terms “banal nationalism,” a national mode of reporting which makes the world orbit around the nation-state, and in terms of taken-for-granted conceptions of the world as constituted by self-governing national “islands” rather than being a complex transnational network ( Berglez & Olausson, 2011 ). In national media the domestic and foreign worlds are, by tradition, separated, and the nation-state becomes disconnected from the rest of the world ( Berglez, 2007 ). At best, relations between the domestic and foreign are constructed through the domestication of foreign events, i.e. by the addition of a national angle to the story from “outside” in order to make it more relevant to the national audience as it is perceived ( Clausen, 2004 ; Gurevitch et al., 1991 ; Riegert, 1998 ).

This tendency of national media to reproduce and maintain nation-state discourse and identity must of course be acknowledged. However, the national outlook should not be viewed as totally precluding other, transnational or global outlooks on the world. As suggested by Volkmer (2003 ), national media are to an increasing extent influenced by transnational media style and formats. Furthermore, and even more importantly, due to the globalization of risks such as climate change, and conflicts such as transnational terrorism or the Global War on Terror (as labeled by George W. Bush), national discourse is constantly (and perhaps to an increasing extent) challenged by transnational or global discourses that strive for the hegemonic position ( Laclau & Mouffe, 1985 ). It is thus not a question of either national or global discourse but both-and, with national and local views functioning in interaction with transnational or global outlooks ( Beck, 2006 ).

In a similar fashion, Hjarvard (2001 ) suggests that the possible emergence of a global public sphere should be viewed in terms of both-and; the transnational communicative space that has come into existence through the development of transnational media should be seen as a supplement to national public spheres. The globalizing tendencies of politics, economics, and culture have put the national public sphere under constant pressure, as has the increasing connectivity with other national public spheres. This will ultimately lead to what Hjarvard labels a “global reflexivity,” since fewer and fewer topics can be dealt with without including information from “outside.” In this way, national public spheres will gradually become deterritorialized through the “increased presence of global connections within the national framework” ( Hjarvard 2001 : 24, emphasis added). Like Hjarvard, Cottle (2009 ) emphasizes the media’s ability to provide…

“…a transnational and global perspective on a problem that both migrates across and transcends national frames of reference or explanation, exposing international interconnections, contextualizing motives and exploring both the scope of the problem and its human consequences.” ( Cottle 2009 : 100, emphasis added)

The issue of whether or not the media are capable of displaying global or transnational connections is pivotal to the discourse approach to global media suggested here. Global discourse in the news media is, as argued by Berglez (2008 ), characterized by the depiction of connections – including antagonistic ones – between people, processes, events, and phenomena at the local, national, transnational, and global levels. This focus on interconnections between various geopolitical scales makes the global news style quite different from the traditional foreign news style, which primarily reports from one nation to another without displaying any connections between the two ( Berglez, 2008 ). If a global discourse is present, the most local (in terms of geography) of all media might be labeled “global” (in terms of discourse), providing a global interpretative framework by linking national and transnational identities or positioning a local event in a global context or vice versa.

Thus, the decisive criterion of global media, from a discourse theoretical perspective, is the ability to display complex and often subtle connections between various geopolitical scales. These relations do not have to be of the “objective” or realist kind to be acknowledged as building blocks of a global discourse. More precisely, a global discourse does not have to comprise “real” relations of causality, motives, and interconnections, for instance that it is the carbon dioxide emissions of the First World that is the cause of the extreme droughts in the Third World. The connections displayed in media discourse could also be of a purely constructivist nature, i.e. be the “creations” of media logic itself. The inherent characteristics of news media, such as their preference for dramatic and emotionally charged reporting (perhaps occasionally also supplemented with the journalist’s deliberate intent to incite action among citizens) sometimes lead to the emergence of a global discourse that involves interconnections between people across vast distances.

A telling example of this kind of global discourse, building on pure constructivist connections, is the “globalization of emotions” ( Cottle, 2009 : 99) that the media have engaged in over the last decades in relation to human suffering caused by wars or natural disasters. As noted by Nohrstedt (2009 , cf. Shaw, 1996 ), there has been an increasing tendency in the news media to display the “true face” of war, i.e. the casualties and human suffering it causes, something which could be viewed as an invitation to audiences around the world to unite in compassionate responses. In her seminal work on “the spectatorship of suffering” Chouliararki (2006 : 24) discusses on the one hand how the various routines of the media, such as almost endless repetition, in all probability create distance between the audience and the distant sufferers, and on the other hand how the media are capable also of establishing an “imaginary ‘we’ that brings all spectators together in the act of watching.” With the purpose of exploring how distant suffering is depicted in television news, and building on Boltanski’s (1999 ) theories on the topic, she distinguishes between the following three different modes of representation, each of which invites the viewers to respond to the suffering observed on the television screen in a specific way: empathy, denunciation, and contemplation. Another example, which builds on the theories of Boltanski (1999 ), is Robertson’s (2008 ) exploration of the news reporting on the 2004 Asian tsunami. In searching for a global, or cosmopolitan, outlook deriving from compassion for and empathy with the sufferers, she examines five nationally-based European broadcasters and compares them with three European channels broadcasting to global audiences. Interestingly enough, the results show that a global discourse, in terms of constructions of “togetherness,” could be found on all the channels. It was far from the case that transnational broadcasters contribute more global outlooks than the national channels; in one case a transnational broadcaster even provided a less global outlook – a finding which indisputably strengthens the argument of including national media when exploring global discourse.

As Cottle (2009 ) points out, media research has been focused on examining how news content “positions” the audience in relation to distant suffering; there has been a lack of empirical studies that show how the “discourse of global compassion” ( Höijer, 2004 ) in the news media actually is received and handled by the audience. Höijer (2004 ), however, has demonstrated that the emotionally charged portrayal of human suffering in the news tends to trigger a variety of complex responses among the audience, and her findings challenge the notion of a pronounced compassion fatigue among people in general ( Moeller, 1999 ). Audience research has also shown that the news reporting on distant suffering has the potential to trigger transnational identification with distant sufferers, if not for more than a moment ( Olausson, 2005 ; Olausson & Höijer, 2010 ). These processes of identification are characterized by the empathetic capacity for “feeling oneself in one’s fellow man” ( Boltanski, 1999 : 92).

