Nowadays the phenomenon of globalization can be described as the dominating power behind major sociological developments all around the world. From day to day global culture becomes more and more autocratic in every land; even in such lands where it can be hardly expected to happen so. The role of media in the process of globalization can be hardly overestimated; it is the “engine” of the process. Two approaches to the issue of global culture and the role of media in it will be examined in this paper: the UN perspective and Arnett’s one. Generally, these two conceptions can be seen as quite different in their approach: Arnett’s outlook can be described as more related to cultural and psychological characteristics of global culture, whereas the UN report weighs this phenomenon up mainly from an economical point of view along with the situation in the world’s labor market and trading market. Both articles unconditionally support the fact that global culture is formed by media and through media which is above all responsible for spreading ideas on moral values, lifestyle, and materialistic way of thinking.
Within this vast field of research, two important articles discussing the issue of globalization in the world culture are “The Psychology of Globalization” by Jeffrey Arnett [2002], and “Young People in Globalizing World” by the United Nations [2003]. In his article, Jeffrey Arnett argues that in the 21st-century globalization has become the dominant force behind sociological developments in human society. He explains that the tendency to have a mutual effect among varied cultures existed long ago due to wars, migration, and trade; however, nowadays the process of globalization has acquired unequaled extents on the reason of media’s role in it. According to Arnett, “recorded music, movies, television, the Internet—and, to a considerable extent, global media are the leading edge of globalization” (775). Arnett indicates that the young population of the planet is especially affected. According to him in many lands, young people have no other perception of cultural values but those ones enforced by global culture and western cultural values (781). He makes an emphasis on psychological and cultural aspects of the process of globalization along with public values and stereotypes enforced on young people. Similar conclusions are made in the UN report which explains that due to their psychological peculiarities young people are especially vulnerable to the effects of globalization. The UN report also explains this phenomenon addressing the role of media in it, particularly it reads: “A clear trend towards the global circulation of cultural goods has been developing for decades, facilitated in great measure by the increased access to audio-visual communications media” (Young People in Globalizing World 293).
Although the two articles can be evaluated as quite analogous in their approaches including their position concerning the critical role of media in speeding up the process of development of global culture along with causing the main trends in it and establishing the system of common values, a few significant differences can be found between them. First of all, Arnett makes a special emphasis on cultural and psychological consequences of globalization; though both articles acknowledge that the process of cultural globalization is vastly affected by the economical backgrounds of the countries engaged in the process. Arnett makes the following comment concerning this outcome: “the gaps in technology and lifestyle between rich and poor countries … have persisted or even grown in recent years” (779). The same idea is seen in the UN report which explains that the process of globalization elapses being affected by the variety of economical indicators including market power, the tendency to run more and more international corporations and companies, the tendency of weakening in the private sector of the countries’ economy, privatization, the imbalance between collective and private-public interests. Secondly, Arnett’s approach appears to be more positive with regard to the results of globalization. The UN report, on the contrary, outlines the situation with globalization as a rather complicated one and presents numerous economical and sociologic difficulties to young people. One of the main concerns established in the UN report is related to dramatic changes in young people’s moral values and their corrupted way of thinking in which such new values as immorality and materialistic way of thinking are prepositioned. Further, the two articles agree that the effects of globalization are not equal. Arnett believes that globalization has more or less worldwide extents, whereas the UN report accounts for the differences occurring in varied geographical regions including Western Europe, Eastern Europe, Asia, and Africa and within individual countries.
In conclusion, the two articles examined in this paper present their perspective on the tendencies in the world society with regards to the phenomenon of cultural globalization. Nevertheless, despite some differences in their approaches, the findings of the two articles concerning the issue of globalization can be acclaimed as valuable and complimenting each other. Arnett’s perspective can be described as more related to cultural and psychological outcomes of the process, whereas the UN report tends to evaluate this phenomenon mainly from an economical point of view. However, both of these approaches strongly agree on the climactic role of media in it.
Works Cited
Arnett, Jeffrey. “The Psychology of Globalization”. American Psychologist 57.10 (2002): 774–783. Print.
Young People in Globalizing World. PDF file. 2003. Web.