VOL-II, ISUUE-I (Spring 2009)

CULTURAL IMPERIALISM FROM CORE TO THE PERIPHERY VIA INTERNET

Mirza Jan (PhD)

ABSTRACT

This empirical study discusses cultural imperialism from Core to the Periphery counties via Internet. The Internet has been one of the most rapidly adopted communication technologies. This paper explains both the flow of media products and information to know the structural differences between the Internet and traditional forms of mass media. New communication technology such as the Internet offers a chance to develop and refine theories of mass communication through its very nature. This paper highlights Internet as truly a global phenomenon .

INTRODUCTION

Imperialism affects our culture and everything we do. Cultural imperialism is the practical aspect of social, cognitive level of the people and, brings changes into the social system of a society. Media prepare the stage of shifting and provide physical and non-physical materials where we put ourselves into that shelf what it means to be. This covers all areas of life from personal relationships to across relationships. Culture is considered as a frame of reference. Whatever you do with your native cultures it would broaden the level of thinking regarding other cultures. Cultural imperialism is just like a genetic evolution. Internet is most creative mass medium which gets the attention of the younger, users.

Internet plays an important role in almost all aspects of daily life. The effect of Internet is obvious and how we virtually mediate our relationships with various social group and institutions.  Internet more often make closer our friends to us. We believe in social relations and Internet fulfills the requirement. Imperialism is a theory which tells us that smaller country loses their identity. Internet is considered an explosion knowledge economy. Its application has vibrated all the areas of knowledge.

LITERATURE REVIEW

The existing literature, review the cultural imperialism of Internet and the concepts of the additional literature in the areas of Internet technology to be explored. The literature review will establish hypotheses to guide this exploratory study of Internet technologies available in the University and its domination on periphery countries.

The Internet has been one of the most rapidly adopted communication technologies. The Internet is consuming an average of 150,685 new users per day, or 1.74 per second. By 2000, 250 million people will have access to the Internet (Killen & Associates, 1996). More specifically, this paper aims to question the charge of "cultural imperialism on the Internet" in the globalizing media environments.

One of the well-fitted theoretical perspectives applied to studying the effects of new electronic media is the cultural imperialism argument because of the problem of unequal flow of media content has been one of the major international issues. Individuals and governments around the globe have expressed concern regarding the influence of Western cultural products on both local and national cultures (Herschlag, 1996). Often expressed in the term of "cultural imperialism," this concern has become a topic of debate in not only scholarly circles, but in economic, legal and legislative arenas as   Cultural Imperialism Argument.

IMBALANCE BETWEEN CORE AND PERIPHERY COUNTRIES

Scholars, such as Schiller (1981) and Hamelink(1990), have maintained that despite the advent of our current information society, information itself and its technology have remained in the hands of the economic elite. This criticism is most commonly expressed in terms of “Core and Periphery Theory” which maintains that global imbalances exist between "core" (i.e., rich and industrialized nations of the First World) and "periphery" nations (i.e., poorer and rural countries of the Third World), in both the flow of media products and information.

In this view, information and its technology are controlled by the core nations, and its flow is seen as uni-directional from the core to the periphery, with little opportunity for peripheral nations to participate in the process (Hamelink, 1990).  To explore the globalization phenomenon and charges of cultural imperialism, it is important to draw together results and some of the basic assumptions and areas for criticism in the cultural imperialism argument - in terms of media power and its role in society.

CULTURAL IMPERIALISM

In regard to media power, the cultural imperialism argument offers an almost omnipotent view of the media that cannot be thoroughly justified. What it offers in terms of the media's power to affect cultural change is a dominance and transmission-based model, which seems implausible in the pluralistic and ever-expanding mediascape (Sims, 1995).  However, what makes sense in regard to certain aspects of the debate such as the conglomeration of ownership and possibly formatted content, doesn't apply in terms of new media technology, the audience and effects. While one-way flow may be evident in terms of information flows on an information theory quantitative estimate, the reality is that as media technology and economies become more intertwined, this seemingly one-way flow reverses itself into a two-way flow in which what sells abroad influences what Americans see at home (McQuail, 1994).

