Our interaction with the students at South High both perpetuates and counteracts cultural imperialism of globalization. Many of our media projects challenge media globalization through criticizing the concentration of media outlets, and by critiquing the narrow perspective covered by U.S. media.
Yet, many of the references in our media projects focus on media companies that hold the top tier of power, rather than expanding our attention to smaller, local, or bottom tier media sources. Therefore, we are still perpetuating the “cultural imperialism” theory of media globalization.
For example, there was only one group of international students who exposed us to a point-of-view of a news source external to the U.S.
It is challenging to combat cultural imperialism when our awareness of the “other” and the other’s resources are so limited. Nonetheless, we can attempt to develop strategies that strengthen our awareness as consumers of media.
- What did you learn about cultural imperialism, the “global village,” local cultures?
At first glance, the concept of the “global village” is an optimistic theory founded on peaceful incentives; yet, at closer inspection this theory is idealistic, and the globalization of media is clouded with corruption that may be irreversible.
The capitalist-driven free-market has at stronghold on developed and developing economies, and western imperialism drives the content and economics within the media market. The voices of international cultures are constantly at risk of being suppressed, and their traditions lost—comparative to the diminishment of smaller media companies within the United States, which have increasingly been “bought out” by corporate media conglomerations.
When recognizing how the Western world has used the “free market” flow for the infiltration of media into other countries, Media Society recognizes the others’ view:
“…many developing countries came to understand [the idea that information should flow freely] as privileging the ‘First World’s’ market-driven perspective of information flow.” As a result of “different levels of infrastructure development and capital resources” within various countries, “the operating reality of ‘free’ international information flow was that major advertiser-funded news organizations from developed nations dominated the collection and dissemination of information” (340).
It is as though a road has been paved for all, but actually the only people who can use the road are those with the proper vehicles and elite components. Thus, only people who can financially afford to use the road can use it at all.
- What do you think about the politics of information, global media regulation, and other issues raised in this chapter?
I think that it is the government’s responsibility to regulate media sources to ensure that people are receiving valuable information from widespread and diverse outlets. So, I do not agree with the “decentralization” that the U.S. government has been passing, which has assisted in strengthening media conglomeration.
In regards to the Canadian defensive measures taken against the heavy saturation of U.S. media industry, I agree with some of their decisions, including their requirement for citizens to learn the French language, and their effort to expand the range of homegrown programming. However, I do not agree with their laws mandating that
“35% of the music played on AM radio and 60% of a television stations’ programming feature Canadian content” (335).
I think that governmental control over the amount of a particular type of content that is included (or excluded) within media stifles free expression, just as media conglomeration stifles the variety of informants available within the market.
- Does your experience make you want to change your video essay? Why or why not?
After learning more about media globalization, I agree even more with my group’s video essay about media economics.
The effects of the dominant industry business model—in which advertising revenues finance big media, which in turn lowers program quality and encourages media conglomeration and consolidation—is not just a struggle within the media in the United States, but is a struggle in the media industry world wide. This business model creates a challenge for the voices of American subcultures and international cultures to be heard within media.
After researching the top MSO companies i decided to pick the corporal conglomerate, Comcast. I thought this would be an easy thing to write about because i can also relate to myself, being a Comcast subscriber. Having been a costumer for years, i can safely say that i love Comcast, With it’s variety of features, the cable company has taken digitalism by storm. Offering a large collection of movies as well as having the option to record shows, Comcast seems to have it all. But after reading several blogs about the company, the fortune five hundred enterprise seems to be lacking in one area, customer service. There have been several instances where a new Comcast member has obtained new cable. and has received poor customer service. The client claims that the workers are uninformed and are very non-chalant about their jobs. The communication between the customer and the employer seems to be an area that Comcast is lacking in. Many people have said they have removed their membership from Comcast to satellite because of the lack of customer service available for the user. Yes, it might have all the digital perks in the world, but sometime when you come across a problem it would probably be harder to resolve. I must say, i have had no specific concerns with Comcast , but after seeing the reviews, i can clearly see why people do not like this company. It seems to be a consistent problem among customers and is something that Comcast should fix in the future. A little more time dedicated to the public aspect and less of the technological aspect is something i think needs to change within the system of Comcast. A change is not going to happen overnight, but they can start now to make up for lost time.
With Android at the top of the smartphone market and Youtube easily atop the video platform market, Google and its acquisitions seem to be in perfect position to remain relevant in the near future of technology. In 2010, Google’s Android operating system was used in more phones than Apple’s iOS4, and I think it will continue to be more utilized than the iPhone, due to its flexibility and open development system. Android has managed to create a very open ended platform, and it has shown so far to be a more popular one than the iPhone.
