|
|
Excerpts from "A Survey of the Influential Ability that the Internet has on Culture" (Barbu, 2000)
INTRODUCTION
This paper is a brief look into the symbiotic relationship (nightmare??) between cultural norms, values, and weltanschauungen, and their collision with the modern medium known as the Internet. Geertz stated that "The concept of culture...is essentially a semiotic one. Believing, with Max Weber, that man is an animal suspended in webs of significance he himself has spun, I take culture to be those webs, and the analysis of it to be therefore not an experimental science in search of a law, but an interpretive one in search of meaning" (emphasis added)(Giese, 169). One of those webs is today called the World Wide Web. The ecology of modern culture has a new composition. Our webs of interaction have shifted paradigmatically; what were once closed borders and remote locations are now part of the globalscape. Rothenberg argues that "Ecology, in the broadest sense, is an evolving human perception of being caught in an ever-wider web of natural relationships. Information is the rapidly growing pile of data that we can store and exchange electronically and digitally around the world" (29). What used to be our private in-group culture is now available to anyone, thanks to a real-time, border-less, and pervasive technology. The goal of this paper is to see the extent of intrusion this new ecology has on what used to be one's private culture.
The Internet is a phenomenon that has made what Marshall McCluhan coined years ago as the global village. Hogan states that "The Internet is an international system that...began in the late 1960's when the U.S. Defense Department commissioned the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) to create a computer network that could survive a nuclear attack" (430). Survive it has, but the irony of that is the focus of this paper, namely, has the Internet survived to be the proliferator? I propose to answer the thesis question does the Internet alter culture? When I say culture, I imply a culture that is being intruded upon by the presence of the Internet, and as a result, does that culture change in any way? In this section, we will look briefly at the Internet, culture, and the merging of the two. This first section is an introduction only. The second section will discuss the pervasiveness of the Internet, while the third section will discuss culture when it has been penetrated. Section four will discuss the backlash of cultural intrusion, and in the conclusion we will determine if, in fact, there is an influence in culture resultant of the Internet's presence.
McChesney states that "...the Internet...permits inexpensive, global, interactive, and mass computer communication, as well as access to a previously unimaginable range of information" (Kim, 4). This range is synonymous to an electric Marco Polo, going to the far reaches that previously had not been traversed. Gersch argues that "The Internet exists at the crossroads of technology and culture" (306). But who has the right of way as they enter those crossroads, technology or culture? Or is there a dirt path that divides the two? Hamilton states that cyberculture is the realm of technology that has cultural implications (see p. 178). All the way back in 1966, Ford predicted that "A sweeping technological and intellectual revolution is transforming contemporary society. It is not confined by national or geographic boundaries. The abilities, thoughts, and beliefs of men everywhere are being reshaped by forces which are the result of applied rationality. Norbert Wiener connoted the pattern of these changes with the word cybernetics, a neologism which has become a general reference term for the contemporary revolution in industrial societies and a portent of the future for developing nations" (Hamilton, 191). But, who or what is the Internet? The Internet, literally, is anyone who has a computer and is online, but for this paper, we will look subcutaneously. Scholars have maintained that "...despite the advent of our current information society, information itself and its technology have remained in the hands of the economic elite" (Kim, 2). Rothenberg argues that the problem with the Internet is that it has only one species on it (see p.30). Rothenberg and Kim are implying that the vast majority of Internet users are Western, English-speaking, upper income, American White males (see the NTIA report). The crux of the later sections of this paper deal with the intrusion upon culture, but by who? I will have the burden in later examples to discuss that.
The scope of this paper is focused on the ramifications of an informational medium-cultural intercourse, hence I will use explanations that involve this particular scope. I mention this because entire papers have been written on what the definition of culture is, so I will offer a bare minimum. Communication is a social function. Habermas states that "...our species maintains itself through the socially coordinated activities of its members and that this coordination is established through communication" (Yaple & Korzenny, 296). Communication is a powerful force--we are what we communicate and are communicated to. Jeffres argues that "...ethnic media use is directly linked to maintenance or strengthening of ethnic identification" (Yaple & Korzenny, 312). The use of any media by our own in-group intensifies our bond to other in-group members, and the key is that we share similar qualities. Hamerlink,Schiller, and Mowlana have all argued that "...cultural autonomy is fundamental for the survival of human beings who have developed particular cultures for their unique adaptation to the environment" (Yaple & Korzenny, 309). For some cultures, autonomy is crucial. Davis states that "Worldwide some 300 million people, roughly 5% of the global population, still retain a strong identity as members of an indigenous culture, rooted in history and language, and attached by myth and memory to a particular place. Yet increasingly their unique visions in life are being lost in a whirlwind of change" (64). So, culture is a vital essence to all of us--some more than others, but still vital to all.