The global discourse built on compassion in the news media is composed – not always but in many cases – of pure constructivist connections. There are no “real” relations between the sufferers and the spectators beyond those “created” in news discourse, which highlights the constitutive role of the media in the process of globalization. Global media are not only the products of a globalized economy and technology, or the intermediaries of pre-existing events, processes, or connections already shaped by globalization, but are to a considerable extent also contributors to the expansion of transnational identifications and connections (cf. Volkmer, 2008a ).

Thus, events or processes in various parts of the world, be they natural disasters, environmental hazards or wars, take global shape not only, or even primarily, in terms of worldwide impacts or as effects of the technological reach of transnational media, but also, and most essentially in this context, in terms of their formation in the news media where people, places, and objects are linked more closely together (cf. Cottle, 2009 ). This discursive demonstration or “creation” of transnational connections takes place not least in national media, their inclination to apply national angles and reinforce national identity notwithstanding.

When arguing in favor of the inclusion of national media in the search for a global discourse, it is necessary to address the question of “methodological nationalism,” raised by Beck (2006 ). Not only the media but also social research has been criticized as being caught in a nation-state logic in ways that do not correspond to the globalizing trends of late-modern society. However, the determining cause of methodological nationalism is not the study of national media per se; this fallacy rather comes into existence when the analysis is conducted through a national lens, and this could be the case whether the object of study is national or transnational in character. Or, to put it differently, when examined through a “national prism” both national and transnational media might take on national features, just as both national and transnational media might assume global features when examined through a “transnational prism” ( Cottle 2009 : 168). Indeed, the nation-state logic still permeates national news media but with a discourse theoretical approach and the analytical application of a “transnational prism” it is possible to detect at least embryonic forms of transnational or global connections also in national media, a suggestion that will be empirically illustrated below.

3.1. The question of a European public sphere and identity

Much research on the possible emergence of a European public sphere and a European identity has been carried out over the last years. Volkmer (2008b : 231), as an example of an “optimistic” view on this, argues that advances in satellite technology have created, if not a public sphere in the traditional sense, at least “a platform for new, interesting flows of trans-European communication.” However, there are also quite a few voices that are less hopeful regarding the possibility of a European public sphere. Sparks (2007a , 2007b ) concludes that despite the development of supra-national political bodies such as the EU, there is as yet no sign of a corresponding media system; most media remain confined within the borders of the nation-state. This is commonly used by authors in the field as an argument against the possible development of a European public sphere: since there is no functioning European media system, the prospects of a European public sphere are rather discouraging. And, additionally, since the national realm has considerable power as the point of reference for the making of identity, the chances of creating a common European “us” are minute. The only viable way to enhance political interest at the EU-level among citizens and to instill a sense of European belonging is for national news media to present news about the political institutions of the EU: EU policy-making, EU-level actors, EU politics, etc. The more frequently EU topics appear in various national media, the better the breeding-ground for a sense of community and for the development of “Europeanized national public spheres,” it has been argued. Accordingly, EU topics in national media have been measured quantitatively – the more the EU topics, the more the transnationalization, or Europeanization, of national news media, it has been assumed (e.g. D’Haenens, 2005 ; De Vreese, 2007 ; Koopmans & Erbe, 2004 ; Machill et al., 2006 ).

I would argue, first, that the sheer presence of EU topics in national news media does not automatically lead to the emergence of a transnational discourse. Following the argumentation above, in order for EU topics in national media to contribute transnational outlooks and not traditional “foreign” ones, they have to be, in one way or another, discursively connected to local and/or national conditions. These connections should not be interpreted in terms of mere domestications of EU topics (what will happen with Swedish moist snuff when the EU legislates against it?), which rather reproduce national outlooks (Sweden and the EU), but through the discursive intermingling of EU and national horizons, for instance the forging of a common European “us,” as in the example presented below (Sweden in the EU). Secondly, it is not only EU news in national media (whether intertwined with national horizons or not), that might contribute to a sense of EU belonging. Instead, such topics tend to impose themselves on national media from above as “Europeanization projects” ( Lauristin, 2007 ). I would suggest that the everyday reporting of events or phenomena of transnational scope is just as relevant an object of study since such events, due to their borderless character, have the potential to trigger discursive transformation. According to Beck (2006 ), it is transnationalized threats and the suffering they cause that by necessity pave the way for a global outlook, since traditional dichotomies such as internal and external, national and international, and us and them lose their validity when confronted with these kinds of dangers (cf. Nohrstedt, 2010 ); a new cosmopolitanism becomes essential in order to survive in “world risk society” ( Beck, 2009 ). The transnationalization of risks and crises such as climate change, terrorism, and financial crises pushes even national media – slowly and unsteadily perhaps, and most likely not at the same pace everywhere, yet nevertheless – in the direction of transnational modes of reporting. These transnational outlooks could well be in embryonic stages, not entirely explicit in nature, but instead common-sensical and “banal” in the words of Billig (1995 ), and deeply embedded and naturalized in the everyday language of news. This means that they are difficult to capture empirically without the aid of sensitive discourse analytical tools ( Olausson, 2010 ; cf. Berglez & Olausson, 2011 ).

Some authors (e.g. Schlesinger, 2008 ) dismiss the entire notion of a European identity and argue that there are too many obstacles, such as the lack of a common language, history, and worldview, for such an identity to evolve. However, it is not very productive to cling to this “cultural” conception of identity, which can only lead to the discouraging conclusion that a European identity is a rather unachievable project. Instead, identity could be treated in a more modest way which does not demand cultural homogeneity; from such a perspective, identity concerns the identification with a political “us,” in relation to some given events, phenomena, or issues more than others ( Mouffe, 1995 , 2005 ). Thus, European identity could simply be treated as, in the words of Habermas and Derrida (2003 : 293), “a feeling of common political belonging” as is illustrated by the empirical example presented next.

