留学生作业：汤姆林森对于文化全球化的解释
12-31, 2012
汤姆林森（1997）认为，一个的主要特点是文化帝国主义在事实上，它带来的全球化进程是焦点，因为它收集各方面的观念的支配有一般性的霸权文化的形成（西方现代性消费文化）的原因，别是各国关注的问题，可接受一个政治经济学的批判。
Tomlinson (1997) argued that one of the major characteristics of the
cultural imperialism thesis lies in the fact that it brings the globalization process
into an immediate critical focus, as it gathers notions of domination in terms of
both general hegemonic cultural formations (Western modernity and consumer
culture) and of particular national concerns (America) and accommodates this
critique alongside a critique of http://www.ukthesis.org/thesis_sample/ political economy. Tomlinson (1997) explained
that if the cultural imperialism thesis continues to constitute an important and
widely-used critical perspective today, it is because it is based on several
irrefutable empirical observations and arguments. Tomlinson identifies these
key arguments as the following:
1. The ubiquity of Western (American) cultural goods: there is in fact a wealth
of evidence that Western cultural practices and tastes are becoming global
ones (clothing, food, music, film and television, etc.). Cultural imperialism
draws attention to the locus of control of lived experience and underlines the
importance of distanced influences on our everyday lives. It then becomes
evident that the practices and values of the culturally dominant nations are
BANERJEE: THE LOCALS STRIKE BACK? 519
Downloaded from gaz.sagepub.com at University of New South Wales on March 30, 2012
increasingly influencing our everyday lives. This perspective also then points
to specific points of origin and concentrations of power where influence flows
from the centres of cultural production to the peripheries.
2. A long history of Western imperialism: the Third World or developing countries
generally stand in a historical relation of political and economic
subordination to those of the developed West, ineluctably bound up with a
colonial past. This historical relation provides a strong basis for understanding
cultural as well as politico-economic globalization. The uneven –
and even dramatically lopsided – power geometry of globalization thus
supports the hegemonic foundations of the cultural imperialism thesis.
3。资本主义作为一种文化力量的核心：资本主义的动态是全球化进程中的心脏地带。因此，文化是密不可分链接到资本主义生产体系的扩张和市场的原因。文化霸权的延伸，它是唯一合乎逻辑的查看经济统治和剥削，以及资本主义扩张。
3. The centrality of capitalism as a cultural force: the dynamics of capitalism
lie at the very heart of the globalization process. Culture is therefore inextricably
linked to the expansion of a capitalist production system and
market. It is only logical to view cultural domination as an extension of
economic domination and exploitation, which characterize capitalist expansion
in the world. The gigantic decentred order of capitalist transnational
practices not only is seen to threaten the political and economic autonomy
of nation states but also their cultural sovereignty, identity and value
systems.
The cultural imperialism thesis is founded on these three historical
politico-economic arguments and empirical observations. For the past several
decades, ‘cultural imperialism’ has held sway in most debates on the cultural
implications of globalization and the extensive global media and cultural flows
that characterize the world today. However, more recently, progresses in
cultural theory and research have led to sustained criticism of the cultural
imperialism perspective (see among others Featherstone, 1990; Schlesinger,
1991; McQuail, 1994). Critiques of the cultural imperialism perspective
challenged not only the basic premises on which it is founded but they have
also questioned the assumptions that it makes. A body of critical media and
cultural research constituted over the past decade have highlighted the complexity
of cultural dynamics, emphasizing articulations between cultural
spheres and pointing to processes of cultural integration and disintegration
that result not only from the interaction between global and local cultural
forms and practices, but also operating within national and local cultural
spaces.
Cultural Globalization
Numerous studies have pointed out the major weaknesses and limitations of the
cultural imperialism perspective; this article’s objective will be to present a
general overview of the key critical responses to this thesis. These critical
responses challenge some of the fundamental assumptions of the cultural
imperialist perspective, while at the same time placing cultural issues within
processes of change characterized by an increasingly globalized world. Instead of
examining cultural processes as simplistic, linear, unidirectional conceptions,
recent critical analysis places global/local contradictions at the core of its
520 GAZETTE VOL. 64 NO. 6
Downloaded from gaz.sagepub.com at University of New South Wales on March 30, 2012
construct (Tomlinson, 1997). Cultural processes are therefore considered as a
dialectic, which involves simultaneously globalizing tendencies and local involvement,
cultural practices and dynamics (Giddens, 1991; Martin-Barbero, 1993).
Cultural imperialism perspectives were based on a fundamental assumption:
the centrality of media in shaping cultural processes. As Tomlinson (1992:
58) rightfully contends: ‘There is an assumption shared by both proponents and
critics of the media imperialism case that the media are somehow in the centre
of cultural processes and that issues of cultural domination therefore turn on
issues of media domination’. This assumption has since been challenged by a
number of micro-social analyses, which demonstrate that in many respects, the
mass media are far less important sources of information than interpersonal and
other forms of communication (see Hartmann et al., 1989). These analyses
argue that information, ideas and values originating in the media undergo a
process of diffusion, which is neither automatic nor indiscriminate. This
diffusion takes a variety of forms and generally follows the patterns of social
interaction, which are already structured by a range of other factors (caste, sex,
age, education, class, religion and other social factors).
This same assumption, through its extension, leads to another weakness of
the cultural imperialism perspective, which Tomlinson (1997: 180) describes
as ‘unwarranted leaps of inference from the simple presence of cultural goods
to the attribution of deeper cultural or ideological effects’. In other words, the
sheer presence of Western cultural goods does not imply profound cultural
transformation or impact. Numerous studies have pointed out that Western or
even US television programmes do not enjoy a position of unchallenged dominance
in developing countries. Local productions tend to be more popular in
domestic markets than their Western counterparts and the latter often operate
at a cultural discount in terms of their popularity with local audiences (Morley
and Robbins, 1989).
New centres of media and cultural production have recently emerged in the
developing world. A pluralization of cultural production is occurring around the
world, and geo-linguistic factors influence market penetration and share. There
are numerous examples of this development with companies such as TV Globo
in Brazil and Televisa in Mexico that not only dominate their own domestic
markets but also transform themselves into powerful exporters of cultural
commodities and content.
Striking examples of this pluralization of cultural production are also found
in the Asian context. The deregulation of television in most Asian countries in
recent decades led to a proliferation of domestic television and film production
companies across the region, which has led to the emergence of regional markets
based on geo-linguistic affinities and similarities. Hong Kong constitutes one of
the best recent examples of this trend, with an output of about 200 films a year.
It emerged as the third-largest producer of films and the second-largest exporter
in the world. In addition, Hong Kong-based television broadcaster TVB constitutes
the world’s largest library of Chinese language programming. Its broadcasting
and production strategy is based on offering its Chinese programmes
not only to Greater China, but also to overseas Chinese communities in South-
East Asia (Thomas, 2000).
Get expert help on all your writing
立即预定