Examination of the cultural effects of globalisation

Ensayo , 2001 , 10 Páginas , Calificación: 1 (A)

Ciencias Culturales - General y definiciones

After, what has been a `very long, uneven and complicated process and is currently called globalisation′, world capitalism and the underlying system of sovereign states have become `the first historical system to include the entire globe within its geography′. The brands, images, and the cultural output of transnational companies of mainly North American origin are flooding almost every part of the world. What George Ritzer has called McDonaldization, `the rationalization of everyday interaction and individual identity′ - the principles of a fast food restaurant that `more and more sectors of society are adopting transforms national economies into one global, interdependent economy′. As a consequence, activities, which were previously carried out within a national or regulated international framework, will from now on be carried out globally, in accordance with the needs of the global marketplace, which is steadily growing. By 1980, it was estimated that there were over 10.000 transnational corporations of all national origins, and by the early 1990s more than three times as many.

In the media sector the vision or the nightmare of a global business would look like this: one single mega-corp, which delivers down its cable, to our homes, every intellectual morsel (it thinks) we need. The films, sit-coms and documentaries it has made; the news it makes; the information and e-mail services it controls; the chat-rooms it monitors and the celebrities it has made famous.
In the following this essay will examine how true this fantasy of total control is in reality by looking at two German conglomerates, KirchGruppe and Bertelsmann AG, which are currently expanding in Europe and the United States. Furthermore, the cultural effetcs of globalisation will be looked at in this context.

Inhaltsverzeichnis

• After, u.hat has been a 'very long uneven and process and is cun-emly• called globalisation' ßobertson, 1992: 10), world capitalism and the underlying system of sovereign sts have become'the first histofical system to include the entire globe within its geography' (Wallerstein_ 1997) Ihe brands, images: and the cultural ouq)ut of transnational companies of mainly Ncnth American Oligin are flooding almost evay part of üle world What George Ritzer has called McDonaldization, the rationali_zation of everyday imeraction and indiiidual identif (Keel: 1999)- the principles of a fist food restaurant that 'more and more sectors of society are adopting' 1997), 'transfonns national economies into one global, interdependent economy- 1998). As a consequence, acti&ities, which were previously canied out Mithin a national or regulated intemational fia_rneu.ork, from now on be can-ied out globally: in accordance With the needs of the global which is steadily growing_ By 1980, it was estimated t}nt there were over 10.000 transnational of all national origins, and by the early 1990s more than three times as many (Stopford and Dunning, 1983: 3; Ikeda: 1996:48).

• In the media sector the "vision or the nighttnare of a global business uould look like this: one mega-corp, which delivers down its cable, to our homes, every intellectual morsel (it thinks) need Ihe fihns, sit-coms and documentafies it has made; the neu.ß it makes; the infcnmation and e-mail senices it controls; the Cint rooms it monitors and the celebrities it has made

• In the this essay Mill examine how tme this åntasy of total control is in realib' by looking at two German conglomerates, KirchGruppe and Bertelsmann AG. which are currently avancling in Europe and the United States Futhermore, the cultural effetcs of globalisation Mill be looked at in this comext_

• The two media giants, KirchGruppe and Bertelsmann AG. control 90 per cent of Germany-s commercial TV stations (Schoenz 1998) and Kirch uå10 is co-opemting its Italian counterpart Berlusconi and media mogul Rupat Murdoch (ouner of BSkyB and the world-uide operatmg media group News Corporation, which has recently taken a stake into China Netcom) is present in almost every European ele•äsion market Bertelsmann, uh_ich is one of the largest media corporations in the world @lird as of 1995) (Ndbcnet, 2001) is the only antagonist to this media empire the merger With the British TV group Pearson, Bertelsmann is now ov.ning production companies and charmels, among others the RTL-channels in Gamany: Channel 5 in MO in France and Programme in Spain (Ott 2000a)

• In Gamany, 'Beitelskirch" how the German press to call the two conglomerates, have divided the TV market among each Other in a cosy duopoly (Pitz«, 2000).