Elsewhere ( Olausson, 2010 ), I have shown how the embryo of a European political identity is being forged in Swedish news reporting on climate change. In the construction of this transnational outlook, the discursive transcendence of national identity is pivotal and occurs when the national and the transnational become so closely entwined that they merge into a common “us.” Admittedly, this study also confirms the common conclusion of media research that national identity holds a hegemonic position in national news media. In this case, it is constantly reproduced through, for instance, elements of national self-glorification such as “If any country can manage this, Sweden can,” and “Sweden is one of the countries that have succeeded best.” The national outlook is also nourished through domestications of the climate issue, for example when maps of Sweden recurrently fade in and out between images of flooded areas and other alleged consequences of the changing climate on the television screen.

However, it is also evident that the national mode of reporting does not entirely preclude the emergence of transnational outlooks. As a matter of fact, it seems as if national identity functions as a necessary anchoring mechanism in the construction of a common European “us” which momentarily dissolves the distinction between the national and the transnational. Sweden and the EU are on the one hand mentioned in the news reporting as two separate entities, but on the other hand they are also closely tied to each other in the sense of their all being part of the group of “climate heroes.” In contrast to the “climate villain,” the USA, “we,” the EU, take climate change seriously and make earnest efforts to mitigate it, the message reads. The quotation from the broadsheet Dagens Nyheter “Perhaps it is not unknown to us in Sweden and Europe that greenhouse gas emissions cause great changes in the world climate” implies how national identity is transcended and incorporated into a European identity, how a common “us” is established.

Thus, the already established and naturalized national outlook becomes a means to introduce a transnational counterpart, which is not yet an integral part of everyday thinking and discourse. In the news program, Rapport, produced by the Swedish public service broadcaster, SVT, a sense of European community in relation to the climate issue takes shape through an intriguing blend of national and transnational identity positions. In the initial phrase of the reporter’s statement a “we” that transcends the national and includes the European sphere is constructed: “Exactly the way we do things within the EU…” However, when the reporter continues, this European “we” becomes integrated within the national: “…says our Swedish Minister for the Environment,” with “our” here referring to the national community.

The purpose of these brief empirical examples of the construction of a European political identity is to demonstrate that national and transnational outlooks are not engaged in discursive struggles where the destruction of one or the other is the inevitable outcome ( Laclau & Mouffe, 1985 ). As Sparks (2007a : 150) suggests, the local, national, and global exist alongside each other in news discourse and tensions do arise between them, but “the evidence does not support the contention that one is being undermined by the other two.” I would even go so far as to claim that they in fact are highly dependent on each other: in order for less established transnational outlooks to become naturalized and integrated in everyday thinking and discourse, they need to become anchored within the familiar and established national horizon ( Olausson & Höijer, 2010 ). Thus, there is reason to suppose that national and transnational discourses work interactively and that they mutually (re)construct each other (cf. Delanty, 2000 ; Olausson, 2007 ).

4. Conclusion

In this chapter, I have put forth the argument that the research field of global media needs to acknowledge not only the trans-boundary nature of media technology but to a greater extent the very knowledge production of the global that takes place not least in national media. When the given assumptions about what exactly the “global” in “global media” refers to are changed from being a matter of geographic reach to becoming a discursive feature, then it is possible to discover transnational and even global “embryos” in several as yet relatively unexplored media contexts, as has been shown (cf. Berglez, 2008 ).

As noted by Volkmer (2003 ), there is still a remarkable focus on the cultural impact of new communication technologies in the sociological debate on globalization. Cultural transformation has also been a dominating issue, not least in the disagreements between the fields of international communication and cultural studies over the cultural imperialism thesis. Hafez (2007 ) for his part, regards absence of cultural transformation generated by cross-border communication as a sign that a truly global media does not exist. Before there is reason to talk about global media it must be clarified “whether receiving cultures are changed by transmitting cultures in the process of cross-border communication through the Internet, satellite broadcasting, international broadcasting or through media imports and exports” ( Hafez, 2007 : 14). Thus, it seems that without the evidence of cultural transformation generated by cross-border communication, the notion of global media remains utopian.

It is true that the discourse perspective on global media, as proposed here, says little about cross-border communication and cultural transformation, but it does not totally exclude these aspects. In particular, this holds true if we go beyond the traditional technology platforms of the news media – newspapers, radio, and television – and widen the focus of research to include web-based forms of news reporting. The digital versions of newspapers, for instance, offer links to other websites around the world, hyperlinks which enable user interaction, etc. The digitalization of (national) news allows, to a greater extent than previous technologies, for cross-border communication and perhaps also cultural transformation ( Berglez, 2011 ; Heinrich, 2008 ). But, what is deemed even more important here is political transformation – how the nation-state logic of political identity loosens up, is transgressed, and transforms into transnational political identities in certain contexts, as in the example above of the discursive construction of EU-identity in relation to climate change. I would argue that the discourse perspective contributes knowledge of a fundamental ingredient, both in a global public sphere and in what Berglez (forthcoming) describes as a global political culture, namely how and under what circumstances the media – national or transnational – provide their audiences with a global interpretative framework capable of including politically relevant interconnections between various geopolitical scales (cf. Volkmer, 2003 ).

A central aspect of this line of reasoning is the idea of late modernity being characterized by contingency in every respect, which means that everything that exists right now could take quite a different form in another situation and context ( Mouffe, 1995 ). The contingent character of today implies that it is not reasonable to expect the media, be they national or transnational, to produce global knowledge all the time – the reporting on certain objects or phenomena, such as global risks, is probably more inclined to assume global characteristics than the reporting on local events such as a traffic accident. But it is also true that the media do not reproduce the nation-state logic throughout their reporting. And the same goes for the media audience; our national identity positions are, in all probability, activated in relation to quite a few of the events and phenomena reported in the media, but in certain cases and under certain circumstances, possibly in relation to distant suffering or global risks such as climate change, we accept global outlooks provided by the media and take on transnational identities, if not for more than a brief moment (e.g. Olausson, 2007 , forthcoming). The national and global, as shown, are not mutually exclusive, but reinforce and reconstruct one another. Thus, it is rather unproductive to understand the media as contributing to either the stability of the nation-state or the fluidity of globalization, since they most likely contribute to both of these conditions depending on context and circumstances, and in a dialectic fashion. Stability and fluidity are two sides of the same coin.