When the rubber hits the road, there is smoke. We as people who live by varying degrees of cultural association also will have varying reactions as to a forced intrusion from outside the group. The thesis question gets to the heart of this matter--what does it take to alter one's cultural system? As an American (we'll just leave it at that for the sake of brevity), I understand the influential power of the media; in fact, I have grown up relying on television as my primary source of information. I see other parts of the world and understand that I am different from others. But what about the people from other cultures who have been in an isolation from the outside? The Internet is a form of communication--it is pervasive and has the power of Moses; suddenly a culture has access to everything, and the ability to actively communicate with the outside. Jones notes that "Computer-mediated communication is essentially socially produce space" (Giese, 153). Hence our link; the Internet is a social medium. We will now move into a more specific line of inquiry with section two, namely, just how pervasive is the Internet from a cultural perspective.
|
| |
INTERNET PERVASIVENESS The Internet is becoming more powerful with each new application. Pilarski states that "Kids' games have more power than the most powerful Cray computer had 20 years ago, and some greeting cards today have more computing power than existed on earth before 1950...if cars developed as fast as computers, they would travel today at speeds of 10K mph and cost only ...they would probably be only two inches long" (74). The ability to breach what was once a solid boundary is now a possibility through the Internet. Giese states that "In cyberspace, it is possible to cross a border with the touch of a button" (156). Many communication scholars feel that although it is Gutenberg who is credited with the invention of the printing press, the printing press had been invented and used much earlier by the Chinese; because the West and the East before Marco Polo were not exactly on good communicative terms, this knowledge was left intact and safe from outside acquisition. This section deals with the power the Internet has penetrating boundaries, the likelihood of the Internet altering the methodology/ecology of other cultures, the bias toward non-users (and how whole groups are now coming online), and the effects of the Internet in promoting a meta-culture.
The Internet, as a medium, is powerful due to the numerous methods of contact; one to one, one to many, and many to many. Its speed is almost instantaneous, and its popularity is increasing almost exponentially. Bimber states that "The evolution of the Net is still in its infancy. The number of people using it in the U.S. has grown at a rate of 50% to 75% per year for several years, putting it on a path into American life like that traversed by radio in the 1920's and 1930's and television in the 1950's and 1960's" (134). With that in mind, I agree with Yaple & Korzenny's assessment that "...intercultural contact through electronic communication continues to grow" (295). The Internet has the ability to blur boundaries--to access and to be accessed with ease what used to be almost proprietary indigenous knowledge. Toulmin says that "Traditional boundaries, like national borders, which people believed to be fundamental and permanent, have become blurred by both transnational entities and emergent local spaces" (Hong, 264). Also, the event of the Internet has ushered in a new communication style--one that is a virtual-dyadic like the phone, but well beyond mere aural application. Giese states that "Electronic communications have provided humanity with the ability to transcend space in an unprecedented way, but only recently have these technologies been able to provide the same sort of communication forums that have existed within space-bound human communities" (153). Further, Giese says that computer mediated communication "...has the ability to provide communication options similar to the market bazaar, the town hall, the political rally, or the cocktail party on a geographically dispersed basis. Physical proximity is no longer a requirement for these sorts of interactions" (154). Alongside the blurring of boundary is the push for a universal culture. Sullivan states that "Aside from Coca-Cola and the Big Mac, ubiquitous personal communications technology is the greatest driver of mass globalization we have. Wireless and Internet technologies are reaching every corner of the world, often with unpredictable results..." (1). Unpredictable, as if by a sense of volition, Rothenberg argues that "...information breaks through barrier after barrier. It wants to be free...Yet technology doesn't just improve, it passes through thresholds as well..." (30)...and that "...technology helps us transcend our natural location in the scale of things" (31). The flow of information is no longer limited; cross-boundary exchange can take place from the privacy of your own home now. Morris states that "Migration is no longer just the movement of people or animals or plants but the conveyance of electronic data across computer systems so that the data can still be read when the machines on which they first were stored are obsolete" (12). Morris emphasized the fact of information outliving its vessel; in like manner, once such a large audience has privy to such information, it has the potential to inculcate and be beyond return to any previous state of existence. Hong argues that "...the motion of a technological system or network cannot be completely controlled by human beings, including engineers. Once set into motion, the system or network acquires, like a snowball, its own momentum--a momentum too large to be changed by minor human interventions..." (260). Isn't that swell? If it can't be stopped, then what is the result?
