Page 186 - Critical Political Economy of the Media

Globalisation, transnationalisation, culture 165

Western TNMCs have regionalised and localised their content, with many
Southern media organisations involved in this production and cultural glocali-
sation. Against tendencies to valorise the rise of non-Western media, Thussu
(2007: 11) cautions this ‘may reflect a refiguring of hegemony in more complex
ways’.A ‘global popular’ is being created with ‘media content and services being
tailored to specific cultural consumers not so much because of any particular
regard for national cultures but as a commercial imperative’ (Thussu 2007: 21).
Much of the contra-flow highlighted in accounts of increased cultural diversity is
commercial and interlocks into a global corporate system. The diversity of multiple
flows advanced within cultural globalisation masks the global extension of a
commercial system. This does not produce homogenisation of cultural output;
commercial dynamics respond to a diversity of local tastes and interests. However, it
does mean that there is sameness arising from the commercial dynamics towards
privileging entertainment and other content that does not mount sustained
challenges to governing interests and values.

The neglect of economic power

Cultural globalisation theory conceives globalisation as a decentred process. In
doing so it ‘[f]ails to capture the agency of large profit making corporations
in affecting, but not completely determining the new cultural world order’
(Hesmondhalgh 2007: 238). It reflects what Curran describes as a ‘blind spot’ in
cultural globalisation theory, a reluctance to critically address economic power
(Curran 2002: 174). Instead we must begin with an analysis of corporate capitalism.
The critical discourse of cultural imperialism has been challenged for its
inadequate account of cultural processes (how culture makes us, individually and
collectively, and how we make use of culture). Its continuing relevance is in
foregrounding questions of inequalities in the distribution of cultural resources
and the organisation of cultural markets. It is primarily concerned with cultural
resources: who has access to the resources to produce, circulate, consume and use
cultural forms (Hardy 2008)? Yet, cultural imperialism has always been an
‘evocative metaphor’ (Sreberny-Mohammadi 1997: 49) rather than a distinct
analytical concept and cumulative critiques have prompted efforts to revise and
reformulate the problem.

From American cultural imperialism to transnational
corporate domination

Throughout the twentieth century, especially after Europe was ravaged by two
world wars, American industries grew to become the dominant cultural exporters.
The variety of factors explaining American cultural dominance makes the case
for a synthesis of strictly political economic and broader cultural explanations.
We must account for both the push and pull of American culture (Gitlin 2002;
Morley and Robins 1995), for the influences that honed cultural forms and formats