The discourse approach to global media studies, for which I argue in the present chapter, is certainly not the perspective that provides us with the only “correct” version of reality. However, this perspective is currently somewhat obscured by the dominant view on global media as consisting of transnational media networks and technologies, and there is reason to draw attention to the discursive aspect of global media, which is something qualitatively different from technological reach. Nonetheless, I would like to bring this chapter to a close by emphasizing the fruitfulness of there being a variety of theoretical perspectives that pose different kinds of questions about global media and together enrich the research field. Considering their, in all essentials, complementary nature, the diversity of theoretical perspectives and approaches is indispensable for an integral explanation of global media.

• The term “transnational” is here used to describe events, technology, processes, connections, etc. which transcend nation-state borders but do not necessarily encompass the entire globe (Hannerz, 1996).

© 2011 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike-3.0 License , which permits use, distribution and reproduction for non-commercial purposes, provided the original is properly cited and derivative works building on this content are distributed under the same license.

Continue reading from the same book

Published: 01 August 2011

By Mel van Elteren

5796 downloads

By Mostafa Al Masum Shaikh, Keikichi Hirose and Mitsu...

2756 downloads

By Peter Mann de Toledo, Ima Célia Guimarães Vieira...

2487 downloads

IntechOpen Author/Editor? To get your discount, log in .

Discounts available on purchase of multiple copies. View rates

Local taxes (VAT) are calculated in later steps, if applicable.

Introductory essay

Written by the educators who created Covering World News, a brief look at the key facts, tough questions and big ideas in their field. Begin this TED Study with a fascinating read that gives context and clarity to the material.

At the newsstand, on our smartphones and while watching the evening news, we learn about faraway people and places from the journalists, stringers and correspondents who work for news agencies and other media outlets around the globe. Global news is everywhere — from the front page news read by a New Yorker on Madison Avenue to the government radio station broadcasting in Pyongyang.

However, it would be a mistake to consider this a completely new phenomenon or to overstate its pervasiveness. Many people tend to think that global news is both a recent phenomenon and one that we can credit to advances in technology. If we think of 'news' in terms of newspaper articles or television reporting, then news is only as old as the technologies of press and video, and dates back to the first newsletters that circulated in Europe in the 17th century.

But in reality, humans have shared information about current affairs within and across borders for thousands of years, starting with the news networks of the ancient Phoenicians. The historical record also describes merchants sharing political news along ancient trade routes, minstrels and other traveling artists whose fictional performances also carried information about social change, and criers in medieval town squares.

If news is not a product of modern technologies, it's nevertheless true that technological change has had a dramatic impact on how news is made and consumed: where once we had printed newsletters distributed twice a day, now we have Twitter feeds refreshed twice a minute, and carrying information from an ever-widening array of sources. We live, as media critics like Marshall McLuhan have argued, in a global village.

The trouble with this vision of 'global news' is that it's not nearly as complete as we imagine it to be. According to the World Bank, of the world's seven billion people, only 80% have access to electricity (or the gadgets like computer and televisions that depend on it), 75% have access to mobile phones, and a meager 35% to the Internet. Most people on the planet aren't connected to what we think of as the 'global media' at all. As Global Voices founder Ethan Zuckerman points out in his TED Talk, "There are parts of the world that are very, very well connected, [but] the world isn't even close to flat. It's extremely lumpy."

Just as critically, the content that makes up the 'global media' is still heavily focused on a few key centers of power. In her TED Talk, Public Radio International's Alisa Miller shares a powerful map of the news consumed by American audiences in 2008: most of it focused on the U.S., and to a lesser extent, on countries with which the U.S. has military ties. Ethan Zuckerman points out that this lack of global coverage is pervasive, whether it's at elite news outlets like The New York Times or on crowdsourced digital information platforms like Wikipedia.

Moreover, Zuckerman argues, it's not just about the stories that get made — it's about what stories we choose to listen to. Thirty years ago, Benedict Anderson made waves when he argued that political structures (like states) depend upon a set of shared values, the 'imagined community,' and that the media plays a key role in creating those values. Zuckerman, however, argues that in today's world the disconnect between what we imagine to be our community, and the community we actually live in, is a major source of global media inequality. We connect to the Internet, with its technological capacity to link up the whole world, and imagine that we live in a global village. But in practice, we spend most of our time reading news shared by our Facebook friends, whose lives and interests are close to our own. Zuckerman calls this 'imagined cosmopolitanism.'

Compounding the problem, the stories we do attend to can be heavily distorted, reducing whole countries or societies to a single stereotype or image. As author Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie explains in her TED Talk about the 'single story,' when all the tales we hear about a country follow the same pattern, we begin to imagine that this pattern is all there is know. The 'single story' can affect all of us, rich and poor: Adichie talks of her own misconceptions about Nigeria's rural poor, of her surprise at encountering the diversity of life in Mexico, and of her college roommate's reductive vision of Africa as poor and underdeveloped. The difference, she argues, is that there are simply more stories out there about powerful countries than about less powerful ones, and that makes it harder for us to reduce those societies to 'single stories' in our minds.

What can we do?

First, we can tell different stories about the places that are prone to reduction. In her TED Talk, Yemeni newspaper editor Nadia Al-Sakkaf takes us to the Yemen she lives in — where terrorism and political upheaval are real problems, but far from the whole picture. Moreover, in her account, each image can tell many stories. A woman with a veiled face can represent the role of fundamentalist Islam in Yemeni society, but she argues that a look behind the veil shows us that many of these women are holding down jobs and earning income, and in so doing, changing their role within their own families and in Yemeni society more broadly.

Second, we can find ways to invest in journalism. As Alisa Miller argues, a major obstacle to a truly global news media is the cost of production, of keeping bureaus in every country and paying for journalists to produce deep, investigative stories. The great paradox of media economics in the digital age is that the Internet makes it possible for us to consume more content, but falling advertising revenues means that each piece of content must cost a little less to produce. That pushes news outlets, even wealthy ones, in the direction of gossip and regurgitated press releases that can be produced by a reporter who hasn't left her desk.

One way to break this cycle, Ethan Zuckerman argues, is to make small and targeted investments in local journalists in the developing world. He describes a blogger training program in Madagascar that became a newsroom overnight when world media outlets needed verified content from a country undergoing revolution. He highlights the critical work of professional curators like Amira Al Hussaini at Global Voices or Andy Carvin at the Associated Press.