The world is trying to catch up to the electronic precedent set in motion from the West. Mowshowitz argues that "In less than half a century the worlds of work, government, school, home, and the arts have been enhanced, enlarged, empowered, and transfigured by the use of computers" (23). Edwards agrees by assessing that "...(computer) chips are changing our relationships with the things around us in subtle ways that are not without ambivalent effects" (71). One consideration we must have is how this affects the youth. Along with the rapid changes in the ecology of what is becoming the computer culture, the methodology of education is also changing. Dwyer states that "Along with the retrofitting of classrooms has come a rethinking of teaching and learning, as computers subtly alter power structures, teaching strategies and curricula" (56). In fact, power distance, which is more pronounced in Eastern countries, is becoming less pronounced in the West due to the ability of our youth to go directly to a source without referring to an elder, which is common in an Eastern high power distance culture (for power distance, refer to Hofestede). Morris states that "Nothing but a keyboard and a screen divides kids from the new realm of information..." (11).
The ecology is also changing in respect to new groups coming online en masse for the first time, and also some people who are being left behind. The Associated Press (2000, March 03) announced that in Mexico there is a new Internet Service Provider (ISP) that will give Mexican citizens free Internet access in order to increase the volume of the Spanish voice. Another free ISP is being offered for Black Americans (who are behind White Net users, numerically) (see Jesdanun), as is still another for the benefit of women (see Johannson). One rapidly increasing voice on the Internet are the 55+ year olds--the silver surfers. Coleman "...saw usage spreading as silver surfers increased, while online discussions were finding more people with computer access but not previously part of the social group which took part in political activity starting to become involved" (King, 3). Looking at the recent trend in people who go out to vote, perhaps this is a good influence! There are, however, some that are not benefiting from the Internet. Soukup ponders, "Lest we get lost in a kind of populist admiration for the Internet, we should also ask...Who is not there? or What is no represented?...we must recognize that the Internet currently excludes as many voices as it promotes. Those without access to technology do not appear on the Internet. That category includes people already marginalized, people with low incomes, people of certain education levels, people with some hesitation about technology and people busy with other things...even without gatekeepers, the Internet has its gates" (10). Also, Horror writer Stephen King has a huge following that anxiously awaits the release of each of his novels. Unfortunately for those of his fans that are without Internet access, his last novel was released via Web only (see Harkavy). Despite these changes mentioned here, there is still a push toward homogeneity on the Internet.
Just as Gerbner has stated that "...the television mainstream may be the true 20th century melting pot of the American people" (Yaple & Korzenny, 310), it can also be assumed that, as Jones states, "American culture is global culture. That does not mean that it is perfect--or even necessarily good--but that it is the closest thing that exists to universalism" (118). Since the majority of the Internet activity is American (see NTIA report, 1999), it is easy to see that Internet culture is dominantly American-flavored. With this in mind, Yaple & Korzenny ponder: "Does the mass media as the cultural production of one society influence another, and, if so, how? Some scholars believe that our world is in a continuous state of homogenization; traditional lifeways are breaking down, their memberships forming an atomized mass--not a romanticized gemeinschaft, but a collection of alienated individuals--susceptible to the influence of a dominant culture" (296). And with this flux toward homogeneity is the Eurocentric belief of a global modernization. Lerner assigns this belief as part of the progression of the modernization process, which is a four-step process that includes "...urbanization, literary, media participation, and political participation...the assumption was that eventually, through mass education and mass media (emphasis added) across cultures, all countries, and all peoples, would finally become modern" (Yaple & Korzenny, 303). Finally, before we move to the next section, which deals with the effects of cultural penetration, think about what Hamerlink calls synchronization of culture through the Internet. Hamerlink argues that "...the great variety of the world's cultural contexts (are) disappearing due to a process of cultural synchronization: facilitating a conscientious effort toward synchronic transnationalism, which will allow multinational corporations to create a uniform global marketplace for their products" (Yaple & Korzenny, 309). Now we will examine the real effects of the pervasiveness, even intrusion, of the Internet.
|
The universe is large, but our world is small.