Cultural imperialism also makes a definite assumption of the media's role in and its influence on society. What emerges is a view of media and technology that is highly deterministic and devalues the role and importance of the cultural aspects of this argument ( Ferguson , 1992).   What then must the imperialist argument make of the media message? Sepstrup(1989) answers this question by reminding us that the path from transmission to cultural consequence is much more complicated in the international sphere. Even assuming the homogenization of media messages due to concentrated ownership or Western bias, cultural imperialism denies the power of the audience to interpretation of messages, contexts or to form its own meanings from the message (Smith, 1990). Elaborating on this idea, Straubhaar(1991) re-asserts the concepts of Active Audience Theory and a preference among cultures to view regional or national media products.  Straubhaar(1991) draws on the past research and predictions of Pool (1977) and Read(1976) that local cultural producers would eventually begin to compete with American products, and as these productions increase and become more readily available, audiences would prefer regional or national products to international products.

Two trends in research are used by Straubhaar to support Pool's predictions: 1) uses and gratification research in terms of its selectivity and 2) the active participation in terms of interpreting media content.  In arguing the active audience perspective, Straubhaar quotes Fiske(1987) who said, "These audiences actively read television in order to produce from it meanings that connect with their social experience."  Another possible criticism for the cultural imperialism argument lies in its equation of culture with consumerism and again denies the complexities of cultural development.  According to Ferguson (1992), "Global Cultural Homogeneity" as a myth must presume a global cultural economy that completely ignores local, regional or national influences.  

Appadurai (1990) further addresses the new path of global cultural flows and ultimately questions the former core and periphery models through his conceptualization of interacting "disjuncture" or relationships within these flows. He conceives of global cultural flow in five dimensions : Ethnoscapes refer to the flow of peoples (immigrants, refugees, tourists and so on) throughout the globe as we become increasingly mobile. In Appadurai's model, there is no traditional core and periphery to be designated and as such represents the "non-isomorphic" paths in which culture now flows. Building on earlier discussion of core and periphery theory, Straubhaar (1991) criticizes recent assumptions that new technology would strengthen the imbalances of media or information flows around the globe. While new technology has opened doors for the influx of American cultural products, it has also increased national production as well as the development of specific genres taken from American models and re-created into distinctly Latin American genres. Straubhaar(1991) also credits the influence of First World influences for the "decreased cost and increased flexibility in television technology." This influence has allowed for a growing number of television producers throughout Latin America . Straubhaar (1991) takes the view that even within a "dependency" or "imbalance" situation, development can occur in the "periphery" nation.   

According to McChesney (1996), two oppositional trends dominate the United States and global media and communication. On one hand, there have been both rapid corporate concentration and commercialization of media industries. On the other hand, newly developed computer and digital communication technologies can undermine the ability to control communication in a traditional hierarchical manner. The most dramatic development along these lines has been the Internet, which permits inexpensive, global, interactive, and mass computer communication, as well as access to a previously unimaginable range of information.   However, until recently, mass communications researchers have overlooked not only the Internet but the entire field of computer-mediated communication, staying instead with the traditional forms of broadcast and print media that fit much more conveniently into models for appropriate research topics and theories of mass communication (Morris & Ogan, 1996).

SOURCE-MESSAGE-RECEIVER FEATURES

Morris and Ogan(1996) argue that if mass communications researchers continue to largely disregard the research potential of the Internet, their theories about communication will become less useful. According to them, a new communication technology such as the Internet offers a chance to develop and refine theories of mass communication through its very nature. The Internet plays with the source-message-receiver features of the traditional mass communication model, sometimes putting them into traditional patterns, sometimes putting them into an entirely new configuration.   Internet communication takes many forms, from World Wide Web pages operated by major news organizations to Usenet groups discussing folk music.

Sources of the messages can range from one person to a group of professionals in a World Wide Web page. The messages themselves can be traditional news stories created by a reporter and editor, stories created over a long period of time by many people, or simply conversation. The receivers, or audiences, of these messages can also number from one to potentially millions, and may or may not move from their role as audience members to producers of messages. It is one of the Internet's advantages that an audience member may also be a message producer (Morris & Ogan, 1996).    

The gates of the world are groaning shut. From marble balconies and over the airwaves, demagogues decry new risks to ancient cultures and traditional values. Satellites, the Internet, and jumbo jets carry the contagion (David Rothkop, 1997). When argued from an empirical basis, the facts and figures of American cultural popularity on the Internet make the case for "cultural imperialism" seem virtually undeniable. As of July 1995, there were 6.64 million host computers on the Internet. This number has been approximately doubling annually since 1981. Demonstrating that the Internet is truly a global phenomenon, the same source shows that 2.37 million of these are international hosts connected to the Internet, representing 150 countries. In 1994, there was wide variation in the number of Internet hosts per 1,000 people, ranging from 14 in Finland to fewer than 0.5 in Korea (Quelch & Klein, 1996).