At the heart of these recommendations is a shift in the way we understand the mission of journalists — or rather, a return to an old way of thinking about news.

Right up until the early 20th century, all journalists were assumed to be opinion writers. Reporters went places to report, made up their own minds about a topic, and wrote an account that included not only facts, but an argument for what position readers at home should take and what political actions might follow. George Orwell's colorful and opinionated essays from South East Asia, for example, were published as reportage.

Then the Cold War started, and in the democratic West, journalists began to strive for objective impartiality, to distinguish their work from the obvious, state-sponsored propaganda of the Soviet bloc. Many critics at the time questioned whether 'true' objectivity was possible, but no major western news organization disputed that it was the ideal.

Today, we're seeing a return to the older understanding of journalism, towards an acceptance that even independent reporting carries a viewpoint, shaped by the people who produce it. Moreover, contemporary journalists are increasingly coming to see this viewpoint as a strength rather than as a weakness, and using social media to be more transparent to readers about the values they bring to stories. New York University's Jay Rosen, for example, has argued powerfully that the 'view from nowhere' advocated by 20th century western reporters is dangerous because it can lead journalists to treat 'both sides' of a story equally even when one side is telling objective falsehoods or committing crimes.

Many of the speakers in Covering World News describe their journalism — whether it is Global Voices or the Yemen Times — as having an explicit moral and political mission to change our perceptions of under-covered regions of the world.

But no speaker is more passionate on this subject than TED speaker and photojournalist James Nachtwey, who credits the activist context of the 1960s for inspiring him to enter journalism, using photography to "channel anger" into a force for social change. Nachtwey's work has brought him, at times, into partnership with non-profit aid organizations, an alliance that is increasingly common in today's media world but would surely not have fit within the 'objective' media of a half-century ago. Nachtwey sees himself as a 'witness' whose place in the story is not to be invisible, but to channel his own humane outrage at war or social deprivation in order to drive social and political change: in one case, a story he produced prompted the creation of a non-profit organization to collect donations from readers.

This kind of work is a form of 'bridge building,' a theme that emerges in many of our talks. For while there may not be one 'global media' that includes all communities equally and reaches all parts of the globe, there are many individuals whose skills and backgrounds enable them to go between the connected and less connected pockets of the world, bridging gaps and contributing to mutual understanding. That, perhaps, is the way forward for international journalism.

Let's begin our study with Public Radio International CEO Alisa Miller, an ardent advocate for a global perspective in news programming. In her TEDTalk "The news about the news," Miller shares some eye-opening statistics about the quantity and quality of recent foreign reporting by American mainstream media organizations.

Alisa Miller

How the news distorts our worldview, relevant talks.

Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie

The danger of a single story.

Ethan Zuckerman

Listening to global voices.

James Nachtwey

My wish: let my photographs bear witness.

Nadia Al-Sakkaf

See yemen through my eyes.

• Dcode Bold 3 Price in Pakistan
• Dcode x Mobile Price in Pakistan
• VGO TEL Note 23 Price and Specification in Pakistan
• Bank of America Fined $12 Million By CFPB: 2023
• What is Christmas Economy? Understanding its Impact on Sales and the Economy.

Exploring the Vibrant Tapestry of Global Media Cultures in the Contemporary World

Global media culture, in the contemporary world, refers to the interconnected set of values, beliefs, practices, and behaviors that arise from the interaction between media and various cultures on a global scale. It encompasses the dissemination and consumption of media content across borders, leading to the emergence of a shared cultural landscape that transcends national boundaries. Global media cultures reflect the interplay between local, regional, and international influences, and shaped by the flow of media content, cultural hybridity, and the formation of transnational audiences. In this dynamic context, global media culture both challenges and enhances our understanding of diverse cultural perspectives and identities.

Global media culture in contemporary world is as a fusion of local, regional, and international elements, influenced by the widespread dissemination and consumption of media content across borders. It reflects the interconnectedness and interdependence of media systems and audiences worldwide, as well as the cultural exchange and hybridization that occurs as a result.

Top 5 Global Media Culture examples

Sure! Here are some examples of global media cultures:

• Hollywood: The American film industry, centered in Hollywood, has a significant impact on global media cultures. Hollywood movies are widely distributed and watched across the world, shaping filmmaking trends, storytelling techniques, and influencing cultural references.
• Anime: Japanese animation, known as anime, has a dedicated and passionate global fan base. Anime series like “Dragon Ball,” “Naruto,” and “One Piece” have captivated audiences worldwide, leading to the development of fan communities, conventions, and a widespread appreciation for Japanese animation style.
• Bollywood: The Indian film industry, popularly known as Bollywood, produces a vast number of films each year. Bollywood movies are not only popular within India but also have a significant global following, influencing fashion, music, and dance styles around the world.
• YouTube Creators: The rise of YouTube has enabled individuals from various countries to become influential content creators. YouTube stars like PewDiePie, Dude Perfect, and Lilly Singh have millions of subscribers and shape global media cultures through their vlogs, comedy sketches, and other content.
• Social Media Influencers: Social media platforms have given rise to a new generation of influencers who have a substantial impact on global media cultures. Influencers such as Kylie Jenner, Huda Kattan, and Chiara Ferragni have built massive followings, shaping fashion trends, beauty standards, and lifestyle choices.

These examples highlight the diversity and influence of global media cultures, where content from different regions resonates with audiences worldwide, shaping trends, and fostering cross-cultural connections.

What are the effect of Global Media Cultures

Global media cultures in the contemporary world refer to the widespread dissemination and consumption of media content across different countries and cultures. With advancements in technology and the internet, media has become increasingly accessible and interconnected, leading to the emergence of a globalized media landscape. Here are some key aspects of global media cultures:

Media Convergence

The convergence of different media forms, such as television, film, music, and the internet, has played a significant role in shaping global media cultures. This convergence allows for the seamless integration of content and the ability to access and share media across various platforms and devices.

Cultural Exchange

Global media cultures facilitate the exchange of ideas, values, and perspectives among different cultures worldwide. Television shows, films, music, and online content from one country can quickly reach audiences in other parts of the world, leading to cross-cultural understanding and influence.