We depend on each other! |
| |
THE IMPACT OF CULTURAL PENETRATION The impact upon a penetrated culture from an outside source can have varying effects, from great to horrible, as some cultures welcome alternate points of view, while others want to keep their autonomy. Hence, we should be careful with intrusive products. In fact, Giese states that "...the phenomenal growth of the Internet...(gives us) the sense that the Internet is more a cultural phenomena than a technological one" (152). In this section we will examine the effects of acculturation, cultural imperialism, the Internet as a vehicle, and some very brief case studies.
Mowshowitz and I are in agreement when we ponder, the mere fact that something can be done does not mean that it should be done (see p.23). Duh! If we can see a problem that may occur, then perhaps we should take the stance of Star Treks' Prime Directive--don't interfere with other worlds (cultures in this case). As has been the case with previous technologies, the Internet is different. Straubhaar & Do state that "...the information revolution will probably be quite different from previous technological revolutions. Rather than producing physical products in a technically neutral fashion, it will involve rapid and widespread transmission of information in a culture-laden, asymmetrical way" (Hedley, 205). Hong states that "...when a technology becomes part of a sociotechnical network consisting of other technologies and human users, it may have some unexpected consequences" (260). Mowlana states that "The notion that information and communication are, in fact, culturally neutral is the greatest myth of our time" (Hedley, 205). And since it is not neutral, it does have an effect. But can it be stopped or diverted? Not always. Hong states that "Modern technology changes our society in unexpected ways. Many modern technologies have wider social ramifications and external costs that can be effectively predicted and controlled by their inventors" (261). Also, Heilbroner states that "...the forces of technical change have been unleashed, but the agencies for the control or guidance of technology are still rudimentary" (Hong, 262). With this in mind, let's look at the effects of transference.
When a culture is transferred to another group of people, as can be the case with the Internet, the outside source can influence the inside culture over time. Young Yun Kim's definition of acculturation (borrowed from Marden & Meyers) states that "...the change in individuals whose primary learning has been in one culture and takes over the traits of another culture" (Yaple & Korzenny, 311). This shifting can result when a person is subjected to lengthy periods on the Internet with its global access. This doesn't imply that the free flow of information outside of your indigenous culture is detrimental, but the potential is there, especially if the culture in question is not English speaking or Western in orientation. Yaple & Korzenny argue that "...free flow is but the guise for a potentially destructive force of alien ideas whose aim is to destroy fragile, emergent national identities and their embryonic mass media culture industries" (306). Also, Davis argues that "Cultures disappear only when they are overwhelmed by external forces and when conditions imposed upon them render them incapable of adapting" (77). Perhaps what is needed is more time--a period of adjustment for other cultures to adjust to the rapid change. Ogburn's term cultural lag identifies "...changes in material culture or the applications of scientific discovery and the material products of technology...occur at a faster rate than the changes in the nonmaterial, adaptive culture (values, norms, patterns of social organization, etc.), thereby causing maladjustment in the nonmaterial culture, or cultural lag" (Hedley, p.204). And as a result, there is disruption. One example is as Dwyer ponders, "How are you going to keep kids down on the farm once they've seen Paris?" (57). Another is the blurring of tradition and folklore. Rothenberg states that "Myths may become more transferable as they move from culture to culture...No culture will be closer than any other--all stories will be up for grabs--No community will be able to stay isolated for long without believing that they are missing out" (31). Since myth and folklore are part of some cultural educational systems, this transference can have permanent ramifications. Another consideration is that of language. Since the Internet is predominantly in English (thus far), it is easy to assume that Internet use can diminish reliance on one's non-English native tongue. In fact, Davis states that "Throughout all of history something on the order of 10K spoken languages have existed. Today, of the roughly 6K languages still spoken, many are not being taught to children--effectively, they are already dead--and only 300 (languages today) are spoken by more than a million people. In another century, fully half of the languages spoken around the world today may be lost...when we lose a language, it is like dropping a bomb on the Louvre...The issue is whether ancient cultures will be free to change on their own terms, adopting beneficial aspects of the modern world while rejecting intrusions that can only harm their spirit and heritage" (65). The structural presence of English in the Internet's infrastructure has an inclusiveness, and the end result may well be the exclusion of other languages used. If the global Internet becomes as established as the trend asserts, then as Ken Hale of M.I.T. states, "As languages disappear, cultures die" (see Davis, 65). The intrusion of foreign values can have a lasting effect on a culture that is so awestruck by new technology or anything that had previously been unobtainable. The traditional forms of maintenance are not as effective in keeping a way of life intact--geographic mostly. The Internet can penetrate culture where geography was once an inhibiting factor. Yaple & Korzenny state that "Traditional barriers that have protected cultural diversity are potentially vulnerable to an influx of alien information made possible through the foreign mass media" (297). This leads us to the aggressive hegemony that dominant cultures display while overtaking a more submissive or poorly prepared culture.