Currently, 90% of traffic world-wide on the Internet is in English. These, together with the following factors, have lead some to denounce the Internet as the most recent and most sinister facet of American cultural imperialism to emerge: the Internet is anchored in the United States; the vast majority of World Wide Web sites are based in the U.S and are in English; most software used to navigate the Internet is in English; and search engines are mostly in English (Herschlag, 1996).  On the surface it would certainly appear that the United States has taken over through its cultural dominance on the Internet. Thus will the Internet be another source of cultural imperialism? Many nations express concern over cultural imperialism on the Internet.  On the basis of the discussion above, the research questions for this article can be developed as follows: According to the cultural imperialism argument, will the Internet become another source of cultural imperialism? What are the main effects of the Internet? What are the advantages and limitations of adopting the cultural periphery? Imperialism argument to examine the effects of the Internet?   

Consideration needs to be given as to whether there are any factors which make it unnecessary or undesirable to seek to apply cultural imperialism to the Internet (Selene, 1996). There are several aspects of the Internet which suggest that the application of cultural imperialism is not only impracticable, it is also unnecessary. First, with the Internet there is no central location of power. Unlike television, radio and the press, where information and cultural products are produced, selected or disseminated from one source possessing overall control, the Internet is entirely decentralized. Although at present the majority of web sites are located in the U.S, there is no reason why this should remain the case. Geographical locations are irrelevant in cyberspace (Morris & Ogan, 1996).

Second, unlike most information and entertainment products where the means of production lies in the hands of a few, an increasingly powerful company, everyone on the Internet becomes a potential communicator of ideas. The ability to become a publisher is not merely a theoretical opportunity. Instead of the "one to many" communications model, the Internet allows "any to many" communication with a relatively low barrier to entry. The "any to many" model facilitates the creation of special interest groups, removing the barriers of time and distance in the individual communications with others (Selene, 1996).  Third, the Internet thereby allows people to continue to participate in their "local" culture no matter where in the world they are. As the citizens of other nations connect to the Internet we will see the Internet as a tool for the preservation and celebration of culture (Brown, 1996).   Fourth, related to the previous point is the fact the receiver or viewer of messages is not a passive listener; they actively seek information or entertainment - they "pull" information out rather than have it pushed at them.  Fifth, linguistic uniformity, and with it cultural uniformity is not the inevitable and only way forward for the Internet.

Rather than advancing the cause of American cultural imperialism, the Internet may be better suited to sustaining multiculturalism (Berlingeri et al., 1996).  Additionally, users are not forced to jump into the global melting pot and submit to the domination of U.S popular culture. An Internet for English speakers alone would not be as useful or successful as one which was open to speakers of all languages. Both Netscape Navigator and Microsoft's Internet Explorer are coming out in various languages, and a multilingual web browser capable of translating web sites into over seventy-five languages is being developed (Herschlag, 1996).  Therefore, nations worried about the threats posed by the Internet to dilute or irradiate cultural identity may find their only recourse is to focus on the production and dissemination of their own cultural products on-line and the creation of chat rooms and bulletin boards in their own language.

 

HYPOTHESES

•  More the exposure to Internet, more the use of worldwide webs

•  Greater is the knowledge of world wide websites, greater is the cultural imperialism of Internet

METHOD

Sample

This was a cross-section study. Fifty male and 50 female post graduate students of Gomal University have been selected for face to face interview on random method of sampling. The items selected for inclusion in the questionnaire were determined through a review of the relevant literature.  Closed-ended questionnaire of multiple choices was prepared. The sample of 100 randomly selected students was relatively young and well educated. Members were from ICIT, IER, Economic, Mass Communication, MBA, MPA, Law College , commerce, and English departments of the University. Confidentiality were protected of all respondents.

Pilot study

Based on the pre-test, the survey questionnaire was conducted. The pilot study was a rehearsal for the final study. It helps the researchers in eliminating, modifying and reshaping those questions which could affect the validity of the response, the vague questions, were changed. In this way final questionnaire was collected.

Assumptions

It was assumed that the target sample will answer questions honestly and with the perceived perception of the phenomena that Cultural imperialism is the practical aspect of social, cognitive level of the people and, brings changes into the social system of a society.