Transnational Media Companies

Large transnational media conglomerates, such as Disney, WarnerMedia, and Netflix, have a significant influence on global media cultures. These companies produce and distribute content that reaches audiences globally, often tailoring their content to appeal to diverse cultural tastes.

Localization and Glocalization

While global media cultures are prevalent, localized adaptations of media content are also common. Media companies often adapt their content to suit local cultural contexts by dubbing, subtitling, or remaking shows and films. This process is known as localization. Additionally, glocalization refers to the blending of global and local elements, where media content incorporates global themes while retaining local cultural nuances.

Social Media and User-Generated Content

The rise of social media platforms has empowered individuals to create and share their own media content, contributing to global media cultures. User-generated content, such as videos, memes, and social media challenges, can quickly become viral and reach a global audience, influencing popular culture and trends.

Media Imperialism and Cultural Hegemony

Some critics argue that global media cultures perpetuate the dominance of Western or American media and values worldwide. They argue that the concentration of media power in a few transnational companies leads to cultural imperialism, as local cultures may be overshadowed or marginalized by the dominance of global media content.

Media Activism and Resistance

Global media cultures also serve as platforms for activism and resistance, allowing marginalized communities and social movements to amplify their voices and challenge dominant narratives. Social media campaigns, online petitions, and digital storytelling have become powerful tools for social and political change.

Cultural Appropriation

The globalization of media culture has also raised concerns about cultural appropriation. Cultural symbols, practices, and identities can be commodified and appropriated by dominant cultures, leading to the marginalization or misrepresentation of certain cultures in the media.

Media Literacy and Interpretation

Global media culture requires individuals to navigate and interpret media content from diverse cultural contexts. Media literacy skills become crucial for understanding and critically engaging with the complexities and nuances of global media representations.

Cultural Influence and Soft Power

Global media culture plays a significant role in shaping perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors on a global scale. Media content from powerful media industries and countries can exert soft power, influencing cultural norms, values, and lifestyle choices in other societies.

Overall, global media cultures in the contemporary world are characterized by the interplay between global and local influences, the exchange of cultural ideas, and the power dynamics within the media industry.

What are advantage and disadvantage of global media culture

Advantages of Global Media Culture:

• Cultural Exchange and Understanding: Global media culture allows for the exchange of ideas, values, and perspectives among different cultures, fostering cross-cultural understanding and promoting empathy.
• Access to Diverse Content: Global media culture provides individuals with access to a wide range of diverse content from around the world. People can explore different cultural expressions, artistic forms, and storytelling traditions, expanding their horizons and enriching their cultural experiences.
• Global Connections and Communities: Global media culture enables individuals to connect with like-minded people from different countries and cultures. Online platforms and social media facilitate the formation of global communities, where individuals can share their interests, passions, and experiences.

Disadvantages of Global Media Culture:

• Cultural Homogenization: A major disadvantage of global media culture is the potential for cultural homogenization. Dominant global trends and content can overshadow local cultural expressions, leading to the loss or marginalization of unique cultural identities and practices.
• Influence of Stereotypes and Biased Narratives: Global media culture can perpetuate stereotypes, biases, and misrepresentations of certain cultures or communities. Misunderstandings and negative perceptions can arise when cultures are portrayed in a simplistic or stereotypical manner.
• Cultural Imperialism: Critics argue that global media culture can reinforce the dominance of certain countries or regions, particularly Western or American media. This can result in cultural imperialism, where local cultures are overshadowed or marginalized, leading to a loss of cultural diversity.

Bus Journey from Islamabad to China via Faisal Movers

• Economic Franchise Concept

You May Also Like

Best Passive Real Estate Investments

How Technology Transformed the Industrial Revolution: A look at the Innovation that Changed History

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• StumbleUpon

Pin It on Pinterest

Essay on Media And Globalization

Students are often asked to write an essay on Media And Globalization in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Media And Globalization

What is globalization.

Globalization means the way countries and people of the world interact and mix. It’s like different parts of the world coming together to share things like goods, services, ideas, and culture. It’s a bit like having friends from many places.

Role of Media in Globalization

Media, like TV, internet, and newspapers, helps globalization by spreading information. It’s like a bridge that connects people from far places, letting them share news and stories. Media makes the world seem smaller because it’s easy to know what’s happening far away.

Types of Global Media

Media comes in many forms. There are movies, music, and shows from all over the world. The internet also has websites and social media which lets us chat and see what others do, no matter where they are.

Impact on Culture

Because of media, we get to see and try new things from other cultures. Sometimes, this can change our own culture, like how we might start enjoying food from a different country or celebrate new festivals.

Challenges of Media Globalization

250 words essay on media and globalization, what is media and globalization.

Media refers to the different ways we share information, like newspapers, television, and the internet. Globalization is when people and places all over the world become connected and start sharing things like goods, ideas, and culture. When we talk about media and globalization, we’re looking at how the ways we share information help connect the world.

The Role of Media in Connecting the World

Media plays a big role in making the world feel smaller. With the internet and TV, we can learn about what’s happening in far-off places in just a few seconds. News from one country can spread to another very quickly, making everyone more aware of global events. This means that a kid with a computer or smartphone can see and learn about different cultures and places without leaving home.

Sharing Culture Through Media

Thanks to media, music, movies, and TV shows from one country can be enjoyed all over the world. This helps different cultures to understand each other better. For example, a child in India might watch a cartoon from the United States and learn about American life and language.

Challenges of Media and Globalization

Even though media helps us connect, it can also create problems. Sometimes, the information shared is not true, which can cause misunderstandings. Also, when everyone is watching the same shows or listening to the same music, local cultures might become less important. It’s like when everyone starts wearing the same type of clothes, and traditional outfits are worn less often.

In conclusion, media has a huge part in making globalization happen by spreading information and culture. But it’s important to remember to check if the news is true and to keep celebrating our own local traditions and cultures.

500 Words Essay on Media And Globalization

Media brings the world together.

Media has made it easy for us to know about other countries. Before, if something happened in another country, you might never hear about it. Now, you can watch news from everywhere on your phone or computer. This means we can learn about other cultures and what life is like for people who live far away.

Global News and Understanding

When we watch global news, we start to understand people from other places better. If there is a big storm in another country, we see the pictures and want to help. This makes us feel connected to the whole world, not just our own town or country.