The Internet is akin to a Bull in a china shop; the Bull is the force of the dominant culture and language, while the china (that is damaged when the Bull comes in contact with it) is the culture and language of the host. The Bull is also known as cultural imperialism, at least in this context it is. For example, Thomas states that "One of the most significant and pervasive implications of the Internet will be the diffusion of Western (and specifically the U.S.) culture and influence around the globe. A majority of the programming content of the Internet originates in the U.S. The Internet largely runs on U.S. software, is accessed by U.S. software, and is controlled by U.S. software. U.S. products, services, information, and entertainment dominate the Internet. The English language, already established as the 1st language of international commerce, will spread even more rapidly and become even more dominant as the language of international commerce and conversation. The Internet, like the movies, music and television before it, will be a marketing agent for American culture" (38). The example just used points at American intrusion--the origin is irrelevant in this paper--what we are trying to find out is whether or not any culture can utilize the Internet and effectively alter the culture of another. Another example is that of gender. Gersch argues that "...the interrelation between science/technology, political economy, and culture accounts for different experiences of women and men in relation to the Internet because of particular discourses privileged in these areas" (306). And further, Harding argues that "The scientific knowledge on which the Internet is built is based on modernist epistemology, basically a male-centered and male-valued rationality based on Western assumptions of hierarchy, following from Enlightenment philosophy and pervading all areas of Western life" (see Gersch, p.307). Turkle argues that "...the computer has no inherent gender bias but that the computer culture is socially constructed as male (emphasis added)...the computer becomes a personal and cultural symbol of what a woman is not" (see Gersch, p.307). Still another example is that of elitism. Again, Gersch states that "...the Internet...constitutes a barrier for economically disadvantaged groups in society, among them a large number of women. The Internet then becomes an alternative space mainly for the economically privileged, raising the issue of class as important in defining empowering and alienating experiences for women with the Internet. Because of the Internet's inaccessibility to women in underdeveloped countries and women of lower economic status in Western capitalist countries, the possibility of these women's issues to be voiced on the Internet is slim" (309). Another form of elitism is that of the religious nature. Soukup states that "A quick look at the World Wide Web using a standard search engine shows 16,500 faiths and practices sites and 12K Christianity sites" (9). The point is, there is a massive representation of the religion of the West--which is predominantly Christian. For other cultures based in religions other than Christianity, their presence on the Internet, at least initially, may be offensive to them (since it appears that an assumption of Christianity has been established, just as there is an assumption of English, also). These examples display what is commonly known as cultural imperialism, the imposition of a cultural standpoint on everyone else without considering what everyone else thinks. Information falls under this aegis also. Hamerlink states that "...information and its technology are controlled by the core nations, and its flow is seen as uni-directional from the core to the periphery, with little opportunity for peripheral nations to participate in the process" (Kim, p.2). Smith asserts that "...cultural imperialism denies the power of the audience to interpret the message on its own contexts or to form its own meanings from the message" (Kim, p.3). Quantitatively, the numbers don't lie: "When argued from an empirical basis, the facts and figures of American cultural popularity on the Internet make the case for cultural imperialism seem virtually undeniable. As of July 1995, there were 6.64 million host computers on the Internet. This number has been approximately doubling annually since 1981...2.37 million of these are international hosts connected to the Internet, representing 150 countries. In 1994, there was wide variation in the number of Internet hosts per thousand people, ranging from 14 (Finland) to fewer than 0.05 (Korea)...Currently, 90% of traffic worldwide on the Internet is in English. These, together with the following factors, have lead some to denounce the Internet as the most recent and most sinister facet of American cultural imperialism to emerge: the Internet is anchored in the U.S.; the vast majority of Web sites are based in the U.S. and are in English; most software used to navigate the Internet is in English; and search engines are mostly in English...On the surface it would certainly appear that the U.S. has taken over through its cultural dominance on the Internet" (5).