• On the one side is Bertelsmann With major im.estments in book magazine records, and music publishing broadcasting_ on-line senices, and otlrr alhed entertainment and information products_ It owns book Clubs, Grune*Jahr, the German publisher of such titles as Stern and GEO and Bantam Doubleday Dell, which is the second largest trade publisher in the United States. It also has major investments in the music industry, handled by Bertelsmann Music Group (B.MG) Entertainment, which is also owner of the labels Arista and Ariola and the second largest record club operator in the USA. Bertelsmann is ouner of RTL, Gamany's most successfill and profitable commercial chamlelz uhich several spin off chamlels (RTL 2, Super RTL, and Vox) and has established itself as a major player in production_ Apart from that the company holds a 50 0 stake in the Intemet provider America Online (AOL) and has joint walt-ures u.ith AOL Europe and Lycos Europe (Mbcnet, 2001). Besides: it operates the e-comrnerce companies bol.com and barnesandnoble.com_ At the momem the firm employs 76.000 people in 58 countries (@mey: 2001).

• On the Other side is the KirchGruppe, which is Gamany's biggest TV family (Ott- 2000b) Leo Kirch Who is the ou.ner of KirchGruppe runs the ProSiebenSat.1 Media AG, its channels Pro Sieben, Sat.l (togeffer With Berlusconi), Kabel I, N24 and Deutsches Sport Fernsehen (DSF) It also includes holdings in the Spanish Tele&ision Company Telecino and in ffle Italian enterprise Mediaset. In the pay-TV sector Kirch has got a monopoly in Gamany uith Premiere World (together "ith Murdoch). Ihe company is Gamany's leading distnbutor of film and telewision programmes and its subsidiary Beta Film represents the largest non-Ame1ican licensing company on the intemational market The sports-rigHs agencies held by the KirchGruppe rank among the leading European players and rights of e_g_ the Football World Cups in 2002 and 2006 and the Gaman national football league_ Furthennore it holds shares in Axel Springer Verlag, uh_ich publishes among others Gennany's best selling tabloid Bild Zeitung and the newspaper Die Welt (KirchGruppe, 2001).

• Other players worth mentioning on the TV market are only the public broadcasters ZDF, ARD, its local channels, and the culture channels Phoenix and Arte The Gaman media regulatoß have ahnost Said "good bye" to the prevention of monopolies and the concentration of power in the media sector_ The have always been anended in the •vvay that tlr neu-constellations arranged by the companies were legal (Pitz«, 2000).

• This treatrnent of the legislation stands in support of Andrew Marr's opinion_ He stresses that should not assume that govemments would be alanned by tlr emergence of the media/entertaimnent/commerce super company_ In some •vvays, politicians would mce ülem for making life simpler': he argues, because 'they would be easier to cut deals With and their products Mould be sanitised and their political would be predictable' (Marr, 2000). In addition to that the media critic McChesney gave two examples on a conference in Berlin in 2000 He stated that Rupert Murdoch was willing to structure the editorial work of his TV-channels in the the Chinese govermnent would not bar him from getting irno the market And, McChesney added that the programme of CNN and .'VßNBC about the last American election would have gone With every totalitarian system because the election got coverage in the media only through üle commercials of ffle candidates (@schu, 2000). McChesney states in his book 'Rich media- Poor Democracy" that television is in danger to shrink to an ' 'infomerciaV'- a mixture between information and commerce_ He argues that a third of the sociew in America phys no role anymore in the considerations of üle media entaprises because of their too Iow spending pou•er CvrcChesney, 1999). This situation is not unmce the one we find in Europe

• Two big blocs are each Other in Europe and betu.een these tua TV-cong10merates around Kirch and Bertelsmann is only little space lef medium-sized and small television providers and production companies_ It is now ahnost impossible to surviR in ülis sector unless one merges With one of ffle blocs (Ott, 2000a) Therefore the media landscape get still more homogeneous and in åLture üle audience will have to pay more and more watching their programmes_ A development into this direction can a_lready IE seen today by looking at tlr dealing uith the for the World Cups 2002 and 2006 (Kirch oums the broadcasting rights and plans to sell them to the highest bidder)_ Because great competition is not existing anymore fres can be increased as long as people are willing to pay_ Information and entatainment are not accessible anymore in the way we are used to it. Broadcasting only the programmes uhich are attracting the majoriw of the viewers, "ill diminish diveßiw in the media_

