Crtical essay {global village )

The Global Village 3


(Student Name)


A lot has stemmed from the shifting of power due to globalization. Currently, people are able to experience the world as small unitary place with interconnected networks of global citizenship. In realization of the global village and social interconnection, the communication media has played a key role, both as outcomes and as a cause. The types of models that people use in their daily lives shape their thinking hence they end up in a blend of actual research and aspiration.

The proponents of globalization assert that increased technological inventions in transport and communication have contributed to global village political, economic and social dimensions. Economic relations and international trade have relatively expanded over the past decades. The increasingly accelerated pace of flow of the commodities, technological talents, managerial instruments and capital across the Nationals’ clearly points to the kind of interconnected society in which humans currently live (Sassen 2004). Most of the national governments opened their economies to be conventional to the dominating principles of the international free market by instituting laws to encourage and regulate fair market competition, and lowering trade tariffs. All these measures taken around the world have led to the integration of international economies, and the various nations’ have achieved some levels of uniformity.

The concept of media globalization has confused many people as to whether it the media that instigated globalization or are themselves responsible for globalization. Obviously, globalization is a product of both, however, the tendency of people in the field of communication to think in term of media-centric has given media an upper hand causation and shape of the global village. This concept has led to the anticipation that in future, satellite television, international journalism, and other communication channels will form practical global system that can expose humans all over the world (Hafez (2007).

Much has been discussed on the suffrage of media globalization in the hands of under-conceptualized and overly optimistic explorations as well as whether international communication can facilitate cross-border media technology (Hafez 2007). As much as one can agree with this statement an in-depth consideration of what global media technology would mean the status of the global village is necessary. The emerging trends in the transnational media have pinned a lot of hope on the individuals in various countries as the poster child of the media of globalization. Brecher and Costello (2008) keenly observe that the increased mobility of some of the western scholars makes them overestimate the capability of the transnational media.

One of the core phenomena of the global village is the cross-border communication. The international communication is a key element of the global village. Even though media global village has never been successful in achieving a true platform for transnational media and dialogs across borders, the blend of digital divides, linguistics, and persistent regional preferences have interlocked have achieved globalization. Internationalism, which is a significant aspect of the prospected globalism, has incurred ranges of criticism from national journalism for years. It has not reached the global level to enable people to speak freely without the feeling of ethnocentrism.

According to Hafez (2007), global village is a networked society in which the glocalization culture stands out to be relatively abstract for empirical activities and application. He sees a networked society as producing varying lines of cross-border articulation, and there is anticipation that it will generate a giant of the interlinked state of the world epitomized with numerous cultural entities. On the other hands, he suggests that glocalization is the in the inevitable interplay of distant forces of cultures and localities.

Based on the world systems theory, Global comes up short depending on three various aspects: change, interdependence, and connectivity. The systematic connectivity dimension demands the alleviation of the impediments to the cross-border communication, and evidently, this is something that has never been realized in the world society. However, a lot of changes are visible in the mode of communication among people in the international environment. Critically analyzing The Internet as a global communication system, Brecher & Costello (2008) still disagrees with the notion that The Internet is a global communication, but he rather sees it as a regional means of communication since some areas hardly are reached through the internet as a medium.

Based on the concept of transmitting and receiving (Reese 2008), a little variation in the global system regarding cultures and localities can be spotted. In a way, cultures seem to be somewhat fixed and resistant to the full realization of the village factor in the global system. In the struggle globalization between the external and internal cultural impacts, domestic practices outpace the conversion and other cultural changes as the individuals’ term the changes as modernization rather than globalization. Maybe to make the whole process workable, cultural practices needs to transmit through as a whole slice of the host culture. Conversely, people can develop a new unitary global culture to facilitate their coexistence in the global village.

In further analysis of the village factor in the world system, one may ask whether people in a particular country still cling to their own news alone or whether journalists in most of the countries still solely adhere to their nationals’ interest. Well, the reality is that they do, but the concept of globalization has led to a lot borrowing and application of standards, codes and significant qualities from other countries (Sassen 2004). At the level of globalizing scholars, some significant changes in the norms are can be seen. These convergent changes can be seen in the geographical spaces and communication networks of various countries (Brecher & Costello 2008). Many research perspectives have currently been developed to scrutinize the media systems and cultural practices in journalism while creating analogy among various nations.

