Globalisation and Popular Culture (AQA A-Level Sociology): Revision Notes
Globalisation and Popular Culture
Introduction
The worldwide reach of media has transformed how we understand culture and identity. Globalisation refers to the increasing interconnectedness of societies through media, technology, and cultural exchange. This process has fundamentally changed how popular culture is produced, distributed, and consumed across the globe.
Understanding globalisation's impact on popular culture is essential for comprehending how modern media shapes our daily lives and cultural identities in an interconnected world.
Media culture as popular culture
The high versus low culture debate
Culture has traditionally been divided into high culture (considered refined and beneficial for society) and low culture (seen as less sophisticated). However, this division represents an elitist perspective that many scholars now challenge.
Two competing theories explain how culture operates:
Mass culture theory suggests that media companies create content for passive audiences who simply consume what they are given. This approach views audiences as having little control over cultural production.
Popular culture theory argues that audiences actively shape their cultural experiences. Rather than being passive recipients, people can influence and create their own cultural meanings, making this approach more empowering than mass culture theory.
The key difference between these theories lies in audience agency: mass culture theory sees audiences as passive consumers, while popular culture theory recognises them as active participants who shape their own cultural experiences.
The dumbing down debate
A significant controversy exists around whether media content is becoming less intellectually demanding. The dumbing down argument claims that media organisations simplify their content to appeal to the widest possible audience, avoiding complex or challenging material.
Evidence supporting this view includes:
- News programmes containing more celebrity gossip and sensational stories than previously
- Popular entertainers like Katherine Jenkins and Il Divo making classical music more accessible but potentially less sophisticated
- The replacement of challenging cultural content with more commercially viable alternatives
However, several counterarguments challenge this perspective:
Counterarguments to the Dumbing Down Theory:
Historical context: Critics have worried about cultural decline since the 1860s, when commentators like Matthew Arnold feared that refined culture was under threat, suggesting this concern is not new.
Audience choice: Pluralist theorists argue that audiences receive the media content they actively choose, meaning any perceived decline in quality reflects consumer preferences rather than media manipulation.
Elitist assumptions: Theorist Frank Furedi (2004) contends that deliberately simplifying cultural content is itself an elitist practice, as it assumes ordinary people cannot understand complex material.
The media as a global industry
Media concentration and globalisation
Recent decades have witnessed unprecedented concentration of media ownership, with a small number of large corporations controlling the global media market. This concentration has enabled media globalisation on a massive scale.
Devereux (2003) observes that most major media corporations are based in Western countries, particularly the United States, giving Western societies disproportionate influence over global media content.
Modern technology has accelerated this process:
- Commercial satellite and cable television services can broadcast content worldwide
- Global advertising campaigns promote international consumption of products and brands
- Digital technologies enable instant global distribution of media content
The global village concept
McLuhan (1962) introduced the concept of the 'global village', suggesting that new communication technologies bring people together regardless of geographical distance. He argued that we can now interact with our neighbours while simultaneously connecting with people on the opposite side of the world.
McLuhan's 'global village' concept has become increasingly relevant as we consume news and entertainment from multiple countries simultaneously, use social media platforms for instant global communication, and rely on digital technologies like email and blogs that exemplify his original vision.
However, some sociologists argue that governments in Europe and the United States have deregulated their media industries, allowing capitalist corporations to establish global media networks that can influence culture on an international scale.
The internet's impact on global culture
Expanding cultural access
Media globalisation now exposes audiences to cultural and social commentary from numerous countries, helping people understand different perspectives and develop what some scholars call global culture.
Matos (2012) argues that before new media technologies emerged in the 1990s, most media focused on national issues. Today's media landscape has a much more international perspective, with the internet enabling newspapers and broadcasters to cover global events that affect everyone.
Creating global communities
The internet has revolutionised global communication by making it easier for people to create and share their own media content. This development allows individuals to share their cultural experiences and values with others worldwide, without relying on traditional media outlets for content creation.
Digital divides and cultural influence
However, new media technologies may also create divisions within the supposed global village. People with better access to internet services and digital literacy will have greater advantages than those with limited connectivity.
Countries with superior communications infrastructure will likely exert stronger cultural influence than nations with less developed internet connectivity, potentially creating new forms of global inequality and digital divides.
Cultural imperialism versus cultural hybridisation
Cultural imperialism theory
Some scholars argue that media globalisation represents cultural imperialism, where Western culture dominates and potentially harms other national cultures. This perspective suggests that Western media products create markets for Western consumer goods while undermining local cultural traditions.
McBride (1980) identified cultural imperialism as occurring when Western media content flows into less economically developed regions, potentially changing local cultures and creating demand for Western products.
Evidence supporting this theory includes:
- People worldwide sharing similar consumption patterns due to global advertising from companies like Disney, Sony, and Virgin
- The internet enabling national boundaries to become less relevant for advertising to global audiences
- Klein (2000) argues this leads to cultural homogenisation, making everyone's culture increasingly similar
Some critics claim that globalisation specifically promotes American cultural values, with American culture being copied worldwide. Additionally, four major global news agencies that media outlets use as sources have been accused of spreading Western cultural perspectives through their reporting.
Cultural hybridisation theory
Since the 1990s, alternative perspectives have emerged suggesting that globalisation actually creates cultural hybridisation rather than cultural dominance. This theory proposes that local, national, and global cultures blend together to create diverse hybrid cultures worldwide.
Sreberny-Mohammadi (1996) argues that many local cultures have successfully resisted cultural imperialism. She points to the growing media industries in Asia and South America, which export cultural products back to Western countries.
Cultural Hybridisation in Practice: Brazilian Television
Brazilian television programmes are now sold to stations across North America, South America, and Europe, demonstrating how cultural content flows in multiple directions rather than just from Western to non-Western countries.
This approach suggests that culture moves in 'multidirectional flows', meaning cultural exchange occurs in multiple directions rather than simply from America to other countries. This process creates cultural diversity rather than cultural homogenisation.
Curran's critique of cultural hybridisation
Curran (2000) has challenged cultural hybridisation theory, arguing that some studies promoting cultural diversity ignore the role of economic factors. He suggests that media corporations use their economic power to influence culture and audiences, creating specific cultural preferences among consumers that companies can exploit for profit.
Matos (2012) provides an example of this critique, noting that the concept of 'exotic' cultural difference is often used by large media companies to market products. These companies advertise and sell 'exotic' products to consumers worldwide who have been exposed to multicultural influences through internet and satellite television.
Key Points to Remember:
- Popular culture theory offers a more empowering view of audiences than mass culture theory, suggesting people actively shape their cultural experiences rather than passively consuming content
- The dumbing down debate reflects ongoing tensions between commercial viability and cultural sophistication, with valid arguments on multiple sides
- Media globalisation has created unprecedented concentration of media ownership, predominantly based in Western countries
- McLuhan's global village concept from 1962 has become increasingly relevant with digital technologies enabling instant worldwide communication
- Cultural imperialism and cultural hybridisation represent competing explanations for how globalisation affects culture, with evidence supporting both perspectives