>The following is to be read to my class as a summary of Chapter 38 of “The Globalization Reader” Edited by Frank J. Lechner and John Boli.
The Chapter’s title is “Cultural Imperialism” by John Tomlinson. On page 317 of the book.
The summary is only for the second part in which the writer seems to argues with another writer, Hamelink.
P.S. ANYTHING WRITTEN IN ITALICS IS MY OPINION AND IT IS AN AMATEUR OPINION WITHOUT THE SCIENTIFIC BACKGROUND AND WEIGHT OF THE WRITERS MENTIONED BELOW.
THIS CHAPTER ARGUES about the effects that international media have on different cultures than the one they were produced to. |||Some people consider this an imperialistic cultural behavior, either intended or not to influence another group of people (usually ethnic groups or countries) creating a kind of cultural colony.|||
THE THEORIES BY Hamelink is that the culture of the receivers is destroyed by the foreign (media) products, but the writer disagrees, with the fact that the interpretation by the locals would differ from the original intented interpretation.||| Personally I agree with the writer, as the message is received in a different cultural background, but also some parts of the message are perceived as intended. However, both of the translations of the message can have effects in a culture changing it to the standard role models of the product or a mixed kind that will create a new variation of the role model.|||
IT ALSO ARGUES about the homogenization of cultures (which means to merge into one), without giving any answer, but still arguing with Hamelink. Then he answers to Hamelink’s argument about the need for autonomy as a matter of survival for the different conditions of each place, saying that the modern society is different that more primal societies in the aspects of survival. |||Modern societies survive through a local AND a global market, making them immune to some survival aspects of the previous societies, as they are not as example suffer from lack of food in case of flood because they can buy foods from other places.||| The writer continues arguing, because he points the problem of Hamelink’s point of view as an one-sided view in cultural behavior which is a lot more than that and cannot be perceived as a sole creation of survivalist logic.
IN THE WRITER’S words:
“Cultural autonomy must address the autonomous choices of agents who make up a cultural community; there is no escaping this set of problems by appeal to functionality.”
FINALLY THE WRITER closes distinguishing the spread of a bad culture influence with the spread of uniformity. |||Agreeing with him, I would add that in a world becoming flat (as I am influenced by Thomas L. Friedman, to say), an international cultural and some merges in cultures (not full merges but partial ones) will be more and more common in the future, that is one because partly of the Americanization of the Film industry, the European Union as a whole and exchanging cultural in the European Continent and the newly found powers of the East that are coming to threaten the Western dominion.|||