The Debate of Cultural Imperialism

Image source

INITIALLY the expansion of media companies is usually in line with the history of imperialism. Many examples of the high cost requirements, one-way news flow, information and entertainment coming from western countries that spread throughout the world.   

From this discussion the most important is that more new 'regional regions' are also beginning to exist. Often depends on the breadth of imperialist languages

like Spanish, English, French, and even Arabic. This can be seen from the production of important products from Mexico and Brazil that produce telenovela or soap opera that apparently sold outside Latin America like in Europe and Asia. Especially the country has a common Portuguese and Spanish language.   

To explain theoretically we can use the explanations of economic politics. Some theorists such as Armand and Michele Mattelart, Janet Wasko, Tobby Miller, and especially Herbert Schiller stated that the globalization of communication continues to grow rapidly. This has happened since the end of the second world war that started from the commercial interests of big companies based in the United States, especially those engaged in oil and weaponry.   

Not only that it is often related to the political and military interests of the United States itself who is eager to take over the role of Britain, France, the Netherlands and other old imperialist countries. So it is not a big leap to say that the power of American media is in the form of cultural imperialism and the media.   

Traditionally, local culture could have been destroyed by this process. The new form of culture is sharpened by the dependence and reflection of the old forms of power of old imperialist relationships.   

Hebert Schiller is one of the best known to introduce the term cultural imperialism. He argues that the dominance of US advertising driven by commercial media is driven not only by the high-cost broadcasting model but also because of the spread of technology around the world. Includes the appeal of its non-commercial culture but is also driven by a desire to instill American-style consumerism to the people who open the door to it. Many criticize this approach by Schiller. 

• He took the case in the 1950s and 1960s when the United States economy was so dominating the global system that it looked like it could not be replaced by anyone. Despite the brutal fighting in Vietnam. The last theorists reasoned was not sufficient enough to explain the changes after the 1945s era, nor did they consider the significance and existence of other systems such as the beliefs and touch of nationalism.   
• The more difficult to accept Schiller's opinion is to use his theory after the 1990s and beyond. The world changed after the erosion of ownership of companies originally owned by US businessmen, for example Sony from Japan who bought Columbia and Tristar in 1989. Then Bertlesmann bought RCA and Random House publishers, Rupert Murdoch of Australia gave 20th Century Fox in 1986; French company Vivendi bought Universal Studios in 2000 which was originally owned by the Canadian Seagram. We will also find a diminishing number after the Sept. 11 attacks of 2001.   
• Schiller's final opinion that American cultural imperialism will be replaced by a form of dominance of transnational corporate culture. Critics argue that although this form is not sufficient to describe a complex stream, the network and the use of media products in the contemporary world.   
• Miller (2001) argues that little is achieved by the imperialist distribution system that has been established, except for what they call the new international division of labor culture, including in the labor practices within production itself. The above operationalization is closely watched in terms of financing, which means that employment is less crucial than when firms can pay their workers at a low salary. Better payment and post-production decisions are mostly around California and Canada, although employees are not satisfied with the policy.   
• The assumption that cultural imperialism is just a fantasy. Prior to the arrival of US media, third world countries still enjoyed the golden periods in which the original traditions and cultural heritage had not been tainted by outside influences. Critics argue that this can weaken the protection of a country. It is also often described as a period of cultural glory whose traditions and cultural heritage have not been fouled by the long and brutal process of cultural conflict with the intervention of the United States, including hundreds of years of colonialism by European nations.
• Just as the United States focuses on mastering and enjoying the hybridity of wealth, a part of the established global-local culture, as well as the United States as a painful outcome of a modernization process.   

Thus are some important notes about cultural imperialism that come from the west through mass media and internet content products. This is all due to globalization. What I write here is a personal opinion as a lecturer of Communication Studies. Hopefully pleased!  

by @dsatria

Reference
~ Media Massa dan Imperialisme Kultural
~ Globalisasi Media: Pusaran Imperialisme Budaya di Indonesia