Cultural Imperialism

Manifestations of cultural imperialism by America.

For many centuries, culture has been viewed as the set of common ideas on which a society or group rest on. Nevertheless, there is a growing belief that the spread of culture through mass media is unbalanced and thus has led to the term cultural imperialism being applied in society. Cultural imperialism can be defined as ‘the use of political and economic power to exalt and spread the values and habits of a foreign culture at the expense of a native culture.'

The mass media is one of the principal sources of wealth and power for U.S. capital as it extends its communication networks throughout the world. An increasing percentage of the richest North Americans derive their wealth from the mass media. There are over 500 media companies in America, but through many integrations there are only 6 major media institutions and they dominate nearly 98% of the market. The media monopoly seen here is fundamentally anti-democratic in its concentration of media powers.

U.S cultural imperialism has two major goals, one economic and the other political. The export of entertainment is one of the most important sources of capital accumulation and global profits displacing the manufacturing sector. In the political sphere, cultural imperialism plays a major role in dissociating people from their cultural roots and traditions of solidarity, replacing them with media created needs which change with every publicity campaign.

Another manifestation of America’s cultural imperialism is shown in everyday ‘news’. Their strategy is to de-sensitize the public; to make mass murder by the Western states routined and acceptable activities. I see mass bombings in Iraq being presented in the form of video games which my brother plays on his Xbox. By trivializing crimes against humanity, the public is desensitized from its traditional belief that human suffering is wrong. By emphasizing the modernity of new techniques of warfare, the mass media glorify existing elite power – the techno-warfare of the West. Cultural imperialism today includes “news” reports in which the weapons of mass destruction are presented with human attributes while the victims in the Third World are faceless “aggressors- terrorists”. So as anybody can see, mass media can be exploited to the aims of its users to meet their aims.


Internet bringing a new era of American imperialism.

As the internet was invented in the early 1990s by American scientists, some people suggest that it would just become another tool for America to impose its products over the world.

The public is exploring the issue that Internet becomes an American product of capitalism; America is taking the lead in the construction of a ‘Global Information Infrastructure" This view highlights the perpetuation of such domination to ‘a single community world of cultural homogenization where cultural differences are erased and cultural sameness is super imposed’.

Thus the need for Internet gatekeepers to control the flow, transfer and type of media that is imported into their countries.

The term Internet gatekeepers are often seem to be associated with the role of government. Here, government becomes the internet pipeline, which attempts to determine which websites are accessible or not. A notable example is the Chinese government who has built a specific system to control the information flow on the Internet. With this system, called the Great Firewall of China, the government blocks and censors websites which are seen as harmful to the country’s values and image. In a way, it is a form of media hegemony, the media representing the views of the elites, influenced by those who hold economic and political power, supporting those who benefit themselves.

Another point of view- Limitations of Cultural Imperialism.

Every year, the number of Internet users has increased rapidly, it reached 1600 percent in 2001 compared to a decade ago. Additionally, the amount of non-Western content or non-English websites has also increased and thus, it questions the existence of cultural imperialism on the Internet in the future.

Meanwhile, with many foreign cultures on the Internet, some governments seem to have started online regulation or online censorship to ban undesirable web content. It is believed that this action will be followed by other countries, especially Asian countries, to maintain their traditional values and culture. Hence, their culture will not be negatively affected or replaced by the foreign culture.

Some might argue that the large flow of US media into Singapore is a great example of cultural imperialism, and others might beg to differ. Different theorists and scholars have provided their own interpretation of the term cultural imperialism, and depending on the writer, the term could have positive and negative meanings. As we can see cultural imperialism in another perspective, one that a society is brought into the modern world system.

In summary, based on the history of cultural imperialism and America’s invention of the Internet, the Internet is perceived as another tool of Western cultural imperialism. However for others, this is seen as a challenge to maintain and promote non-English culture to the world through cyberspace. The future of cultural imperialism itself is being questioned due to the emergence of non-English websites and restriction to undesirable internet content.


Will US’s media threaten Spore’s identity?

In a country that encompasses a good mix of East and West such as Singapore, it is undeniable that US media is prevalent. As more television shows, radio programs, movies, news channels, internet websites and magazines are being produced in the United States, the same soaring amount of products are being introduced to us locals. Reality TV shows like Singapore Idol and Don’t Forget The Lyrics are simply mimics of American shows. Despite this, however strong the influence of American media, the values and traditions of Singapore, I believe, are twice as powerful. Although US media does arguably affect and influence the general public to a certain extent, it does not threaten Singapore's national identity.

Recognizing the fact that even though there are positive aspects of importing US media into Singapore, there is also a responsibility in ensuring the stability of and reinforcing the nation's values and principles. Our government understands the importance in keeping one's nation's culture, and in an effort to enhance the country's cultural heritage, a set of values was introduced in 1988 by then Deputy Minister Mr. Goh Chok Tong. Aptly named "5 Shared Values," it covers principles such as, "Nation before community and society before self, Family as the basic unit of society, Community support and respect for the individual, Consensus, not conflict and Racial and religious harmony". As the sphere of US media seem to expand in Singapore, the general public still adhere to these values that set us apart from the rest of the nations. :)

The Media shaping public opinions

Mass media, whether by print, radio, television, or now online via the Internet, inevitably provides the raw information from which people form their basic insight of the world around them. Without the media, our 'reality' and knowledge of events would rarely extend beyond the countries in which we lived, or that which we experienced ourselves directly.