Business and Media

Learning from each other.

Thanks to media, we can learn new things from other cultures. We might watch a show from another country and learn how to cook their food or speak a few words in their language. This helps us to be more open and friendly with people who are different from us.

Problems with Global Media

Even though there are good things about media and globalization, there are also problems. Sometimes, news from other countries can make us scared or worried. Also, when businesses sell the same things everywhere, local shops and traditions might disappear. This can make different places start to look the same, and we might forget what makes each culture special.

If you’re looking for more, here are essays on other interesting topics:

Apart from these, you can look at all the essays by clicking here .

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Global Media Essays

All global media are hybrid systems, popular essay topics.

• American Dream
• Artificial Intelligence
• Black Lives Matter
• Bullying Essay
• Career Goals Essay
• Causes of the Civil War
• Child Abusing
• Civil Rights Movement
• Community Service
• Cultural Identity
• Cyber Bullying
• Death Penalty
• Depression Essay
• Domestic Violence
• Freedom of Speech
• Global Warming
• Gun Control
• Human Trafficking
• I Believe Essay
• Immigration
• Importance of Education
• Israel and Palestine Conflict
• Leadership Essay
• Legalizing Marijuanas
• Mental Health
• National Honor Society
• Police Brutality
• Pollution Essay
• Racism Essay
• Romeo and Juliet
• Same Sex Marriages
• Social Media
• The Great Gatsby
• The Yellow Wallpaper
• Time Management
• To Kill a Mockingbird
• Violent Video Games
• What Makes You Unique
• Why I Want to Be a Nurse
• Send us an e-mail

How Does Media Influence Culture and Society?

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

Introduction

Definitions of culture, how does media affect culture, how does media influence culture & society, works cited.

The impact of social media on culture cannot be overestimated. It had a great influence on the cultural changes in society, so that the role of men and women has been defined by the mass media. In the process, it affected both intercultural and international communication. Many people globally have been trying to understand the meaning of culture and its influence on how human beings behave (Purvis 46).

So, how does media influence culture and society? This essay tries to answer the question in detail, examining the terms separately and discussing the connection. Besides, the author touches upon another crucial question: how does culture affect global media?

Different sociology scholars have tried to come up with various definitions of culture, with many of them having a lot of contradictions. The media has been instrumental in explaining to the public its meaning and enabling everyone to have a cultural identity. The well-being of people can only be guaranteed if they have a strong and definite identity that influences their sense of self and their relationship with other people who have a different cultural identity.

The difference in beliefs and backgrounds helps people from different societies to relate and negotiate well. Intercultural relations have continued to fail because many people are not aware of their cultural identity. The internet and mass media have been instrumental in promoting globalization which has led to many positive influences on the culture of different societies and races across the world.

Many societies have been able to add new aspects to their cultures as a result of globalization, which is greatly facilitated by the internet and the mass media (Purvis 67). Globalization enables us to have an overview of different cultures across the world and, in the end, be in a position to copy some positive aspects. These papers will highlight the importance of media in culture construction and how the media has led to intercultural socialization.

Learning about other cultures through the media can create some stereotypes, which can be negative at times. The media plays an important role in educating people and making them familiar with some cultures so as to avoid stereotypes. Examples of stereotypes that have been created by the media include portraying Muslims as terrorists and Africans as illiterates.

By educating people about different cultures and emphasizing the positive aspects, the media can play an important role in constructing the cultures of different societies across the world and, in the process, avoiding prejudice and stereotyping. The mass media has got a large audience that gives a lot of power to influence many societal issues. The media advocates for social concerns and enables communication and exchange of positive cultural values among different societies (Purvis 91).

The mass media presents information about a particular region of culture to the whole world, and it s therefore very important for the information to be properly investigated before the presentation. Global sports such as the World Cup enjoy a lot of following across the world, and the media has the power to influence many cultural aspects during such tournaments.

Many ideas concerning males and masculinity have been constructed by the media. The media portrays a man as brave and without emotions and women as fearful and emotional in television programs and movies. The media forms the idea of a real man in society as one who is aggressive and financially stable. Women are portrayed as housekeepers, and the children grow up with this information.

The media has constructed a new image of beauty which has continued to influence many women and even young girls across the world. Since beauty has been associated with having a slim figure, many women and young girls have become very enthusiastic about weight control and have also been influenced to change their diet. Schools and parents have failed to educate children about sexuality and, in the process leaving the media as the only source of information about sexuality (Siapera 34).

According to traditional cultures, it is often taboo to talk about sexuality with children, but this is bound to change because schools and parents realize that it is no longer sensible to avoid talking to children about sex-related issues. The media plays a very important role in ensuring that societal norms, ideologies, and customs are disseminated. Socialization has been made possible and much simpler because of the media.

Through socialization, different societies are able to share languages, traditions, customs, roles, and values. The media has become a significant social force in recent years, especially for young people. Whereas the older generations view the media as a source of entertainment and information, the majority of young people see it as a perfect platform for socialization.

The media highlights different values and norms and the possible consequences of failing to adhere to societal norms and values. Through the media, society is able to learn how to behave in different circumstances according to one’s role and status (Siapera 34). The media helps in portraying models of behavior that are supposed to be followed by society and its members.

The media is a fundamental agent of socialization whose operations are very basic compared to other agents such as schools, families, and religious groups. The internet has got different forms of socialization, such as Facebook and Twitter, that have completely revolutionalized the way people socialize in recent times.

Apart from the internet, other media agents that have become very fundamental in socialization include the radio, newspapers, magazines, and tabloids, just to mention a few. Through these media agents, ideas and opinions can be shared and exchanged.

The internet has emerged to be very the most powerful audio-visual medium since it can now be accessed by many people across the world. Through the internet, one is able to influence others or be influenced by other people who use the internet to share and exchange their opinions. Television is another media agent that has really enhanced socialization in many ways (Siapera 71).

Television gives people a good platform to give their opinions on various topics and issues affecting human life. The opinions shared on television reach a large number of people because television is a mass media that is capable of reaching a large audience. The media is often rapid and interactive and is a perfect socialization agent for young people who watch the television most of the time compared to elderly people.

