Has/ How has Marshall McLuhans Global village thesis materialised in the 21st Century?
In Marshall McLuhans Understanding the media (1964) our eyes are opened to a new magnitude of thought, a thought that has made itself a home in the long standing discussion of Globalisation. More so he comments upon the way that the growth of the media and electronic technology has, and will continue to change the map as we see it. His work within this volume known as ‘The global village thesis’ describes the effect of the media on our universal relationships, ‘The advent of Electronic media would result in the emergence of a global village’ (Mooney, A & Evans, B . 2007:115). McLuhan describes the global village as an outcome of the vast spread of technologies, an outcome that has triggered an extension of our natural senses. Now due to progressions in television and computing, we are able to see not only events happening in our own habitual surroundings, but those that also happen at the furthest distance, thus extending our sense of sight. We have the ability to tune into a radio station and listen to the events happening in any continent of the world, just as if they were in our own village, ergo, ‘The Global village’. ‘He saw the reconfigured world environment emerging as a result of human kinds increasingly intense reaction with electronic media as one which ‘the human tribe can become truly one family and mans consciousness can be freed from the shackles of mechanical culture and enabled to roam the cosmos.’ (Mooney, A & Evans, B . 2007:103) It is because of such inventions as the internet (in production at the time of the writing of understanding the media) that we posses the capability to receive information from the other side of the world in a matter of seconds much like we would verbally speaking to someone in out own parameter. More so it can be argued that we are able to access and gain information faster via the internet, than we could if we were to address someone. It is this progression in telecommunications that has expedited a monumental shift in our social relationships, both local and global. It is argued that the rapidity in the evolution of media that has changed not only the way that we view the world, but integrated within that, the way that the world views us, and the lens through which we see each other. ‘Instantaneous communication would effectively eliminate distance; as information was transmitted across geographic boundaries at an unprecedented pace that the world would effectively shrink.’(Mooney, A & Evans, B . 2007:115)
However not everyone has taken McLuhan’s views of this new world order with the same perspective of prosperity and optimism, a few critics have blamed the expansion of technology, for a scope of concerning factors emerging within the world. They label the surge of communicative platforms such as the internet and the mobile phone as commodities that have forced us not to expand our communicative and social horizons but have led us into living a more integral lifestyle. Some contemporary critics assert that the ‘cybernization’ of the media ‘has offered people the opportunity to pack themselves into ever smaller worlds, where enthusiasm mutate into obsessions, and a reality check is a parallel dimension away.’ (Mooney, A & Evans, B . 2007:103) Others also had concerns that information would become too accessible and this would cause chaos and strife rather than the ideal and harmonious world that McLuhan prescribed, they stated that the swell in use of transmissive platforms ‘would result In sudden conflicts that resulted from too easy to access information’ (Mooney, A & Evans, B . 2007:115) However McLuhan combated these statements and reviewed expressing that he looked upon these centrifugal bound conflicts of the global village with utter dismay and disapproval, commenting ‘I do not approve of the global village, I say we live in it.’ (Mooney, A & Evans, B . 2007:106)
A number of academics have criticised Mcluhans belief in the happening of a global village. Chomsky, Berger and Ritzer have all commented upon how they regard our global relationships each through an altered lens. Chomsky also believed that the impact or increased richness of our global exchanges were reliant on the media and its subjectivities. However he questions our ability to create absolute and compassionate relationships with those of our opposing compass points with the influence and manufacturing of the media and therefore the truth, advocating ‘The problem of this control has not gone away with globalisation - probably the reverse. Indeed the power and the sophistication of the media provide ever more powerful ways of influencing how people think and what they believe’. (Fox,J. 2001:21) Thus he blames the current incompatibility between two distant people, and their questionable capability to fully understand and emotionally connect with one another on the lack of truth portrayed in the media. Chomsky narrows this media control down to two points; ownership and sourcing. For example, in accordance with present U.K newspapers, a large ratio are owned by Rupert Murdock’s media conglomerate ’News Corporation’, these include, The Sun, News of the world and The Times. By owning and outputting through a number of written media platforms Rupert Murdock and his correspondents are able to force a calibre of self serving stories upon an array of audiences who willingly believe what they are reading to be ultimately factual and the truth. This therefore hinders our ability to make more pure and honest global relationships as we are isolated from knowing the legitimate story.