Limitations

Sampling techniques was strictly confined to a small sample of cross-sectional survey. Time and costs also limit this research. Sampling was limited to university students who may or may not have established Internet habits. This study would pave the path for a longitudinal survey and will promote more exploratory rather than analytical approach.

RESULT

Data was collected from 100 male and female students of Gomal University , D.I.Khan ( Pakistan ). For data analysis both descriptive and inferential techniques of Statistics have been applied. For easy understanding I have categorized the numerical information according to the nature of the question asked from the target sample. The category comprises the analysis through frequency distribution, chi-square, binomial/sign test and graphical description.

Results showed support the

  H 1 “More the exposure to Internet, more the use of world wide websites”

65 percent of the total sample reported that they exposed to Google and declared more informative, while Yahoo (40%) and MSN (33%) got second and third respectively. With P-Value = 0.001, difference was significant.

 

H 2     Greater is the knowledge of world wide websites, greater is the cultural imperialism of Internet

Results support the second hypothesis with the chance of observing either 67 or more successes, or 33 or fewer successes in dichotomous rating scale “No”, in 100 trials. Further this empirical investigation reveals the results that Internet changes our cognition, social system, relationships, and identity.   P value and statistical significance:   Chi squared equals 20.609 with 3 degrees of freedom.   The two-tailed P value equals 0.0001, by conventional criteria; this difference is considered to be extremely statistically significant. Result showed that internet brings significant change of cognitive, social system, relationships, and identity level.

Table 1.1: More Informative web site (Answer to all categories)

Table 1.1 indicates the univariate frequency description of respondents' best www

about cultural imperialism shows that 65% of the total sample declared “Google”

“more informative”, while 40% are those who favor “Yahoo”, 33% “MSN”

and “AltaVista” respectively.

 

  Table 1.2: Internet changes our cognition, social system, relationships and identity

 

Table 1.2 shows that majority (40%) of the sample of the view that Internet

change cognitive level. followed by “Social system (23%) and 19% respondents

in the sample says “loses identity”. Only 10% are of the opinion that Internet

brings changes in relationships”.

Table 1.3: Internet as an imperialistic tool of culture

          

Number of saying “Yes”": were 67. Number of trials (or subjects) per experiment: 100

Sign test was applies. If the probability of "say" in each trial or subject is 0.500, then:

•  The one-tail P value is 0.0004, this is the chance of observing 67 or more say out of 100 trials.

•  The two-tail P value is 0.0009. The observations reveal that internet is the powerful imperialistic tool of cultural change.

 

Internet changes the existing culture. Answer to all categories

H 0: There is significant increase exist in Internet culture change

H a:   There is no significant increase in Internet culture change

Chi-square = 47.0 ………….degrees of freedom = 4…………..probability = 0.000

Calculated value is greater (47.0) than tabled value (3.94).  Where:

The degree of freedom is df = (R-1)(C-1)  = 4, and the critical value (Table A.5 Portney & Watkins) is a (0.05). We can reject null hypothesis. Therefore, it is concluded that Internet changes the existing culture.

 

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE FINDINGS

This empirical study widens our understanding of the relationships between Internet and cultural imperialism. The results of this research signify the existence of increase that changes the culture and highlights the power of Internet. The core countries dominate the culture of the periphery through Internet.

CONCLUSIONS

This study is necessarily limited in scope. Nonetheless, the current findings reveal some significant aspects in the field. This study is one of the initial attempts in this process in Pakistan . The researcher suggests future investigations on demographic variables in society, the sociological impact of internet on Pakistani family social activities. Internet confirms the cultural changes on cognitive as well as on social system, relationships and, identities. Furthermore, the information level should be investigated that how internet bring changes and how much it intervene in various field of information. It should be explored that how Internet dominate the local culture and why we lose our identities. These imbalances of flow between the industrialized and poor countries are widening and who are responsible for the erosion. The invasion of foreign culture set aside the local culture and how it can be stopped.

REFERENCES

Appadurai A (1990) Disjuncture and difference in the global cultural economy. Theory, Culture & Society, 7 . 295-310.

Berlingeri I (1996) More cultural imperialism on the net. [On-line]. Available:http://roscoe.law.harvard.edu/HyperNews/get/courses/techseminar96- 18/4/3.html. 

