In the criticisms of globalization theory we discussed in class this week, one feature which brought the most debate was that of Colin Sparks’ somewhat narrow definitions of what constitutes a theory, and how it is supported.
Although Sparks does raise some good questions in his polemic essay, particularly pertaining to evidence and hard data to support the existence of true globalization, he takes somewhat large leaps of logic in his censure of its tenets.
The example I’d like to examine today is the theory of a decentralized world, in which the state is undermined by international organizations and new local movements in an erosion of the “Westphalian” system. In this theory, these developments are due to an influence by the evolution of media technologies. The result is the emergence and strengthening of both global and local media. While I won’t go so far as to say this is entirely true, there is some interesting evidence, mainly the media industry, which can contribute to the discussion.
Sparks uses his argument against this theory purely in a political sense, looking at the nation-state’s existence as proof that the theory of globalization is incorrect. He says that the classic definition of the nation-state as an institution that has a monopoly on violence hasn’t changed at all. The scale of media imperialism, Sparks says, is the only thing that has changed.
This is true. The scale of media has changed dramatically, in terms of its technological and societal reach. And anyone who is in the media industry, particularly the traditional media industry of newspapers, knows that there has been a dramatic shift in how content is created, produced and marketed.
Most media (or most successful media) is based in the developed world, mainly in the United States, according to Sparks. And it is in the US that we can see the clearest evidence of the globalization theory of the “emergence and strengthening of both global and local media,” which is contrary to Sparks' theory.
The traditional way of thinking is gone, when it comes to how the news is reported. Multi-platform outlets are now the norm, with increased user generated content and social media that “enhance” the audience’s experience with news. The online medium is one example in which global and local media are thriving. The news of the world trumps national news on almost every website. And hyperlocal news sites, such as the recently launched TBD.com, reflect the increasing emphasis and relevance of local news.
This is due in part, I believe, to the idea of a globalized society, but not necessarily globalization in the way our readings have laid it out. As the world becomes more connected, and in a way, a great deal smaller, people feel a stronger connection to the world outside their immediate surroundings. However, the tie to a “home base” can become even stronger, the more you are out in the world. Because of the increased capacity for connectivity, it is easier for people to attach themselves to their home base, as evidence by hyperlocal sites on the Web, and easier for them to extend their comfort zone into the rest of the world, as evidence by shows like “World News” on ABC.
And while the term “globalization” is increasingly difficult to pin down, there are at least examples of an inter-connectedness so vast that audiences, particularly in the realm of the media, have extended their reach to a new, wider society and a stronger connection to their local one.
No comments:
Post a Comment