For example, Only 3 years ago in 2010 a very stark, unstable story was published in The Sun, with the title ‘Al-Qaeda Corrie threat’ (fig1). The tale detailed how stronger security measures had to be put in place on the Coronation street set, after hear say that the Al-Qaeda were planning an attack on the Manchester location. However what some may brush off as a ridiculous recording of events, others would be too easily inclined to accept the story as an authentic documentation of affairs. Consequently this could cause a domino reaction, which although quite small, would in some way effect many peoples wants and competence to communicate with others, particularly those who live in/are from the same region as to where the Al-Qaeda is based, even stretching as far as other expanses of the East or even those of the same racial background. ‘Meanwhile the media portray would be immigrants as a threat to the national standard of living, and racism grows’ (Fox,J. 2001:35) Therefore one falls victim of forged sourcing, as regularly what is reported is what is allowed to be reported by funders of media organisations, advertisers wants and in the interests of CEO’s, such as Rupert Murdock. Journalists must accordingly conform to the wish of the governing body in order to not loose there jobs, and thence in turn we as readers of these news stories should not receive them as the quintessential truth.
John Berger (Ways of seeing 1972) also accredits our lack of potential to empathise on the way in which stories are projected in the media, however for Berger it is not a question of the portrayal of truth, but the means to which these articles are placed and positioned. Such contrast of unfortunate pairings such as a tragic middle Eastern news story juxtaposed by a capitalist advertisement, as John Berger discussed in his book, are still existent in 21st century media (fig 2). In ‘Ways of seeing’ Berger identifies how the topography of a news spread influences us to think in a certain way, he argues that it is these simple mistakes during layout composition that can entirely effect the gravity of a piece. ‘The shock of such contrasts is considerable: not only because of the coexistence of the two worlds shown, but also because of the cynicism of culture which shows them one above the other.’ (Berger, J. 1972:152) These inappropriate combinations lead readers of such news to subconsciously assume that the importance of the news story is thus as important as the consumerist product that is advertised below it. The composition of a meaningless ad next to a distressing story, also drives the story to appear more diluted, that the seriousness of these two pieces are a mere reflection of one another. Berger comments further upon this discussing that once these media platforms have come to terms with such unlucky formations, they consider dulling down these images of ill-fated articles to black and white, so that when ‘accidentally’ placed beside one another they do not appear so blunt. Furthering this Berger stated the matter that the sheer shock of the contrast had no weight upon the location or tone of a story, ‘the contrast would have been no less stark if they had been events in Derry or Birmingham… If they are tragic, their tragedy alerts our moral sense to the contrast . Yet if the events were joyous and if they were photographed in a direct and unstereotyped way the contrast would be just as great.’ (Berger, J. 1972:153). Whilst McLuhan (Understanding the media) reflected that the growth in a persons ability to empathise with others would come naturally with the inflation of the media, ‘The aspiration of our time for wholeness, empathy and depth of awareness is a natural adjunct of electronic technology… There is a deep faith to be found in this attitude - a faith that concerns the ultimate harmony of all being.’ (McLuhan,M. 1964:5)
In spite of McLuhan’s claim that the media was essentially an extension of our biological senses, Berger disputes that the media has somewhat dulled our ability to honestly see, hear or feel. He argues that such placement of an ad and a serious story proves that all of our animate feelings have been dimmed by the want to own and posses hollow commodities. ‘It recognises nothing except the power to acquire. All other human faculties or needs are made subsidiary to this power.’ (Berger, J. 1972:153) Berger’s argument can be proved to an extreme extent, some of the most accessible evidence of this argument is lives within western charity appeals such as this piece, (fig3) designed as part of a campaign for Oxfam. The purpose of the Oxfam charity is simple, to fight global poverty through the realms of providing food, drink, education and employment opportunities across the vast planes of the developing world. At first glance of the advert we can see that there is no reference to the context of the charity, we are not informed of what the money we spend goes towards, the ethos or the aspirations of the charity. This is due to the materialisation that the contemporary culture are disconnected and therefore unconcerned with events in the world, 'all real events are exceptional and happen only to strangers.' (Berger, J. 1972:153) For this reason, advertisers see no necessity in adding this information, and instead use the space in these advertisements to react to the consumers compulsions. Within this appeal Oxfam have offered an easy way out, without the audience having to take even a small step outside of their comfort zone. Additionally, instead of only asking that they pay a small fee per month, investors are offered the opportunity to receive some exclusive items which they believe will improve their lives. It gives solution to the audiences fabricated needs to continually consume more. The audience have no perception that the Oxfam advert is in use to raise money for paramount issues in all corners of the world. These issues are concealed by something of more interest to the participator, and so they advance in life, knowing not of these important issues, but filled with the warm feeling and docile mind that they have helped themselves in helping someone else. ‘No other kind of hope or satisfaction or pleasure can any longer be envisaged within the culture of capitalism.’ (Berger, J. 1972:153) Due to the production of appeals such as these, we as the human race are moderately given the allowance to be ignorant to the root and principles of many appeals, we are able to avoid the back stories and the emotional territory. We are somewhat stripped of our ability to understand and create sincere relationships.
