DOCUMENT RESUME CS 05 695 ED 199 615 I AUTHOR Feies; Fred TITt4( The TheOry" of Media Imperialism: Some comments. PUB dATE Wug 90 NOTE 24p.: Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism 463rd, , Boston, MA, August 9-13, 1990). EDRS.PRICE fP01/PC01 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS\ *Communication Crhought-fTtansferi; *CommunicationS: *Cultural Awarenessv 011tureil Differences: Developed Nations: Developing Nations: *International Relations: Mass Media:'*fledia Research; *Neys Political Attitudes: Research Needs: Theories IDENTIFIERS *Media Imperialism ABSTRACT This paper describeR the media imperialism approach to the study of internatioeal comiunications, which focuses on the processes by which moderncomm.unicatiOns media have operated to create, maintain, and expand systems of domination and dependency on a world-wide scale. To provide soMetheoretical baqis for the media imperialism approAch, the'paper presents a brief overview of the , dependency model,_ which analyzes Third World ftvelopmentalproblems in terms of an analysis of the relationships between developed and developing nations. Rased on this discussion,:new directions for research for media' imperiialism are outlined. In particular, the paper calls tor research on factors and fqrces operating on i national level to coxplement research on international factors, for formulatAon of the cultdral issues involved in media imperialism, and for expanded research of non-mass media forms ofcommunication; In -7- conclusion, the paper ariiies that itf the formulation 'of a theoretical appribach to the study of media imRerialism, .the concepX of theory preValent in most areas of the soeial sciences is inadequate and that bioader concept of theory should be used.(Althor/FL) ****************************$****************************************** ReprodUCtions supplied4by EDRS Are the best, that .can be made * * . \from the original dwument. ********************************************************************0* 46. 11 II/ I'AIIIA111 NI Of III Al III Vt1t AI ill/A k P AR! NA 1 .1,NAl 'NS I 11111 I. UI I Ow A I [(IN vo v I I.511,11.1.'11 ',11'11. 1 ,PJ I ,, , , N The 'Theory' of Media Impdrialisme: Some Comments PERMISSION 10 REPRODUCt 1 HIS MATERIAL. HAS.BEEN GRANTED BY frod_rejes TO I HE FOUCATIO.NAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) . Fred Fejes Institute of Communica ions Re earch 222B Armory University of IllinOi Champaign, IL 618 - :!) N. \ Presentet toa joint panel of the Qualitative Studiei and luteational Divisidse at the Asseciation for Educationin Journalism Annual Convention in Boston, MA, August 10-13, 1980. Within the last ten years, the view or what is important in global communications and of the role modern comininications play in the development of Third World countries has undergone a drastic change. While during the 1960. communication resoachere focused on ways in which modern media could asit in the social development of the nations of Africa, Latin America and Asti, this last decade has witnessed the emergence of an approach to the study of communications and development which has, in many important senses, an entirely different perspective and evaluation of the role of modern communications. Although there is by no means complete agrement, the term "media imperialism" le frequently used to describe the concern. of this new approach. While there have been several attempts to give this term some conceptual precision, distinguishing it, for example, from the broader concept of "cultural imperialimm" (Boyd-Barret, 1977), or attempting to define it in terms of levels of generality (Leo, 1978),'or in terms of specific media and nations (Tunstall, 1977), on the whole it still remains vague as an analytical concept. That being the case then, for the purposes of this discussion, media imperialism shall be used in a broad and general manner to describe the processes by which modern communi- cation media have operated to create, maintain and expand systems of dolination and dependence on s world scale. Similiarly, recent communication research efforts which attempt to study these processes shall,be termed collectively the "media imperialism approach."While some may object Otat such a deoligdm- tion is, on the one hand, too arbitrary and, on the other, too brood end general to be of much use, hopefully the purpose and necessity of making such an initially crude and rough attempt at labelling of a body of work shall 3 bt!k(IMic iAatti hi the c.Ouillitl 01 As has been noted by orhern (NotdentItteng And Schillev, 1979; Cruino O'Brien, 1979), the modia imperialism approach evolved in an attempt to deal with those questions and arena of concern which earlier communication models and thinking generally ignored. In contrast