Think about it. For the vast majority of people, we really only 'know' what is happening around the world because one or two news organizations told us so. For the most part, we have no practical way of verifying everything which is presented to us by the media, and will often assume the information to be fact. The fact that we do not have direct access to much of the world means that it is out of reach, out of sight, and even out of mind. The thus mass media help us create a "trustworthy picture" of the world that is beyond our reach and direct experience.

However, even if the information is true, it still is only one perspective of the 'truth', which is that of the media organization presenting it. According to media hegemony, the press represents the views of the powerful elite, and is easily swayed by those who hold economic and political power. Or that the media will support those in ruling, the administrators and echo the views of these groups of people. For our local press, racial harmony and social security are their markers and rules due to our government that stresses both points. The limitation in this is that this myopic view of the world gives most people only a very limited, media-filtered picture of the 'truth', with little opportunity to consider alternative media perspectives which may also be true, and worth exploring.

Our individual judgments can be heavily influenced by the style and approach in which a story is presented. The presenters’ tone of voice, word selection, choice of questions, all can influence how their story is interpreted by the viewer, and the conclusions that the viewer may reach. Even the order in which the news stories are presented can make a large difference in how the viewer will perceive what is of great importance, and therefore what topics to which they should pay more attention to. That is why global news is often top priority, followed by local news, and then maybe about technology, sports and gossip. Consider, for example, the recent presidential campaign. Who decided which were the important topics for the voters to pay attention to in deciding who to vote for? Was it the individual voter, or the news media?

So in this light, the mass media becomes the gate-keeper, in many ways dictating what topics people learn about, think about, and talk about. It controls the flow of content that is coming into the country and exposed to its people. In this way, the media plays a major role in creating and shaping society's public opinion.

I believe when hearing a conflict between friends, one will be fair and hear both sides of the story and then cast their opinions. Thus we should also apply this same theory when consuming media. Freely hear both sides first, and then depend on the wisdom of citizens to decide for themselves what they believed, and which statements were true and which were false.
However, 'truth' is subjective to the person perceiving it. What is 'truth' to one person, is simply an 'opinion' to another. The media, it must be remembered, has a powerful influence on what an audience will perceive as the 'truth', especially when they repeat the same message enough times. When repeatedly broadcasting on a particular news, locals fully exposed to the media will have a higher chance of taking the same side of the media, as how the media portrayed the issue to be.

This can be illustrated by considering two of the largest media channels in America, CNN and FOX. CNN claims that they are "the most trusted name in news", and "your need to know network". At the same time, FOX claims that they are "fair and balanced." Both these stations and their slogans can easily be refuted by those “on the other side”. But for the public that depends on FOX for the daily dish of news, it IS the truth. Regardless of which of those two networks you might prefer, keep in mind that when they report on international news, they are both American perspectives, with an American bias. Consider for a moment how an Egyptian paper might report the same event that occurs in Iraq.

One man's truth can easily be another man's propaganda.

Attitudinal Barriers to Intercultural Communication

I want to highlight an important aspect of attitudinal barriers to intercultural communication, which is prejudice against other culture not similar to oneself. It is vital in a way that people clam up and refuse to even try to understand people from different cultural backgrounds. This will then lead to social problems that may escalate into something Singapore cannot risk, multi-racial problems.

Personally I feel that it is unfair for them to face this kind of ridiculous treatment because in fact, we Singaporeans are much lucky than them in terms of general well- being. They flock here because of the vicious poverty cycle that entraps their entire family, and that they also need proper food and lodgings.

Locals often view India and Bangladesh workers as dirty and smelly. Well of course, who wouldn’t if they are required to work under the hot sun? They help us do dirty, difficult and dangerous jobs, which us locals are unwilling to do. Every morning, I see the familiar faces that clean my corridors and lift landing area. Sometimes they do give us a nod out of politeness, and I greet them back too. I go Mustafa to shop, Jurong Point and Little India, and even on Sundays too! And during Chinese New Year, my dad will distribute red packets to the usual few that sweep my block area. Maybe for my family, we’re indeed more open and acceptable about foreign workers because we strongly believe it’s only a few black sheep that spoils the market.

My stand on protecting foreign workers is inclusive of china working mums, and Indonesian domestic helpers. There is a rising trend of gruesome murders, and victims highlighted are china working mums who are murdered, limbs dismembered and so on. Thus I think the government must set up more regulations to protect our foreign counterparts, so that Singapore can maintain its image as a safe country. What makes Singapore safe if it does not seem the case for people like Huang Na and Liu Hong Mei, both China PRs who dominated the news highlights last year.

We as Singaporeans being more educated should keep an open mind and look for the best solutions, instead of being angry and threatening to bring up this issue in the next government elections. The government can built more public toilets for them so that they will refrain peeing in public and dirtying our estates. I believe a committee should be set up to observe and address the concerns of the residents and propose a counter solution or proper mitigation measures to allow a less hostile "settling in". I would actually recommend having all of them sited in centralised estates, say 2 or 3 major locations so that we are better able to keep track of them and these 2 or 3 locations which are located in less populated areas would allow less problems to occur too.