Chomsky also believed heavily in the topic of cultural imperialism, in this subject Chomsky questions whether the concern is in the peoples inability to interlink with other countries of opposite circumstances, or if our short coming of globalisation is due to a more dominant culture/nation exerting its power over a weaker residence, leading to a wider spread of one civilisation instead of the fusion of two or many. He argues that he particularly sees a tyrannical power of the western way of life, or more particularly that of the U.S unto what is considered a weaker domain such as the middle east. For example, Time warner is a giant American media conglomerate that outputs a high percentage of media with countless sub companies, through the mediums of Internet, publishing, film, telecommunications and television, all reaching, and encompassing one place, our entire sphere. He comments ‘Globalisation seems to be weakening the power of individual countries to control their own destinies, and major decisions are increasingly made higher up at a global level.’ (Fox,J. 2001:20). And therefore the information we receive is what such conglomerates such as Time warner desire for us to know. Thus any truth, which usually extends from the native media strains of regions such as Africa etc is left un accessed by many as such prosperous companies have the wealth to spread their message much further and wider, and to such a degree overcasts the truth. And so there is a posing question, is it even a question of globalisation or an actualisation of Homogeny. Are we blending with one another? or are we all falling into the line of a standard system pushed fourth by a more powerful landscape such as the U.S?
Ritzer also debates the presence of ‘Americanization’ and the consequence of multi-nationalist companies on the synthesis of culture, or absence of in the 21st century referring to the movement in which he calls ‘Mcdonaldization’. George Ritzer contrived this expression in his book, The Mcdonaldization of society (1993) in which he describes the conventions of the American fast food chain; efficiency, calculability, predictability and control as a wave of transformation succeeding numerous divisions of society and segments of the world. And in turn due to the influence of this one uniform system, the globe infact begins to merge into one homogenus culture spearheaded by the United states. Ritzer however rates the process of Mcdonaldization as increasingly efficient, ‘It also allows quantification of how many products are made in certain time frames (calculability), knowing exactly what the product will be like (predictability), and ensures very little variation and few mistakes (control).’ (Mooney, A & Evans, B . 2007:162) However through the employment of this one structure, the possibility of any culture in which this new scheme is embedded to be remotely creative is decreased tremendously. Gone are the times of native cuisine, brimming with ritual and tradition, and endorsed is the contemporary routine of ‘finger food, fast moving queues and DIY table clearings.’ (Taylor, S & Lyon, P. 1995:64) The oncoming of this one powerful flood of an American experience drowns the ability for any other culture to stay afloat. Through the insertion of Mcdonalds into almost every culture, each of these are able to undergo the exact same dining experience no matter if east or west, north or south. ‘Mcdonaldization is inexorable… We confront a future of accelerating Mcdonaldization…It (Mcdonalds) will be remembered as yet another precursor to a still more rational world.’ (Taylor, S & Lyon, P. 1995:64) In the 21st century, as of 2013, 69 million people are served in more than 34,000 restaurants in 118 around the world locations everyday. Ritzer does however argue that the diffusion of such a large company has had some positive effect on our present day lives, these consistent conventions of life produce efficiency which therefore amounts to food being readily accessible and low-cost implying it could be attained by any social class. ‘It is worth bearing in mind that this way of working is also enabling (mainly at the point of consumption) because efficiency means availability and affordability.’ (Mooney, A & Evans, B . 2007:162) Ritzer further poses us to ask the question as Chomsky did, is it a case of east meets west or western tyranny on eastern territory?