Berlingeri I Selene B  Gokyigit E (1996). Cultural imperialism. [On-line]. Available:http://roscoe.law.harvard.edu/courses/techseminar96/course/sessions/culturali mperialism/intro.html. 

Boddy W (1994). U.S.television abroad: market power and national introspection. Quarterly Review of Film and Video, 15 (2), 45.

Brown C (1996) Cultural imperialism? No! [On-line]. Available: http://www.harvnet.harvard.edu/HyperNews/get/discussion/cult_imp2/2.html

Christian WT (1989). Cultural transfer or electronic imperialism?: The impact of American television programs on European television .

RothkopD (1997) Cultural Imperialism? Effects of Globalization on Culture. Managing director of Kissinger Associates and an adjunct professor of international affairs at Columbia University

Ferguson M (1992). The myth about globalization. European Journal of Communication,

7 , 69-93. 

Giussani B (1997) France gets along with pre-web technology. Cybertimes:

New York Times on the Web . 

Hamelink C (1990) Information imbalance: Core and periphery in questioning the media:

a critical introduction . London , Newbury Park : Sage.

Herschlag M (1996).Cultural imperialism on the net. Available:http://www.harvnet.harvard.edu/vpr/tues.empire.html

Human Rights Watch (1996).Silencing the net: The threat to freedom of expression on-line. Cybertimes: New York Times on the Web . 

Killen & Associates (1996) Internet: Global Penetration 1996 and Forecast for the Year 2000 . 

McChesney R W (1996).The Internet and U.S. communication policy-making in historical and critical perspective. Journal of Communication, 46 (1), 98-126. 

McLuhan M  Powers B (1993). The global village: Transformations in world life and media in the 21st century. New York : Oxford University Press.

McQuail D (1994). Mass communication theory (3rd Ed.). London : Sage. 

Meyrowitz  J (1985) No sense of place . New York : Oxford University Press. 

Morris M & Ogan C (1996).The Internet as mass medium. Journal of Communication. 46 (1), 39-50. 

Newhagen J E & Rafaeli S (1996).Why communication researchers should study the Internet: A dialogue. Journal of Communication, 46 (1), 4-13. 

Petras J (1993) Cultural imperialism in the late 20th century. Journal of Contemporary Asia , 23 (2), 139-148.  Professor urges action against pornography in cyberspace. (1997, March 18). Korea Times .

Quelch J A, Klein LR (1996).The Internet and international marketing. Sloan Management Review . 60-75.

Salwen M B (1991) Cultural imperialism: a media effects approach. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 8 (1), 29-38. 

Schiller H (1981) Who knows: Information in the age of the fortune 500 . Norwood , NJ : Ablex. 

Selene B (1996) Brief overview of French position. [On-line]. Available: http://roscoe.law.harvard.edu/courses/techseminar96/course/sessions/culturalimperialism/

Selene.html 

Sepstrup P (1989) Research into international TV Flows. European Journal of Communication, 4 , 393-408.  Singapore sets internet rules. (1997, August 28).

USA Today .

Sims R (1995) The United States vs. the world: A theoretical look at cultural imperialism. Available:http://www.utexas.edu/ftp/pub/eems/cultiimp.387._.html

Smith A D (1990) Towards a global culture? Theory, Culture & Society, 7 , 171-191. 

Smith A D (1990) Media globalism in the age of consumer sovereignty. Gannett Center Journal , 1-17. 

Straubhaar J D (1991). Beyond media imperialism: Asymetrical interdependence and cultural proximity. Critical Studies in Mass Communications, 8 , 39-59. 

Tomlinson J (1991) Cultural imperialism: a critical introduction . London : Pinter Publishers. 

Wildavsky B (1996).Culture clashes. National Journal , 648-651. 

WilliamsF  Rice R E (1996).Communication research and the new media technologies. Communication Yearbook 7 . Beverly Hills , CA : Sage. 

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

 Dr. Mirza Jan graduated in 1984 from Gomal University , Dera Ismail Khan (NWFP), Pakistan . He did his Ph.D from University of the Punjab, Lahore Pakistan on “Message Consumption and Adoption of Agricultural Innovations.” Specialized field of media studies are, Research Methods in Communication, Communication Theories, Development Communication, Social Communication and, International Communication. Currently he is serving as Chairman of the department of Mass Communication, Gomal University , D.I.Khan.

E-mail: mirzajan-5@hotmail.com Fax: 0966-9280100 Phone: 0966-8280461