• In additicu the media exerts povver and control on of opinion in tenns of specific market forces: by considering What content and meanings will be saleable, in •,iew of the cost of production, level of competition and cost of content; and in terms of the amount of access the audience has to the medim 'Media professionals Who are institutionalized by the norms of the media and by the universities most of them uent to, control items get u.hat amount of coverage, "ith What placement and "ith What repetition across time and "ith What intapretations' (Lye 1998). By mea_m of monopolies on a global level the possibility of an objective fcnmation of opinion is under serious threat_ Van Mien the EU Commissioner of Competitiow states that 'companies are becoming so powerffl that if you touch them it becomes a state Case' 0998). McChesney asselts that the deregulation of the American media market has reduced and worsened the diversity of programmes and has contributed to a depoliticization of the society (@schw 2000). Robinson goes even finther in ffe article 'Globalisation: nine theses on Our epoch"_ He claims:

• 'Wiffl the world's resources controlled by a few hundred global corporations, the life blood and tlr very åte of humaniw is in the hands of transnational capital, uhich holds the povver to make life and death decisions millions of human beings Such tremendous concentrations of economic power lead to tremendous concentrations of political power globally_ becomes meanmgless Any discussion of 'democracy- under such conditions (Robinson: 1996: 20)

• He maintains that With üle current system of polyarchy the gap between poor and rich is widening uithin each courfry (ibid. 21) because globalisation the working conditions Companies beher they compete in a global emiromnent and must implement policies to reflect this and by means of that 'effclency is becoming tlr sole imperative' for organisations (Jarnes, 1999: 71). Competitiveness is promoted as a good ffling for all and a 'win-uin' situation (Rinehart 1995). It is used by capital to justify their actions fflat cause detriment to offlers, such as opposing unions, reducing wages, decreasing job securiw and offering feuer employment opportunities ßinehart: 1995: 15-20).

• Another notewotthy• aspect of globalisation is the homogenization Impact it has on cultuml diversiö' O(ing, 1991: 28). By looking at Our case Study it can be seen how the conglomerates systematically decrease competition and by means of that varieb'_

• The KirchGruppe has developed a decoder to receiR the digital television signalz uhich is called d-box.The German government now- has decided to change the tele&ision and radio distribution completely from analogue to digital until 2010 Citzer: 2000). Since the d-box is the indusüy standard for digital TV in Germany evay TW-provider Null have to go tlr d-box With its content on the way to the audience There is the danger that Kirch puts the concurrence at a disadvantage and has the possibility to dictate the pnzes for indusüy and consumer_ Deutsche Telekom, which still cortrols the distribution of all tlr programmmg on its nation-wide Cable network is working together wiül Kirch to lead Germany into the digital åuture_ That is Why Van Mien sees 'enormous competition problems could arise in the German TV market and — because of the Telekom-s palticlpation — also the Cable market- (Schoen, 1998). Already today Kirch has a monopoly position on the German pay TV market His Premiere World is the only digital plafform for pay TV and fflus he is able to dictate ffle conditions for Other broadcasters' enüy into the market

• The transition from the analogue to the digital technique will give him even more povver and it remains questionable how persons Who receive income support and institutions like schools, universities and libraries will be able to Cope With the abandonment of a complete, common Spread system (Pitzer, 2000) It gets clear that the change from analogue to digital is not only about radio and TV_ What is even more important is the ülat ffle owners of the digital netM.01k haR control over e-mail and online contem as Mell.