The arguments put forth by Chomsky, Berger and Ritzer have given evidence to both the possibility and impossibility of a globalised world. McLuhan predicted that through expansion of media platforms such as telephone/mobile phone, computers, radio and television the world would pull closer into a global embrace. We do nonetheless have to be sympathetic to the fact that when McLuhan wrote and published his thoughts of an oncoming global village that he did not yet know the effects that such a platform as the internet would have on our ability to interact with each other locally and globally. What McLuhan wrote does somewhat hold ground in the 21st century, because of these fast growing advances we are able to see more of the world than ever before, we are able to learn of things across the gulfs of the earth that wouldn’t be feasible without these modes of communication. So in reference to McLuhan’s thesis, we have become moderately akin, however in reflection of the ideologies put forth by Chomsky and Berger, we are in the current age transparently lacking the ability associate with each other on an emotional level. The oxfam advert is an undimmed mirror image of our ability to empathise with one another or build compassionate relationships, and because of this I do agree that the advancements of phone to mobile phone and internet have given us the capability to hide away from each other and live a more integral life. However I do not believe it is all down to our own choice, we do not purposefully drown out all of the tragedies of our surrounding world, I accredit some of this responsibility to the media output which we receive. As Chomsky and Berger both discuss, how are we able to conceive honest relationships with one another, if what we are being fed is a fabrication of the truth? We could feel solemn remorse for those in a state of tragedy or abundantly happy for those in a circumstance of joy, but are we naive to do so? And it is this what I think is manifesting in the 21st century, as described previously by Chomsky through the rationale of cultural imperialism, we are falling short of globalisation between the balance of the manufactured media and the mediums themselves. Our senses have been dulled, we are as a positive more knowledgable about our world, nonetheless, we look without seeing, we listen but do not hear and are touched by the stories but we do not feel, our senses have not been extended like McLuhan prescribed they have, they have in fact lessened. Ritzer construes that as of this moment in time it is not a question of globalisation but homogeny and the outbreak of one powerful movement (United states) travelling across the continents of the world. I do agree in some sense that there is a heavy emphasis of the west in eastern culture especially an American influence, however like Ritzer I do not believe it has only had a negative effect, I believe that these changes, although large have not drowned out any culture, but are aiding to perscribe a more efficient, accessible world. From the evidence provided by the 3 academics and an array of evidence provided by 21st century newspapers, advertisements, internet sources and trade that the global village McLuhan depicted has not materialised in this exact form, yet there has been an impression of interaction, a realisation that we know more about every projection of the earth as time evolves, even if we are not well empathised with others, we are at least educated.
Bibliography:
Berger, J (1972) ‘Ways of Seeing’ Great Britain: British Broadcasting Corporation and Penguin books ltd.
Fox, J (2001) ‘Chomsky and Globalisation’ UK: Icon Books ltd.
McLuhan, M (1964) ‘Understanding media: The extensions of man’ New York: McGraw-Hill.
McLuhan, M & R.Powers, B (1989) ‘The Global village: Transformations in world life in the 21st century’ New York: Oxford university press.
Mooney, A & Evans, B (2007) ‘Globalisation The Key Concepts’ UK, Oxon: Routledge.
Taylor, S & Lyon, P. (1995) ‘International journal of Contemporary hospitality management, Vol.7 No 2/3’ MCB University press.
Terrance Gordon, W & Willmarth S (1997) ‘McLuhan for beginners’ London, England: Writers and readers limited.
Images:
fig1:
http://the-sun-lies.blogspot.co.uk/2010/12/apology-for-al-qaeda-corrie-threat-lie.html
fig2:
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/5262483/urgent-appeal-to-donate-a-pound-to-victims-of-typhoon-haiyan-in-philippines.html
fig3:
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3199/2625195092_db69d44c05.jpg