Earlier I stated that America was not the issue here, but that we needed to make an example of the dominant culture on the Internet. Since we have established the U.S. as the dominant Internet culture, we have to give it a name. The term hegemony aptly applies to the dominance that the U.S. has on the Internet. Yaple & Korzenny state that "...hegemony saturates the consciousness of a people, structuring their belief systems, setting their agendas, ordering every aspect of their lives...creating a dominant myth structure known as tradition--a composite set of beliefs that facilitate the continuance of a lifeway" (308). But does this lifeway indicate a need for singularity? Y&K again ask: "Does the mass media construct hegemony, maintain hegemony, or more simply require it for the construction of a shared system of meaning?" (emphasis added)(309). But what if the hegemony is inherent? Hedley argues that "Even though it commands a computer in binary code, computer software originates in words, the effective currency of culture. Furthermore, according to George Gilder...we are now reaching the stage where the distinction between hardware and software will all but vanish" (204). Regarding hardware, even the keyboard is characterized in English. As an example, Gates points out that "...representing (Japanese) kanji characters on a standard keyboard creates another space-related problem" (emphasis added)(Hedley, p.206). The same problem exists for Spanish characters, Cyrillic, or anything other than standard English. Hedley states that "...not only are there different cultural responses to technological innovation, but in some cases the innovations themselves are culturally packaged" (206). The Internet is anchored in the English language and American culture, and unless things change from this current state, further penetration into other cultures will be nothing less than imperialistic and hegemonic.
In the past, vehicles such as television have escorted American values to whoever was able to receive transmission. The coca-colonization of the planet has taken place, and we in the U.S. are the vendors. The advent of the Internet has added a new twist to the marketing of the planet--further reduction in border. Jones argues that "The death of distance, we are told, will probably be the single most important force shaping society in the first half of the next century...conclusions about the benign cultural and political implications of modern communications are perhaps a little overly optimistic" (116). As we will see in section four, the exportation of culture at the expense of one's own culture is not welcome everywhere. Jones reflects on the resentment in the U.K. when he states that "If cultural resentment rises even in Britain, which is 2nd to the U.S. as an exporter of intellectual property, it will swell much more on the continent" (117). But before that, we will look at some case studies of cultural penetration.
Singapore (all information taken from Kim, p.6): The Singapore government believes that...technology must be accompanied by an equally forceful effort to preserve the cultural infrastructure that will allow the country to take advantage of its lead (Berlingeri et al).
The new Internet regulations affecting the use of the Internet in Singapore (05 March 96)...would monitor Web sites coming into Singapore and remove such pages that violate Singapore law, which has strict penalties for libel, slander, pornography, and racial and religious attacks. The three Internet service providers (ISP's) here are supposed to block access to these sites via their gateways. The groups that maintain Web sites...need to be registered for annual license.
Singapore is an Asian country and holds strong values of conservatism and family loyalty...pornography and lifestyle alternatives will obviously have a detrimental effect on the younger generation...
From the point of view of a country like Singapore, it is simply a struggle for preserving a national ideology and value system that may otherwise be swamped by unwanted outside influences.
France (all information taken from Kim, pp.6-7): France as a nation is ferociously proud of its cultural identity and has long been hostile to perceived attempts to dilute its cultural specificity through the increasing saturation of American culture and the English language. The world wide dominance and ubiquity of American popular culture is viewed as cultural imperialism (Selene).
The Internet is perceived as the most recent and most pernicious form of the U.S.-led cultural imperialism. The words that the average French person would use to describe the Internet are probably 'useless', 'complicated' , and 'another tool of American cultural imperialism' (Giussani)...France's preferred weapon against cultural imperialism is the imposition of quotas upon the entry of non-European (read 'American') cultural products...the presence of foreign words in a nation's language was perceived as a contaminating influence.
The sanctity of maintaining the purity and integrity of the French language is seen as an essential element in the preservation of France's cultural identity. Jacques Chirac has objected to the fact that 90% of traffic worldwide on the Internet is in English. The magnitude of the risks it apparently poses for French cultural identity are presented as so colossal that regulation is necessary to prevent the dilution of France's Frenchness. The law...requir(es) advertising to be in French. The law...established an important precedent which may well give strength to the claims of other countries to the right to introduce measures to protect their culture in the face of the onslaught of U.S. popular culture threatened by the Internet.
South Korea (all information taken from Kim, pp.7-8): in South Korea, about half of all Internet users are affiliated with universities or the government...The Korean government has decided to censor domestic computer networks (Oct. 1995)...The decision was made out of growing concern regarding the access to sexually explicit and other undesirable material...Korean culture (is) rooted in the Confucian conservative philosophy that underlies much of the Korean lifestyle...Sung Hi Lee (is) a 26 year old Korean-American girl who has appeared in a variety of U.S. adult magazines...(A) large number of young Korean Net surfers could find her nude pictures on the Internet without any difficulty though the local online adult sites are banned in Korea...it could not happen in South Korea without the Internet...scholars and government officials in South Korea now claim that the Internet is littered with too many sites, mostly in Western countries, containing harmful material and cleaning them up must be a priority to keep traditional culture.
