The case that there is too much emphasis on a small selection of nations within media studies (Curran, 2000, 1) must be taken in consideration that those countries in reality have a much greater political and economic influence. If one wants to describe, positively, how globalization is a force for technological development, then the limited sample of countries is adequate. However, from a humanistic perspective, normatively, Curran’s objections are much more relevant, as the digital divide (Norris, 2000, 4) is still a major setback to impoverished nations, a decade after those reports were issued. Nevertheless, not all wealth is relative, and the absolute strides made in internet access around the world (Cisco VNI, 2010) should offer some optimism for the question of whether the digital divide will ever close (Norris, 2000, 5).
If the legitimacy of the nation-state is in peril (Curran, 2000, 11) due to globalization, then this is not necessarily a cause for alarm. The boundaries to true harmony between cultures, including language, governance and economies, and traditions (Curran, 2000, 12) are already being obviated by mandatory bi-lingual education, transnational governance and economic regulation such as within the European Union and Eurozone, and increasing secularization and cultural appropriation, respectively. While globalization has also been associated with the undermining of labor rights and deregulation of corporations (Curran, 2000, 9), these ills seem prevalent precisely because the globalization of governance has not kept pace with the globalization of economies.
In such a vacuum of power, corporations naturally usurp control. This is why nation-states must necessarily give way to to more global governance, enabling workers to reclaim the full benefits of global interconnectivity, the way that national regulations and labor unions engendered workers to benefit more equitably from their industrial economies. Clintonism, the Nordic model, regional governance, and global governance (Curran, 2000, 9-10) are, in that order listed, increasingly effective ways to adapt politically to the globalized economy. The greater ease of communication between members of social movements (Norris, 2000, 1) is an example of how the challenges posed by globalization are met with new tools for social justice. Of course, those facing true information poverty, without such a means of communication, are the most vulnerable, and in need of support from more enabled influences.
References
Curran, J., Park, M. J. (2000). De-westernizing media studies. New York: Routledge.
Norris, P. (2000). Information poverty in the wired world. Harvard College, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
No comments:
Post a Comment