• 'The convergence of hiternet, TV, and print creates a global market in which the big conglomerates are mling This has been demonstrated by the last mega-mergers of AOL Time Warner and Vivendi With Universal. commissions can cut üle resulting media povver only on ffle fringe Citzer, 2000). The global conglomerates are almost independent from national laws and nation states loose their power to formulate cultuml policy_ Ihe effect of this on culture is that tlr free market Mill be regulator of cultural products (more than ever before)_ The culture we will get and already have today therefore emerges a very contested ten-aim By looking at the TV programmes around the world one can find exarnples of such contested, McDonaldized culture_ Almost every,vhere one can watch Big Brother Oorway, Poland, Germany, Denmark USA, Englanck Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland: Italy, Spain, Sweden and Portugal), Who wants to a millionaire? (runs in 23 countries and already 77 countries in total have b0LÜ the licence): Emergency Room, Ally McBeal, talk shows å la Jerry Springer and so on

• The mowie and telewision industry builds upon the concept of 'predictability', which is one of the fir dominant themes George Riüer outlines within McDonaldization. Ihe spin off safes in programming tlr success of authors mce John Grisham or üle Harry Potter character represent the imponance of predictabi1iW_ 'We get O follow Our characteß and the publishers and producers can be assured of a predictable profit' (Keel, 1999). The theme of 'calculabllity' plays an impoltant role on the TV market as well_ Ritzer describes üle negative effect this can have on cLdture_ He states that,

• [Calculability] im.olves an emphasis on ülings that can be calculated, countd quantified Quantification refers to a tendency to emphasize quantity rather than qualib'_ This leads to a sense fflat quality is equal to certain, usually (but not ahvays) large quantities of frings_ (Ritzer, 1994: 142)

• Global cultural distribution netu.orks Bertelsmann and KirchGruppe Spread their cultural products by means of Riticaland horizontal integrated enterprises_ Production distribution of films Stay in one firm which ouns book and music publishers, nevvspapers and magazines, TV-channels and production companies and which is able to cmss-promote its products wia its whole media-network_ Events such as the Gulf war, social trends and fashions, and cultural phenomena such as Eminem, music: and popular Hollywood films constitute a 'global popular' C(ellner, 1995). This 'increasing interconnectedness in the world is a threat to cultural di•v-ersiw, or at least to catain cultural variations' (Hannerz: 1996 56).

• For Hannen on the one side means abor all this: a global in uhich particular ideas and practlces Spread throughout the world, mostly from the centers of the uest_ pushing Other alternatives out of existence' (1996_ 24).

• On the Other Side, he points out that 'globalization need not be a matter only of far-reaching or complete homogenization; the increasing interconnectedness of the world also results in some cultural gain' (Hannerz: 1999: 66). Hannerz finds the scenario of global homogenization questionable_ He argues,

• If uze look at the cultures around us: I think we can discem that much of their diversity is not merely old diversior in decline: but new diversiw that the global ecunene has (Hannerz: 1996: 64)

• We also har to take into account that the global popular culture operates through the multiplication of different products: serv-ices, and spectacles: targeted at specific audiences_ Consumer and media indusüies are becoming more and more differentiated and are segmenting their customers and audiences into more categories_ hl many cases: 'this im,oh.e.s the simulation of minor differences of and sorle as but it also invohes a proliferation of a more highly differentiated culture and socieor in terms of an ever-expanding variety and diversity of cultuml altefacts: products, and services- (Kellner, 2001).

• To summarize: one can say that globalisation decreases cultural diversi5': 'the expansion of the media of not least the development of global TV has made people all over the world more conscious of Other Places and of the -world as a "hole: (Robertson: 1992: 184). 'Evaybody almost every-,vhere, is more than ever before aware of many possible lives- Clannerz_ 1996: 101) and of the many possible problems conceming our planet hl addition global capitalism both promotes and is conditioned by cultural homogeneib,• and cultural heterogeneib'_ 'Ihe pmduction and consolidation of difference and vanety is an essential ingredient of contemporary capitalism' (Rob-atson, 1992: 173). Global cultures permeate local ones and new configuratlons emerge that synthesize both Poles: providing contradictory forces of colonization and resistance, global homogenization and new local hybrid forms and identities (Kellner, 2001).