Vietnam (all information taken from Schmit): Internet access beyond reach of most in Vietnam (title)...Phuong Le, a labor practices manager for Nike, is one of just 40K Internet users in Vietnam. Vietnam's Internet costs far surpass the financial means of a vast majority of the country's 78 million residents, who have an average per capita income of just a year...Vietnam is rapidly losing any competitive advantage to Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, and China, who are embracing information technologies to market their products to a worldwide export marketplace...The government has cut Internet fees by 25%, although at a month plus two cents a minute, they remain too high for most.
Israel (all information taken from Netanyahu): ...my son has a PC at home. I just use it for word processing...it is hard to imagine the leader of an advanced country not having a grounding in both technology and economics. You have to understand how each works, and, as I see it, the main problem is to marry technology into those applications that advance economic competitive advantage...Technology has already played a key part in an economic and cultural change in Israel. We were a largely socialist society. Because of the information revolution, we are now opening up and moving in another direction. Where there once was one government and two private television channels, technology now brings us (cable) access to the global culture.
Japan: Hedley states that "...the cultural quintessence of Japanese organization and society (is) a clearly delineated, highly formalized, benevolently paternalistic arrangement of people bound together in predominantly face-to-face dependency relationships" (206). Lipset states that "The Internet is far more culturally geared to the American creed of antistatism, individualism, populism, and egalitarianism" (Hedley, p.206).
Finally, a generic example about indigenous peoples. Davis states that "Indigenous peoples...are said to stand in the way of development, which becomes grounds for dispossessing them and destroying their way of life. Their disappearance is then described as inevitable, as such archaic folk cannot be expected to survive in the modern world. The idea that indigenous societies are incapable of change and bound to fade away is wrong..." (76).
Cultural protection by a governing body and its citizens are our final section, and it has become quite obvious at this point that the Internet has a distinct influence on culture. In the next section we will explore some of those negative as well as positive influences.
|
|
|
| |
BACKLASH AND CONCLUSION
To begin with, Hedley states that "American popular culture is so potent that outside the U.S. some countries now attempt to ration it" (205). The force of an intrusive culture is too powerful to sit back and absorb, so these sample nations have decided to take a proactive stance against cultural annihilation.
In Europe, France and Germany are examined here. Jones states that "Both France and Germany contain people who resent the success of global English, which already has more second-language speakers than any other tongue. France spends million a year on promoting French language and culture (118). Sullivan states that "The Internet is particularly hated in France, for being mostly in English. Reuters reports that the French Finance Ministry has struck back by developing uniquely French terms for some of the new words the Internet economy has coined. Instead of stock options, the ministry prefers options 'sur titre' (options on a share), 'message electronique' means e-mail, and software is 'logiciel'. The Web is 'la Toile'".
In the Asian realm, we will examine briefly Myanmar (Burma), China, Cambodia, and Singapore. In Myanmar, the government is strict regarding the Internet. The Associated press (2000, May 13) reports that "The government...keeps a tight grip on all communications and media. The Myanmar Post and Telecommunications, a state agency, is allowed to provide telephone and e-mail service, but it cannot allow public access to the Internet. People with unauthorized ownership of a fax modem or computer network risk up to 15 years imprisonment and a fine...The state forbids posting political writings on the Internet, including anything detrimental to Myanmar or to the current policies and secret security affairs of the government". Also, Pennington writes that "While the rest of developing Asia is rushing headlong into the information technology revolution, Myanmar's unelected military rulers forbid cyberspace, fearing it could open up a Pandora's box of dissent...there are (estimates of) more than 50K computers in this land of 48 million people...But networking between those computers and the outside world is still forbidden. A 1996 law imposes a 7- to 15- year jail term for the unauthorized ownership of a modem...government spokesman Lt. Col. Hla Min (states that)...We want to use the Internet for constructive purposes to improve the knowledge of our people, not as a platform for troublemakers to create problems...while the regime produces its own colorful Web site (www.myanmar.com), and has the capacity to provide the public with Internet access, it chooses to keep the international information spigot closede-mail remains restricted to a few hundred foreigners and to privileged Myanmar officials and businessmen with close ties to the government".
In China, Pennington reports that "...the government has set up a special Internet police unit and has even jailed a few users for posting information purported to pose a national security threat".
