Reader response (final draft)

In 'Globalization of Culture Through the Media' (2002), Kraidy attempts to evaluate the different perspectives of globalization, namely cultural imperialism and hybridization through media. He describes the first school of thought, cultural imperialism, to be one where Western nations are exerting their dominance by exporting their ideas through the media to developing countries. He then explores the second school of thought, cultural hybridization, to be one where the phenomenon of localization that adapts the imported ideas to one’s own culture inherently relinquishes developing countries from Western domination. He then comes to the conclusion that cultures around the world inherently amalgamate imported cultures with their own, and transnational mass media only exacerbate this process.

I agree with Kraidy’s view that mass media act as an accelerant to hybridization instead of being the root cause of it. This can be illustrated in the example of the 2011 Social Media uprising that occurred in Egypt. The Egyptian’s dissatisfaction with the incumbent authoritative regime was already set in motion over the decades. However, social media, like Facebook and Twitter, was the spark that provided protestors with the means for the movement. Protestors were able to round up activist within Egypt and spread their message worldwide. Hence, the Egyptians’ desire for liberation from the oppressive regime was a longstanding internal predicament rather than an instant reaction brought upon by transnational media.

However, the rapidity in which, mass media influences hybridization is not one to be taken lightly. Transnational mass media has redefined the terms in which we acquire information across nations.  With a click of a button, we have access to television programs, news and other events that are broadcasted on the other side of the world. Social media, such as Facebook and Twitter, has enabled us to connect with people from all over the world. What used to take months or even years to reach the outside nations, now takes mere minutes to reach us; such is the power of mass media. Hence, I can’t help but wonder, how long, will it take for our definition of Singaporean culture to evolve – into a completely different one.

References

Kraidy, M. M. (2002). Globalization of Culture Through the Media. Retrieved from http://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1333&context=asc_papers

(366 words)

Reader Response

In 'Globalization of Culture Through the Media' (2002), Kraidy attempts to evaluate the different perspectives of globalization, namely cultural imperialism and hybridization through media. He describes the first school of thought, cultural imperialism, to be one where Western nations are exerting their dominance by exporting their ideas through the media to developing countries. He then explores the second school of thought, cultural hybridization, to be one where the phenomenon of localization that adapts the imported ideas to one’s own culture inherently relinquishes developing countries from Western domination. He then comes to the conclusion that cultures around the world inherently amalgamate imported cultures with their own, and transnational mass media only exacerbate this process.

I agree with Kriady’s view that mass media act as an accelerant to hybridization instead of being the root cause of it. This can be illustrated in the example of the 2011 Social Media uprising that occurred in Egypt. The Egyptian’s dissatisfaction with the incumbent authoritative regime was already set in motion over the decades. However, social media, like Facebook and Twitter, was the spark that provided protestors with the means for the movement. Protestors were able to round up activist within Egypt and spread their message worldwide. Hence, the Egyptians’ desire for liberation from the oppressive regime was a longstanding internal predicament rather than an instant reaction brought upon by transnational media.

On the other hand, I feel that Kraidy has generalized the extent of hybridity as he fails to address that not all aspects of imported cultures are localized. This can be seen in Singapore where many partake in the celebration of Valentine’s Day and Halloween, which are of Western origins. Also, with the accessibility to American television and films in Singapore, there is a percentage of Singaporeans, predominantly the youth, who subscribe to Western cultures wholesale. For instance, there are those who embrace and identify with the Western culture they subscribe to, via transnational media, over their own. Personally, transnational mass media has provided me the platform in which I acquired Western ideologies such as the notion of freedom. This has led me to discredit the culture I was brought up in as I deem it to be infringing on the notion of freedom.  Therefore, the pervasiveness of localization is at best questionable when considering the population in its entirety.

(386 Words)

References

Kraidy, M. M. (2002). Globalization of Culture Through the Media. Retrieved from http://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1333&context=asc_papers

Summary

In 'Globalization of Culture Through the Media' (2002), Kraidy attempts to evaluate the different perspectives of globalization, namely cultural imperialism and hybridization through media. He describes the first school of thought, cultural imperialism, to be one where Western nations are exerting their dominance by exporting their ideas through the media to developing countries. He then explores the second school of thought, cultural hybridization, to be one where the phenomenon of localization that adapts the imported ideas to one’s own culture inherently relinquishes developing countries from Western domination. He then comes to the conclusion that cultures around the world inherently amalgamate imported cultures with their own, and transnational mass media only exacerbate this process.

An event that has shaped my life and the person I've become

Few months after I shaved my head:)

Pinpointing to a singular event that has shaped my life and made me who I am would be futile, as I believe that the collective experiences I’ve had thus far has made me who I am today. However, if I had to write about one particular event, I would write about the day I shaved my head.

Adolescence is a rather confusing period for most, as we battle the notions of identity and attempt to figure out who we are. Just like many, I went through a period of self-doubt and confusion, trying to piece together parts of myself that did not fit the ideal standards of society. During that period, I chanced upon an event called Hair for Hope, whereby we had to shave our heads in support of children battling cancer. This was the perfect opportunity for me to satisfy the part of me that wanted to contribute to society, as well as to challenge the societal standards of beauty.

Unable to fathom the idea of me walking around with a shaved head, most of my friends and relatives tried to talk me out of my supposed insanity. However, I pressed on and did it anyway. By far, this has been the single most liberating experience I’ve ever had in my life. I have never felt as free and alive as I did when I was walking around bald.  All the built up insecurities and unhappiness melted away as I embraced a bald and bold me.  There was no longer a need to care if my clothes looked right or if my shoes matched since the only thing that people looked at was my bare head. For the first time in my life, I did not care what people thought about me.

This experience has allowed me to love myself for who I am instead of how I look. It has also empowered me to live my life according to my own ideals rather than conforming to societal norms.  However, I am still a work in progress. Every new experience molds me into a new and better version of myself. 

352 words