Since the youth form the majority of the audience, many media houses are always smart enough to present topics and programs that appeal to young people. Media houses have the power to manipulate their audience in a skillful manner for the audience to buy into their ideas and messages. The media is able to make some products look appealing to the general public, an example being the status one would acquire if they possessed the latest cell phone in the market (Siapera 85).

The mass media has become a very vital agent in the development of children and the behavior of adults. Although the mass media has some negative influences on the audience, its benefits tend to override the negatives. There are some programs on television that have useful information, like the teachings of some foreign languages that are essential for social interaction.

Programs that teach languages are very beneficial to both children and adults in international socialization. Other programs enable children to be creative and dynamic in their thinking. These programs enable both children and adults to be more knowledgeable and affect their way of doing things. It is, therefore, very important for parents and guardians to be wary of the type of programs their children watch because some programs can end up having a negative influence on them.

Programs with vulgar language and violence should be avoided by children because they can influence them negatively. Different networks have really affected the sense of reality in our society. Internet networks have continued to depict some issues that are out of touch with reality (Siapera 85). The issue of stereotypes that have been mentioned in this paper has greatly been cultivated by networks.

People who get information about certain types of people and cultures without real experience can end up having a wrong impression about a particular race, culture, or region that is contrary to the reality of the situation on the ground. Networks have affected our culture by highlighting some cultures as being primitive and, in the process, prompting people to have a cultural shift.

In conclusion, it is important to note that the media has a very important role in shaping our culture. The media has promoted globalization, and in the end, people from different nationalities and cultures are able to exchange values and ideas that are beneficial to their lives.

The mass media and the internet have greatly contributed to the cultural construction of many societies across the world and therefore making them become very important agents of socialization. Mass media agents such as the television, internet, films, and radio have been very instrumental in promoting socialization by providing a perfect platform for exchanging ideas and opinions on various issues that affect life. Networks have also been able to affect different cultures across the world.

Some of the issues highlighted in films and movies are always fiction, but society tends to practice them in reality, which has led to some serious consequences. Networks and organizations have made the world to become a global village. Networks and organizations will no doubt continue to influence the culture of many societies since there is so much information being passed across different networks and organizations. The media will continue to influence people’s way of life both in the present and in the future.

Purvis, Tony. Get Set for Media and Cultural Studies . New York: Edinburgh University Press, 2006. Print.

Siapera, Eugenia. Cultural Diversity and Global Media: The Mediation of Difference. New York: Jon Wiley and Sons, 2010. Print.

• Media Control and Censorship of TV
• Effect of Media on Owning a Home
• Age and the Agents of Socialization
• Socialization: Positive and Negative Influences
• Socialization for the Transmission of Culture
• The Impact of Media Bias
• Values Portrayed in Popular Media
• Envisioning the media ten years from now
• Mass Media Impact on Society
• The Effects of Media Violence on People
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2018, October 17). How Does Media Influence Culture and Society? https://ivypanda.com/essays/how-our-culture-is-affected-by-the-media/

"How Does Media Influence Culture and Society?" IvyPanda , 17 Oct. 2018, ivypanda.com/essays/how-our-culture-is-affected-by-the-media/.

IvyPanda . (2018) 'How Does Media Influence Culture and Society'. 17 October.

IvyPanda . 2018. "How Does Media Influence Culture and Society?" October 17, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/how-our-culture-is-affected-by-the-media/.

1. IvyPanda . "How Does Media Influence Culture and Society?" October 17, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/how-our-culture-is-affected-by-the-media/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "How Does Media Influence Culture and Society?" October 17, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/how-our-culture-is-affected-by-the-media/.

Home / Essay Samples / Social Issues / Globalization / Media and Globalization: Shaping Our Perception of the World

Media and Globalization: Shaping Our Perception of the World

• Category: Sociology , Social Issues
• Topic: Effects of Social Media , Globalization , Media Influence

Pages: 5 (2221 words)

Views: 1176

• Downloads: -->
• Dixon, V. (2019). Understanding the Implications of a Global Village. Retrieved from http://www.inquiriesjournal.com/articles/1681/understanding-the-implications-of-a-global-village
• Fuchs, C. (2019). Capitalist Crisis, Communication, & Culture [Ebook]. Triple C.
• Georgidou, E. (2019). Marshall McLuhan’s ‘global village’ and the Internet [Ebook]. Canterbury: University of Kent at Canterbury.
• Gibson, T. (2019). Global Village. Retrieved from https://modernrhetoric.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/global-village.pdf
• Karr, N. (2019). How technology spawned a global village — and created a world of dissension & strife. Retrieved from https://mcluhangalaxy.wordpress.com/2017/04/23/how-technology-spawned-a-global-village-and-created-a-world-of-dissension-strife/
• Kaul, V. (2019). Globalisation and Media. Retrieved from https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/globalisation-and-media-2165-7912.1000105.pdf
• Machado, K. (2019). Defining the global village [Powerpoint presentation]. Retrieved from www.umb.massonline.net
• Machado, K. (2019). Media and Economic Globalization [Powerpoint presentation]. Retrieved from www.umb.massonline.net
• Machado, K. (2019). Media and Cultural Globalization [Powerpoint presentation]. Retrieved from www.umb.massonline.net
• Machado, K. (2019). Global Village of Babel [Pdf]. Retrieved from www.umb.massonline.net
• Machado, K. (2019). “The Rise of Global Imaginary” [Pdf]. Retrieved from www.umb.massonline.net
• Machado, K. (2019). The role of media in Globalization [Pdf]. Retrieved from www.umb.massonline.net
• The Global Village: Media in the 21st Century. (2019). Retrieved from https://www.managementstudyguide.com/media-in-the-21st-century.htm

--> ⚠️ Remember: This essay was written and uploaded by an--> click here.

Found a great essay sample but want a unique one?

are ready to help you with your essay

You won’t be charged yet!

Affirmative Action Essays

Privacy Essays

2Nd Amendment Essays

Gender Wage Gap Essays

Daca Essays

Related Essays

We are glad that you like it, but you cannot copy from our website. Just insert your email and this sample will be sent to you.

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service  and  Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Your essay sample has been sent.

In fact, there is a way to get an original essay! Turn to our writers and order a plagiarism-free paper.

samplius.com uses cookies to offer you the best service possible.By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .--> -->