In Cambodia, the Associated Press (2000, April 03) reports that "Prime Minister Hun Sen is fed up with what he calls an assault on traditional values--too many women wearing miniskirts on television. Hun Sen ordered Cambodia's television stations...to get the short skirts--which he labeled foreign to Cambodian culture--off their programs or risk losing their broadcasting licenses...Most Cambodians are conservative in matters of dress and sexual mores. We must consider that no other culture is better than ours, and we must protect it said Hun Sen...". Since television can be accessed via the Internet, it is logical to assume a consistency here. Also, if the government doesn't want miniskirts, then how would they feel about pornography?
In Singapore, the government has gone to great lengths to protect its culture. Hogan reports that "...the government would like to rid the Net of content that threatens public order and national security, religious and racial harmony, and morality...through attempted regulation of Internet content" (432). The means the government chose to carry out this purge include new (1996, March 05) regulations for citizens, which include the following site content not to access: content that includes public security and national defense, content that disrupts racial and religious harmony, content base in moral character, as well as the name or number of other forbidden sites (see Hogan, pp.432-434). In addition to these regulations, Singapore requires class licenses, and utilization of a proxy server, which sifts content through it like a filter (see Hogan, pp. 434-436). Hence, we conclude our survey of Asia and our case studies.
It is interesting to note that some nations would like to have their cakes and eat them, too! I am referring to the dichotomy between entering the global market, while not surrendering to the global language; the point here is not to defend the hegemony of the Internet, but to point out inconsistencies that may weigh into my final stance. Hogan states that "For nations like Singapore and China that wish to control the exchange of ideas, particularly those of Western origin, the desire to advance technologically is tempered by the desire to maintain censorship powers" (429). Hogan continues; "At some point, the government must determine whether the goals of technological progress and economic growth will be overshadowed by the attempt to protect the traditional and cultural value system" (437). Ferguson states that "Global cultural homogeneity as a myth must presume a global cultural economy that completely ignores local, regional, or national influences" (Kim, p.3). The goal is to change the hegemony into a cooperative presence, not to compete in the present presence and complain that it is oppressive. Some ideas to be considered are as follows. First of all, Kim states that "...the application of cultural imperialism is not only impracticable, it is also unnecessary. First, with the Internet there is no central location of power...the Internet is entirely decentralized" (8). By sheer number, a minority voice can have a more powerful presence. Also, the Internet is capable of multiple voices, the barrier-less platform allows cultures to continue (via the ether) even at great distances, information is pulled and not pushed upon a person, and finally, there is nothing physically preventing the Internet from being a truly multicultural forum (see Kim, pp.8-9). Also, Gersch states that "Listservs and newsgroups are an important part of the Internet and serve as sources of information and discussion. This makes for what many people call the true democracy of the Internet (emphasis added). The Internet is often praised as a potential source of societal transformation, providing a forum for people to exchange their ideas and engage in discussion freely. Individuals sharing the same feelings, emotions, ideas, and histories can connect without ever meeting face to face and still form a community" (312).
CONCLUSION
The Internet is an influential force that can and does alter culture. But to what degree? Is the influence mild and gradual, almost evolutionary? Or, is it rapid and harsh, like punctuated equilibrium? These questions are a matter for further research. In this paper I have demonstrated that for positive or negative, the Internet is an influential force that alters culture. The Internet is at present a global phenomenon. How global is global? Will there be a universal language for the Internet? English? A planetary culture? How will that affect the power structure? Yaple & Korzenny believe that "The question...is not of whether a planetary culture will eventually emerge. But what shape, from what sources, and who will control it?" (314). Right now it is American-flavored. Grove's analogy symbolizes it well: The Internet is like an American tidal wave coming, and the rest of the world are in kayaks! (see Hedley, p.205).
A more cataclysmic outlook is that of hegemony gone wild. Maybury-Lewis argues that "Genocide, the physical extermination of a people, is universally condemned...But ethnocide, the destruction of a people's way of life, is not only not condemned when it comes to indigenous peoples, it is advocated as appropriate policy" (Davis, p.76).
These may be extremes, but the point is that yes, influence is present, but the forum may still be available for these cultures to reclaim their identity. On the other hand, time has shown us that no matter what, someone has to survive. In conclusion, I agree with Davis when he says, "In the end the cultures that survive will be those that are willing and able to embrace the new on their own terms, while rejecting anything that implies the total violation of their way of life" (89).
Music selection: STAIRWAY TO HEAVEN
|
|
|
|