• References

• @mey (2001) Kehravende bei Bertelsmann, Flankfiuter Allgemeine Zeitung [online] Available: contentasp&doc={8 10/03/01].

• @schu (2000) Reiche Medien- Arme Demokratie, Flankfiuter Allgemeine Zeitung [online] Available: contentasp&doc={ _ _ _ ['visited 10/03/011

• Eva (1989) Report: Globalization and Finland, [online]. Al.ailable: http"/w"w_evafi/englishjulkaisut/global/lukul _htrn [visited 05/03/01].

• Hannerz: U. (1996) Transnational connections, London: Routledge

• Ikeda_ S. (1996) World Production, Ihe Age of Transition. Traiectorv ofthe World System 1945-2025 T _ K _ Hopkins and L Wallerstein et London: Zed Books_

• James: D. (1999) 'Globalisation: Australia-s second chance", Business Review Weekly, 24 September, pp. 68-75

• Keel_ R. (1999) The McDonaldization of Society: An Introduction to Socioloe, [online] Available: htw//wvvw• [visited 10/02/01].

• Kellner: D (2001) Globalization and the Postmodern Turn, [online]. Axailable: http-]/wvvv_gseis_uc1a_edWcourses/ed253a/dk/GLOBPMhtm [visited 08/03/01].

• King A. D. (1991) Culture Globalization and the World- System, London. Macm_ülan

• KirchGmppe (2001): [online]. Awailable: htw//v.-u•.v tauweb_kirchgruppe 05/03/01].

• Lye, J. (1998) "310 controls the media and their meanings?, [online]. Axailable: [visited 10/02/01].

• Marr, A. (2000) Is thefuture big ? , The Observer [online] Avnilable_ htw//v.-u•.v [visited 04/02/011

• Mbcnet (2001), Bertelsmann A G, [online]. Avallable [visited 28/02/01].

• McChesney, R. W (1999) Rich media-Poor democracy, communicationpolitics in dubious times, Urbana: Universib' of Illinois Press.

• Ott, K. (2000a) Die neue Ubersichtlichkeit in Europas Fernsehen, Süddeutsche Zelt-ung 8 April, p. 31.

• Ott, K. (2000b) Die Familie bin ich, Süddeutsche Zelt-ung 29 June, p_24_

• Pitzer, S. (2000) Monopoly der Giganten, Süddeutsche Zelt-ung 30 October, p_7_

• Rinehart- I (1995) alle ideology of competiti•v-eness": Monthly Review, 47 pp. 14-23 _

• Ritzer, G. (1993) The McDonaldization of Society, Newbury Park: Ca. Pine Forge Press.

• Ritrr, G. (1994) Sociological Beginnings: On the Origins of key Ideas in Sociologv, New York: McGraw-H1

• Robertson: R (1992) Globalization: Social Theory and Global Culture, London: Sage Publications_

• Robinson: W _ L (1996) Globalisation: nine theses on our epoch, Race and Class: 382

• Schoen: G. (1998) Germany 's Digital TV: The Calm Before and Uter The Storm, _Yidgg_Agg International VOL 18: N03

• Stopford, J. M and J. H. Dunning (1983) Multinationals: Company Performance and Global Trends, London: Macm_ülan

• Van Miert, K. (1998) Determined to Prove that No One Is Above the Law, [online] _ Axailable: http-J,ftwuw_time.com/time"magazine/1998/int980706'business_profi1e determi41 _html 28/0201].

• Wallastein, I. (1995) „4fter Liberalism New York: The New Press.

Zielsetzung und Themenschwerpunkte

Der Text untersucht die kulturellen Auswirkungen der Globalisierung anhand von zwei deutschen Medienkonzernen, der KirchGruppe und Bertelsmann AG. Der Fokus liegt dabei auf der Analyse der Medienlandschaft in Deutschland und Europa sowie auf der Frage, inwiefern die Globalisierung zu einer Homogenisierung der Kultur führt.