to earlier models which focused on the national level and on social psychological factors in order 0 to determine the ways in which modern communications media could help accelerate the process of development and modernization, the media imperialism approach is based on "an emphasis on global structure, whereby it is precisely the international socio-political ysteill that decisively determines the course of development within the sphere of each nation" (Nordenstreng and Schiller, 1979:7). Whereas earlier models viewed modern communications media as a "tool" for development, the media AMperialiem , approach viewed the media, situated as they were in a traasnational context, as an obstacle to anymeaningful and well-balanced soc$O-ecOnomic progress that a country ma, attempt to achieve. Seen in a lerger context, the growth of the media imperialism approach is one.reflectSon of the general critical assessment and rejection by many Third World gountries of Western models of growth and development of which th, eaTliev/communication models were a part. The appearance of the mediaimpertelism approachwas matched on the level of international politirby t 'call by many Third World natidhs for the restructuring of global cOmmucation relationsh6s and flow in order to create a "New International formation Order"-as an essential component of a "New International Scott c Order." iTheMA i Or t hrunt and great ent a et:ompl i aliment of 1 he %,Pork undert nken- within 1.11e. media 'imperialism apploach so far hap been an empitical Qeacription 4 4 'Of the manner in whi.ch communleattonn media operate on a global level. As reflected, for example, In workn by Schiller (1971), Mattelart (1979), Varin (1973), and other%, the research in this area on the wholl tends to focus on the operation of transnational agents, either transnational &yr- porations or transnational media induatrirs, and their role in the structuring and flow of media producta at an .international level. Sugh , attempt to dascribe in detail'the manner in which sulih transnational ta.dominate the inteationalrn structure and flow of commonications. 'worksle attention has been focused ou. mass media products such as television and film, other aspects-and areas of communpations such as advertising, satellite communications, educational television and media practices have been examined. While at the empirical level as represented by such atudies, there has been much progress dealing with the concerns of media hmperialism, such L, progress has notbeet matchedAt the theoretical level (Mosco and Herman, 1979: Subv:\ti, 1079), Although there has been individual attempts to formulate and analyse vediaimperiaii.smas a "theory" (Boyds-Barret, 1977; Lee, 1978), on the whole the development of media imperialism as a.theoretical approach, in contrast to empirical descriptions of concrete examples of media *. imperialism, has not formed an impoaant element o the agenda of work in, this area. While the reasons for the lack of theoretical development are meny and varied, it would seem that one majovi reason is ihat the work on media imperialism, much like the work done in other areas of communidation rosearch, is linked tO the concerns'of communication professioneas, activists 4. and policy-makers and to current preening insueo, in this cane the inter- , national debate over imbalances In the international comnamication structuto and flow. There is, of course, no inherent. reason why nuch clone links between researCh and critical contemporary problems should inhibit the development of theory. There are numerous examples in the aocial sciences where a practical concern, often with a very narrow and sometimes even insignificant question, has led to profound theoretical devetOpments. Monethe1e90,in the case of the media imperialism approach At seems that pressing practical anll political concerns have not yet led to any broader theoretical outcomes. This, of course, should not Imply that the empirical progr6es achieved thus far is of any less value. In contrast to thb common complaint that radical and critical researchers and'scholars overemphastze the development L of a theoretical exactness to the point of irrelevance, the work done on media imperialism, because of its empirical nature', has been eminently. clear,_ac cessible and relevant, characteristics which accoun t for the dissemination of its ideas over a wide audience. Nonetheless, it must be' recognized that the lack of an explicit and well foi.mulated theoretical basis involvesdangers. Without any type of accepted theoretical frpmework, one is unable to formulate -a research agenda, distinguishirg th e.questions and issues that are important and need to be pursued from those less iMpoytant or that have been over-studied, thus moving