Carterwrites

The worldwide exportation of movies, particularly by the American film industry, is exposing cultures to one another in a manner foreign to past generations. Individuals and even entire societies are learning of the West through the viewing of movies; unfortunately, such exposure indiscriminately erodes cultural identities. Movies are a vehicle for globalization, and the question of globalization as a positive or negative force is paramount. Does the influence of film serve to unify viewers across the globe with common understanding, or erase the diversity that enriches the human experience?

Our class assignment this week was to explore a possible negative effect of a mass medium; through secondary research and analysis I have concluded that the film industry’s role in globalization is detrimental to the fragility of culture.

To gain insight into the trend of globalization through America’s hegemony on filmmaking, I have examined several academic journals that address the issue. The International Journal of Cultural Policy was fairly critical of Western media’s influence, as it recognized “the homogenizing trend of global markets dominated by American films and television programs” (Feigenbaum, 2004, p. 252).

There is little doubt that in film we export more than simple laughs and explosive adrenaline-packed action. I believe the effects of American film are extremely powerful, framing worldviews and repackaging Western ideas under the benign label of entertainment. Feigenbaum addresses the issue, asserting that with the increased distribution of media, “people located over increasingly extended areas began to see themselves as part of the same culture, and part of the reason for the change is that the barriers of distance had been demolished by technology” (2004, p. 252). With further reading, a clear argument crystallized upon diversity as vital to the human race, “a kind of insurance policy” that encourages “constant renewing of the intellectual environment” (Feigenbaum, 2004, p. 253).

In reviewing three academic articles, I confirmed my understanding that many nations are beginning to pursue cultural protectionism and developing a sense of cultural nationalism that is often juxtaposed with a world moving toward economic liberalism. It may seem strange to view the film industry as a threat to national cultures, but it is a theory supported by well-respected researchers across the globe. The connection between film and globalization is much more abstract than many areas of research, but its existence is generally undisputed in academic circles; the matter becomes subjective at whether or not it is harmful, and in that I take my cue from researchers who have spent lifetimes studying the mal-effects.

Mitsuhiro Yoshimoto, in the journal of Inter-Asia Cultural Studies, even goes as far as to name the Hollywood cinema as having a “complicit relation with a particular vision of globalization in which the world is divided into the U.S. as the unmarked centre and the rest as national particularities” (2003, p. 451). I find it difficult to accept that the American media is in possession of an ethnocentric agenda for globalization, but I do believe its sole aim is to create a profit. In that pursuit, elements of culture are trampled and the film industry serves to corroborate claims of American imperialism.

Although it is evident that the pervasion of Western movies is instrumental in reshaping societal mores, such transformation is inevitable. Whether led by Hollywood’s capitalistic industries, the advent of the Internet, or the gradual erasure of borders through modern transportation, there is a movement toward uniformity. I hope the sharing of ideologies revitalizes humanity’s recognition of a common foundation while allowing cultures to maintain independent identities. It remains to be seen whether globalization will be of benefit to the world or if will provide additional tools for exploitation and degradation of the weak by the powerful. Perhaps the outcome is beyond control, or perhaps it is in the hands of my generation.

*Ishmael Beah’s memoir A Long Way Gone, speaks of his time as a boy soldier in Sierra Leone, and the heavy influence violent films had upon young recruits. It was the special adoration Beah’s squad had for Rambo that contributed to the development of a violent psyche.

References:

Carroll, R. (1952). Selecting motion pictures for the foreign market. Journal of Marketing. 17(2), 162-171.

Feigenbaum, H. (2004). Is technology the enemy of culture? International Journal on Cultural Policy. 10(3), 251-263.

Yoshimoto, M. (2003). Hollywood, Americanism, and the imperial screen: geopolitics of image and discourse after the end of the Cold War 1. Inter-Asia Cultural Studies. 4(3) 451-459.