• Analyse der Medienlandschaft in Deutschland und Europa im Kontext der Globalisierung

• Kulturelle Auswirkungen der Globalisierung auf die Medienbranche

• Die Rolle von Medienkonzernen bei der Verbreitung von Kulturprodukten

• Die Frage der Homogenisierung und Diversifizierung der Kultur durch Globalisierung

• Die Bedeutung von Medienmonopolie und der Einfluss auf die Meinungsbildung

Zusammenfassung der Kapitel

• Der Text beginnt mit einer Einleitung, die die Globalisierung als einen "sehr langen, ungleichmäßigen Prozess" beschreibt, der die Weltwirtschaft und das System der souveränen Staaten grundlegend verändert hat. Der Einfluss transnationaler Unternehmen, insbesondere aus Nordamerika, auf die globale Kultur wird hervorgehoben, wobei die McDonaldisierung als Beispiel für die Rationalisierung und Homogenisierung des Alltagslebens genannt wird.

• Im zweiten Teil des Textes werden die beiden deutschen Medienkonzerne KirchGruppe und Bertelsmann AG als Fallbeispiele für die kulturellen Auswirkungen der Globalisierung vorgestellt. Die beiden Unternehmen dominieren den deutschen Fernsehmarkt und haben auch in anderen europäischen Ländern sowie in den USA eine starke Präsenz. Der Text beschreibt die verschiedenen Bereiche, in denen die beiden Konzerne aktiv sind, wie z.B. Buch-, Musik- und Fernsehproduktion, sowie ihre strategischen Partnerschaften und Fusionen.

• Der dritte Teil des Textes analysiert die Folgen der Medienkonzentration für die Meinungsbildung und die kulturelle Vielfalt. Der Autor argumentiert, dass die Dominanz von wenigen großen Unternehmen die Medienlandschaft homogenisiert und die Möglichkeit einer objektiven Meinungsbildung gefährdet. Die Deregulierung des Medienmarktes und die zunehmende Bedeutung der Medien für die politische Agenda werden als weitere problematische Entwicklungen betrachtet.

• Der vierte Teil des Textes befasst sich mit den Auswirkungen der Digitalisierung auf die Medienbranche. Der Autor stellt die Einführung des digitalen Fernsehens in Deutschland dar und zeigt, wie die KirchGruppe durch den Besitz des d-box-Decoders eine Monopolstellung auf dem Pay-TV-Markt erlangt hat. Die Digitalisierung wird als ein weiterer Faktor für die Homogenisierung der Medienlandschaft und die zunehmende Kontrolle von wenigen Unternehmen über die Verbreitung von Informationen und Unterhaltung betrachtet.

• Der fünfte Teil des Textes analysiert die Folgen der Globalisierung für die kulturelle Vielfalt. Der Autor argumentiert, dass die Globalisierung zwar zu einer stärkeren Vernetzung der Kulturen führt, aber auch zu einer Homogenisierung durch die Verbreitung von "global popular" Produkten und Dienstleistungen. Die Rolle von Medienkonzernen bei der Verbreitung von "McDonaldized culture" und die Bedeutung von "predictability" und "calculability" in der Unterhaltungsindustrie werden kritisch betrachtet.

Schlüsselwörter

Die Schlüsselwörter und Schwerpunktthemen des Textes umfassen die Globalisierung, die Medienlandschaft, die Medienkonzentration, die kulturelle Homogenisierung, die McDonaldisierung, die Meinungsbildung, die Digitalisierung, die Medienmonopole, die kulturelle Vielfalt und die Auswirkungen der Globalisierung auf die Kultur.

• Universidad: University of Leeds (Department for Communication and Cultural Studies)
• Curso: Communication & Cultural Studies
• Calificación: 1 (A)
• Autor: Florian Mayer (Autor)
• Año de publicación: 2001
• Páginas: 10
• No. de catálogo: V9034
• ISBN (Ebook): 9783638158466
• ISBN (Libro): 9783638815772
• Idioma: Inglés
• Etiqueta: Globalisierung, Homogenisierung, Medien, Kulturimperialismus, globalization, media, cultural imperialism