Cultural Imperialism

Last class we spoke about cultural imperialism. This has been a common topic in many of our classes - international relations, globalization, etc. In IR, we learned about the Commercial Peace Theory and how interdependence between nations may promote peace but we learned in this class - computers and info technology - that it may also create cultural homogenization. In addition, it may spur regionalism or what some may even call American imperialism or modern day colonialism. The idea that products alone create imperialism seems to be a stretch. Can this be said for a product that is not American? Would one call the international furnishing store Ikea a form of Swedish imperialism? No. And yet, chains such as MacDonalds, American clothing lines, and American tv shows and internet sites are interpreted as American imperialism. It is not simply about the product but also the values associated with it (as we learned from the Donald Duck movie shown in class). Ikea does not promote socialism (a Swedish value) along with its furniture. However, one may argue that American tv and internet does promote American cornerstones such as liberal democracy and trade, individualism, and "freedom". The harm of such promotions is a give and take. My grandfather, a former economist for both the United Nations and the World Bank, argues MacDonalds provides protein through their meat - even though not high quality - to places of the world (i.e. China) that may struggle to have enough protein in their diet. So in fact, MacDonalds is a service to the world. Others will argue that MacDonalds poisons their children with fatty acids, chemicals, and carbohydrates leading to obesity. These products definitely come with values that can be good or bad. It is all about the interpretation. But to say that the products alone are an enforcment of American values abroad is merely the beginning.

May 25 - Wikipedia

Today's class was interesting because the accuracy of Wikipedia is a highly debated topic. When I first heard of the idea about four years ago, I scoffed at how unreliable it seemed. An encyclopedia that is publicly edited? Today's class shed some light on the inner workings of Wikipedia. I'm still wary about its use but I agreed wholeheartedly with the Professor and many other students that, in fact, Wikipedia is a great place to find sources and begin one's search. Even if a have a question regarding history or a hot button issue, Wikipedia is great for a short, bare-bones type of answer. I was definitely surprised to find that Encyclopedia Britannica is only slightly more accurate than Wikipedia. I was also surprised to find how highly regulated the site is, and that it's not in fact a "free for all" type of forum. However, bias does exist, not matter how small and the question that continues to be contested is - Is Wikipedia an academic source? I agree with most of our professors that it is unacceptable to site. Can one call a piece academic if the person writing it will not reveal his identity or expertise? Of course not. As we have learned - academic sources need to be back by a name and institution. But all in all, Wikipedia provides a good start.

May 12 - Journalism & Internet

Last Tuesday's class questioned the future existence of newspapers in a world backed by the internet. Newspapers, however, are timeless and classic. I find it very hard to believe that the internet will replace print media because there is something very tangible about it that one does not receive from online publications. Some of my fondest memories have been visiting my grandfather and finding stacks and stacks of various newspapers, magazines, leaflets laying on his coffee table. From The Oregonian, to the Economist and The Jerusalem Report, it was always fun to flip through the pages and see where my grandfather was getting all his indispensable knowledge from. My mother, also, after living in the States for over ten years and getting all her news from tv news stations and the internet suddenly decided she had to have a subscription to the New York Times weekend edition. Now she sits, every morning with the paper in one hand and coffee in the other. I think it is this tangible aspect mentioned before that really drew her into it. On a personal level, I have not made a full transition to the internet. Yes, my homepage is Ynet and I have a bookmark folder solely for online news, however I have my favorite magazine shipped to me all the way from San Francisco and one of my best birthday presents this year was a subscription to the Herald Tribune and Ha'aretz. I believe that people choose their medium of choice, whether that be television, internet, books, movies, or newspapers. For example, I have been living without a television for over a year. Life is very easy without tv and I have made a conscious effort to read books that have been on my 'to-d0' list for years. I made this choice to choose books over tv, even though books may be seen as 'dated'. Similarly with internet, one may use it for various purposes but there is definitely this possible choice of exposing oneself to tangible papers rather than online news. Even with the massive switch to the internet, I think we would be surprised at how many people still rely on the daily paper.

The global network society

Today's class was very reminiscent of last semester's globalization course - high paced development of social networking, off shore financing, limited government autonomy...
There were two points made in class that I disagreed with:
First, the idea that states have limited control over business and development because they must conform to international standards. Therefore, they must compromise their values in order to sustain their economy. The example given was the 35-hour work week in France. In order to keep up with the international community, France must compromise and work 42 hours a week. However, Israel has been successful in maintaining Saturday as its day of rest while the rest of the western world takes Sunday off. In other words, Israel has maintained its values even with pressure from the international business community. Therefore, I do not think all values are compromised when dealing with the global network. It's just a matter of how strongly one holds these values.
Another emphasis made in class was the phenomenon of networking sites such as Facebook and MySpace. It was said that if MySpace were a country, its 2 billion users would create the 5th largest country in the world! However, what kind of country would this be? Look at all the groups on Facebook - many of them are innocent but hundreds are factional such as "Israelis against Hamas" or "Help the Poor People of Gaza" or "Everyone who hates George Bush". It was said that these site users are often more loyal to their global networks than to their own country. This I find daunting and dangerous, not progressive and modern. In the virtual world, the lines between being politically correct and being inappropriate are blurred. The internet allows a sense of freedom without censorship, which has the potential to unleash some very extremist thoughts that up until now were tamed within the mind of the individual because there was no outlet for such thought. Social networking sites may very well be this outlet for public hate and factionalism. For this reason, my feelings towards the phenomona of public networking sites are mixed.

March 24

This week's topic on the disappearance of childhood due to media and television was not surprising. As a child of the media age, it is a topic that I have confronted before. However, the extent to which the subject was debated, the depth, and the graphic content was new. At times the discussion made me feel uncomfortable, probably due to its controversial nature. However, the discussion did not persuade me to think differently regarding my own exposure and my future children's exposure to media and television.
I grew up in a major metropolis. This meant billboards everywhere, constant bombardment with advertisements. Additionally, for a family of four, we had four televisions - one in the kitchen, one in the master bedroom, one in the family room, and one in the basement. This is considered normal where I was raised. TV became a constant distraction for those of us without self-control or time management.
My cousins, on the other hand, grew up with no TV at all. Eventually they had one just for watching movies. In the rural area where they live, not having a TV is very common. There was an obvious difference - while my 14-year-old my sister could name all the protagonists in her favorite television serious, my 6-year-old cousin could name every species of flowers that grew in her front yard.
After moving out of the house, my consumption of television and media has decreased immensely. When returning to where I grew up, I ignore the constant bombardment of advertisements. Tuesday's class simply reaffirmed my values regarding media & TV - that it is an unnecessary tool for social interaction and must be used in moderation.