YouTube really does not have much competition from anyone in its market, including Vimeo. It has established a chokehold on video hosting on most other websites, and is a household name around the world. With its branding power, I really don’t see anyone being able to overtake YouTube in the video market.
The Android is a mobile device operating system that was initially purchased by Google, who became the developer of the software. In 2005, Google created the “Android Open Source Project” (AOSP), which is tasked with all development and technological maintenances. I believe that after viewing all of the Wikis, that the Android has the edge. Because of its association with Google Inc., it is widely recognized as a marketing powerhouse (as Google has strongly been established as such for years). According to statistics, over a quarter of a million Androids are activated each day.
A common comparison to the Android is the Apple iPhone phenomenon. The iPhone’s compatibility, efficiency, and user-friendly interface is difficult to rival. However, In 2010, the Android phone surpassed the sales of the iPhone. At the time, the iPhone was in the lead for most popular and successful phone.
I personally own the Android phone, and members of my family own iPhones so I have been exposed to both quite a bit. I think that the Android’s recent success in profit is a sign that they have the potential to remain at the top, even when the iPhone or Blackberry comes into the mix. Its number of applications rival the iPhone’s, and it can be argued that the Android has much more useful applications. The iPhone applications were initially created to attract the “gamer” consumer, having thousands and thousands of applications that are simply games. The Android, however, has created applications based off of utilizations that Google has already established. This includes Google Earth (the mobile reincarnation of Google Maps), Advanced Task Killer, a real wide framed flashlight, ‘GPS My Droid’, metal detectors, and barcode scanners. The Android apps are easy to use and more than practical in every-day life. The Android has also erased an issue that has been ongoing for years: lost and erased contacts. With the Android, this worry is washed away. Each contact that is added is synced with your Google E-Mail account, and is also synced with Facebook friend contacts to ensure that they are never lost. If a phone is ever lost, the new phone will automatically and easily be synced with the old contacts and every little detail is restored.
I thought that the Android wiki Pie Chart was a great example of their success. This wiki was very interesting, informational, and well presented. The video was also relevant and supportive to the theme.
Out of all the wiki presentations that I saw and read about, I felt that the Facebook presentation was the most effective. The group gave a very detailed description of the history of facebook, it’s founder and current owner and the rise from a small website to the largest social networking website on the planet. On the wiki page, the group had a great description about facebooks role in the marketplace. The group didn’t make claims based on their own experiences or preconceived notions, instead they gave statistics outlying facebooks popularity in comparison with their past and present competitors. But, for me, the best part of the facebook wiki was the groups ideas for the future of facebook; specifically, their idea to integrate video chat into facebook chat. Video chat is a huge phenomenon right now. Skype is one of the world’s largets social networking websites and yet it offers almost exclusively video chat. The iphone 4 was one of the best selling smart phones on the market and yet, it’s main selling point was the addition of video chat. Video chat is on the verge of becoming its own market, and I think if facebook were to start offering video chat, they would begin to compete with websites like Skype and devices like the Iphone 4.
The group did a great job of presenting their information in an organized and understandable fashion. They went into detail about facebooks history, their statistics were relatable and important and their ideas for the future were very innovative and realistic.
When I was looking though all the class wikis I found it highly ironic when I came across the iPhone’s and Blackberry’s pages. This was because IPhone’s are widely known for their “flash” and Blackberry’s are known for their business aspect. Both of these phone companies’ wiki pages greatly reflected the type of phone it is. The iPhone has a very catchy image which makes you want to know more. The Blackberry on the other hand has graphics which look very boring, at first glance, like the kind you find in the stock section of the newspaper. But, when you take a more in depth look into the graphics they are very helpful. Overall I think that the Blackberry page has made the strongest argument in print compared to all the other wiki’s.
The Blackberry page has done a number of things very well. Their page is very organized which makes it easy to navigate through the page. It is neat there is not a lot of clutter or irrelevant information as well. Another thing they did well was the ratio of pictures to writing. They have a few graphics and a solid amount of writing. There was not an overwhelming amount of one or the other. Something else this group did well was explaining the diagram which they had. They also included their sources which allow someone who is interested in the subject a place to go to get more information.
One thing that they could have done a better job on was incorporating a more up to date picture of a Blackberry phone. They also could add things that their competitors do that are better than them. That would create less of an argument if they admit that their product is not the best in every area.
Looking at their wiki made me wish we had more organization in our wiki page. That would be something I would change in my groups page. My question for the group is do they think Blackberry will include any of the groups ideas for the future by chance?