Globalization and cultural relativism-Is this really that new?

William Mazzarella discusses media’s effect on globalization and ethnographic research in his article, “Culture, Globalization, Mediation”. The author defines mediation as “a name that we might give to the processes by which a given social dispensation produces and reproduces itself in and through a particular set of media” (346).

Mazzarella focuses on media and the different anthropological schools of thought surrounding its effect on global cultures. The two schools of thought are that of the conservative, wary anthropologists who are concerned about the change and potential dilution of culture as a result of globalization. The other school of thought being that globalization provides an added dimension to discovering and perceiving culture as we react in response to viewing the reflection of ourselves as portrayed in the media. Mazzarella seems to be of the more liberal school of thought and argues that globalization “holds the potential to revitalize” anthropology, as opposed to disseminating it (348). It seems interesting to me that anthropologists would attempt to shield culture as though to encapsulate it in time despite the fundamental anthropological knowledge that culture is dynamic and forever evolving. It is to be expected that anthropologists would attempt to preserve culture however, this knowledge undermines the very concept of purity and thus the cause for sheltering a culture that is merely an evolution of something that was never perfectly isolated to begin with.

It is interesting how media’s portrayal of our culture can influence how we perceive ourselves and one another. However, word-of-mouth has held the same power since the inception of language. Media is at its basic level, a more complex form of communication and its ability to convey ideas universally has increased the amount of information which is circulated immensely however, it still produces the same effect: information exchange. In this light, it appears as though we are concerned about something which already exists. We are concerned when we view a picture of Japan with a MacDonald’s restaurant in the background and wonder if Japanese culture is somehow dissolving under American corporations. Yet, interestingly, we do not regard our own culture and society with such romanticism. I recently read an anonymous quote which is circulating on Facebook at the moment which read:

“Your car is German, your vodka is Russian, your pizza is Italian, your kebab is Turkish, your democracy is Greek, your coffee is Brazilian, your movies are American, your tea is Tamil, your shirt is Indian, your oil is Saudi, your electronics are Chinese, your numbers are Arabic , your letters are Latin, and you complain that your neighbour is…an immigrant?”.

This quote highlights the extent to which foreign goods are so well integrated into our culture that we forget their place of origin and don’t realise how ridiculous it is to attempt to preserve a cultural homogenization that does not exist. It seems the same is true overseas. The concern for globalization is one which seems redundant because globalization has already occurred in North America and one could expect that American products, including media as a product of consumption, will be integrated into other societies in a reciprocal fashion as goods and services have in the past. So is globalization really that new? Yes and no, media does add complexity in terms of cultural reflection and the influence of multi-national information and culture exchange however, societies have influenced one another since time immemorial; this is just a period where the process is being expedited.
Sources:
Mazzarella, William
2004 Culture, Globalization, Mediation. Annual Review of Anthropology 33: 345-367.