In political forums tremendous global spaces have come up with variations in policies, rules, and administrative structures often connected to the diffusion of power from other countries. Currently, international politics and structures are thought to be profound structures and phenomena, considering the development of platforms of media and their practices and more specifically their influence on globalization ((Brecher & Costello 2008). This may take into all the globalizing social and political structures and the ways people in a given sovereignty identify themselves.

The scaling of international structures determines the degree diffusion of global events only in some other countries that can easily nest. For instance, the major pan –European broadcasting organizations like Eurovision and Euro-news illustrates the circumstance described above (Castells 2007). Thus, the role of media in advancing the global village should be regarded in a wider a perspective of journal message, worldwide audience and satellite networks. Some of the available international news channels such CNN are a clear manifestation of the global village. They support global news by interconnecting cross-national awareness of activities and occurrences.

Reese provides that previously, people could speak about media logic (2008) that was based on the local community and national cultures because of the integrative forces of the regional systems. A shared blend of norms and expectations enabled this system to work and be distinct from other cultures and logic in other regional settings. However, the unanswered question still lies in the weakening of most of the original national frameworks, what if the looming logic replaces them. Visible feature stable in the emerging media logic is its dominance with western culture and incorporation of the transnational culture.

Underpinning the global flow system are personal structures and international roles. Concretely, the above-described agents are essential in creating global infrastructure in various local settings. The International elite who are world widely connected and oriented can easily interact with other different local settings, but they still communicate with each other about the global matters through global networks that connect different local settings such as Skype and Facebook (Forman & Greenstein 2005).

Social integration and economic independence in the global settings are always accompanied by an expansion of democratic values. This can be pointed to the epoch of cold war in Easter Europe after they had integrated the Western- state democracy on the collapse of The Soviet Union (Sassen 2004). Similarly, the spirit of Democracy diffused in other regions like South Korea, Asia, and Taiwan.

The regional partitions of the nation still matter today, although the opportunities for democratic activities and discourse open up in unpredictable ways in the political systems of a number of states. This deliberate arena and interstitial activities lie outside the national spaces. Evident examples supra-national structures are the United Nations and the European Unions which logically overlaps beyond national environs and they easily conceptualize higher level of the global village.

From the geographical and social point of view, globalization theorists explain how globalism works in a given local space (Sassen 2004).They explain how the universe becomes particularized while the global dimensions are articulated. Countries with more strategically placed cities enjoy the advantage of coordinated global procedure since cities provide significant nodes in the global networks. International groups of people in service with outposts in these cities locate the global articulation as they interact with others forming what is known as global citizens.

Castells (2007) considers global village is a situation resulting through the advertent networking of networks. Castells adopts this network paradigm to explain how various social sectors are connected distantly through a network that allows for the efficient articulation of the global flows across the international and regional boundaries. For the global village, the articulation is significant in the demarcation of the local spaces that in emerge in different areas in a more hybridized logic and experiences. They do not affect any ancient casual sense in those regions though they enhance the privileges and flows at pivotal junctures in the global structure (Castells 2007)

Global Village can easily be debunked if considered in a media-centric point of view. People will constantly uncover pliability in global societies supporting the familiar along with local in opposition to unusual and external. Therefore, at the institutional level, it may appear that global village has no yield much systematic change. However, at the network level burgeoning the links among the media and various individuals in the global village account for a better life.

Work cited

Castells, M., 2007. Communication, power and counter-power in the network society. International journal of communication1(1), p.29.

Hafez, K. and Skinner, A., 2007. The myth of media globalization. Polity.

Reese, S.D., 2008. Theorizing a globalized journalism. Global newspaper journalism research: Theories, methods, findings, future, pp.240-252.

Forman, C., Goldfarb, A. and Greenstein, S., 2005. How did location affect adoption of the commercial Internet? Global Village vs. urban leadership.Journal of Urban Economics58(3), pp.389-420.

Brecher, J., and Costello, T., 2008. Global village or global pillage: Economic rebuilding from the bottom up. South End Press.

Sassen, S., 2004. Local actors in global politics. Current Sociology52(4), pp.649-670.