Why is it said that the evolution of a “global village” will be the cause of conflicts between cultures? Do you think that the process of globalization would dissolve cultural differences and assimilate into one unified world culture? How or how is it not. Is it right to conclude that the US is the dominant cultural hegemon in the world today? Give examples of how America exercises cultural
THE ARTICLE
Violet K. Dixon
The late Marshall McLuhan, a media and communication theorist, coined the term “global village” in 1964 to describe the phenomenon of the world’s culture shrinking and expanding at the same time due to pervasive technological advances that allow for instantaneous sharing of culture (Johnson 192). The assertion that it is possible for all the cultures of the world to become one global village is controversial, though. On one hand, people believe that if it continues, cultural globalization will lead to a dazzling marketplace where countries of all economic opportunities are represented and where more fortunate countries come to the aid of less fortunate ones with humanitarian efforts.
On the other hand, people are afraid that the evolution of a global village will raise conflicts between cultures, cause a fragmentation of culture, or lead to cultural domination by more developed countries and possibly create hybrid cultures (Johnson 191-96). Assuming Marshall McLuhan’s analogy of the world as a global village is an accurate prediction of the effect of cultural globalization, what consequences and benefits will emerge from this compression of culture? This essay will consider the implications of conflicting arguments addressing this question. Understanding what these changes will mean for each existing culture individually, and being careful to consider all sides of the discussion with equal relevance is essential to forming a universal understanding of what globalization means. If we cannot agree on the implications of these cultural shifts, perhaps we cannot identify ourselves as members of a global village after all.
The issue of cultural identity is certainly not a new one. When McLuhan presented his idea of a “global village” however, his concept raised several distinct social problems. As June Johnson, author of Global Issues, Local Arguments, states, “The idea of the world’s cultures drawn together in a global village raises questions about equal representation, reciprocal sharing, enriched diversity, and mutual understanding” (192). More than ever, examples of cultural globalization can be seen in our everyday lives. The Internet has exploded with a boom in technology, providing individuals from all over the world the opportunity to communicate instantly with each other. Instant messenger, Facebook, Myspace and various online forums are examples of this instant communication. In order to examine these complex problems, we must carefully consider examples of each of the potential outcomes Johnson refers to.
A main concern held by those wary of the effects of cultural globalization is that American media and culture have a negative impact on other cultures around the world. In other words, countries with more economic influence will eventually control the cultural standards by which the rest of the world will have to live. John Harris, a British journalist and author, describes an American rock performance in Brazil and how AOL had sponsored the event: “Rock in Rio was sponsored by AOL…Lest anyone fear that AOL’s arrival represented any kind of online imperialism, their logo had been sprayed in the heartwarmingly Brazilian color scheme of green and yellow” (237). Harris goes on to describe how American media giants are taking advantage of globalization to self-promote while homogenizing musical diversity
Related to the idea of cultural domination is perhaps a more essential issue. As this shift towards cultural sharing and overlapping ensues, how does globalization affect cultural diversity? Critics and activists adamantly argue this point. Johnson presents a summary of their argument when she writes, “Some assert that cultural contact is creating uniformity, standardization, homogenization—a global monoculture that is sterile, dull, and artificial” (193). A prime example of this frustration is the proliferation of American fast food restaurant chains in foreign countries. The excitement of visiting another country is easily soured upon stepping out of the airplane only to see American fast food chain restaurants. McDonalds, Burger King, Pizza Hut and KFC taint the cities of even former Eastern block countries such as Hungary.
INSTRUCTION: You have read the prior articles on Cultural Village and McDonaldization. Answer the questions below related to the articles and write your answers on the answer sheets provided.
- Why is it said that the evolution of a “global village” will be the cause of conflicts between cultures?
- Do you think that the process of globalization would dissolve cultural differences and assimilate into one unified world culture? How or how is it not.
- Is it right to conclude that the US is the dominant cultural hegemon in the world today? Give examples of how America exercises cultural
Trending now
This is a popular solution!
Step by step
Solved in 2 steps
