We All Live In Amerika.
Technology has infinitely increased the pace of the world. Arguably no technological advancement has impacted our culture more so, than the speed in which we communicate with each other in this so-called ‘global village’.
This Iron Age left us with axes, pots and spears.
Industrialisation left us with factories and cheap clothes from India.
Globalization has left us all living in Amerika.
And so the art of letter writing is lost because the click of the mouse teleports our messages instantaneously across oceans; and in effect this click also transports our ideologies and culture in a second as well.
Thus the world is now comprised of McKluhan’s ‘imagined communities’; all of us absorbing and the same information and forming one giant conglomerate mass of a global village.
“The media, on one level, are the primary carriers of culture.”- Jack Lule
Its suggested by Appadurai, that the interconnectivity of globalization has potential to allow a bilateral flow of ideas and a merging of cultures. To an extent this is true. O’Shaughnessy and Stadler acknowledge that globalization will not lead to straightforward American dominance, or global harmony but instead we observe a bilateral exchange of culture.
This utopian view of this global village, where we are all brought together no matter how far apart we all live belies the tension between cultural homogenization and cultural heterogenization. Appadurai argues that this theory of Cultural Imperialism and Global Americanisation ignores the indegenization of the imported culture.
What in my view Appadurai misses, is that whilst this may be true- when you are in Israel the McDonalds is kosher, the real point is that Israelis are still eating McDonalds.
Appadurai, A 1996, ‘Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globaliszation’, University of Minnesota Press, Minnesota, pp27-47.
Lule, J 2015, Globalization and Media : Global Village of Babel, Rowman & Littlefield, LONDON, pp 157.
O’Shaughnessy M & Stadler J, 2012, ‘Globalisation’, Media and Society, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 458 – 471.