As society becomes ever more connected we find ourselves being exposed to more culturally diverse media, and there is a one word answer for this, globalisation.
Too easily a peripheral investigation into whether globalisation encourages the production of culturally diverse media brings about anecdotal response. It may also focus a respondent on the word ‘globalisation’, interpreting that as a 21st century phenomenon. Thus key to exploring this question in an open yet thorough manner is to define when true globalisation happened or when the term entered the common vernacular. A separation must also be maintained between, if indeed globalisation acts as a catalyst for culturally diverse media production and the quality of said media. Thirdly …show more content…
To argue that globalisation has come to, or approaching a finite closure would be a difficult stance to maintain. For example, as nation states become ever more de-territorialised and both jobs and people become commodities, countries become comprehensively linked via culturally diverse media (Hafez, 2007). Episode 16 (2016), of ABC’s Media Watch argued Australian TV is made up of ‘a sea of white’, yet when scrolling through a Foxtel (2016), channel guide that contains over 20 channels made up of news, documentaries or food programs from differing cultural backgrounds and a dedicated indigenous Australian media channel, the cultural landscape is decisively different. On a global scale Australian television may not be a major player and micro-view of such media, like that of the ABCs, would indicate that because too many Anglo presenters are reading the news or hosting television shows that diversity on this platform does not exist. However if we were to watch a documentary on Native Americans, regardless if it were introduced by a ‘see of white’ would not change its cultural …show more content…
Yet copyright laws are designed for the protection of media publishers and owners. Thus does copyright prevent exposure to culturally diverse media or just enhance it, as new producers need to remediate media in such a way as to change it enough from the original works? Anderson (2004), succinctly states, ‘in a globalised society, all the world’s cultures become the property of all the world’s people’. While not an overarching law, this statement reflects a globalised web 2.0 society. A simple search on YouTube for example will find countless remediation’s of some of the most historically significant and not so significant works from human history, but cases against a YouTube producers are not as numerous. Does this mean that copyright is almost a redundant law? The case that may have the most impact on globalised societies was the Authors Guild versus Google. Google claimed fair use when scanning and making available books they borrowed from public libraries on their for profit search engines. The court agreed with Google which means the biggest company in the world now plays one of the biggest roles in exposing a globalised society to culturally diverse media (Supreme Court of the United States, 2015). This one case gives voice to so many individuals that the defence of fair use is valid, and gives rise to the notion of globalisation encouraging and
Too easily a peripheral investigation into whether globalisation encourages the production of culturally diverse media brings about anecdotal response. It may also focus a respondent on the word ‘globalisation’, interpreting that as a 21st century phenomenon. Thus key to exploring this question in an open yet thorough manner is to define when true globalisation happened or when the term entered the common vernacular. A separation must also be maintained between, if indeed globalisation acts as a catalyst for culturally diverse media production and the quality of said media. Thirdly …show more content…
To argue that globalisation has come to, or approaching a finite closure would be a difficult stance to maintain. For example, as nation states become ever more de-territorialised and both jobs and people become commodities, countries become comprehensively linked via culturally diverse media (Hafez, 2007). Episode 16 (2016), of ABC’s Media Watch argued Australian TV is made up of ‘a sea of white’, yet when scrolling through a Foxtel (2016), channel guide that contains over 20 channels made up of news, documentaries or food programs from differing cultural backgrounds and a dedicated indigenous Australian media channel, the cultural landscape is decisively different. On a global scale Australian television may not be a major player and micro-view of such media, like that of the ABCs, would indicate that because too many Anglo presenters are reading the news or hosting television shows that diversity on this platform does not exist. However if we were to watch a documentary on Native Americans, regardless if it were introduced by a ‘see of white’ would not change its cultural …show more content…
Yet copyright laws are designed for the protection of media publishers and owners. Thus does copyright prevent exposure to culturally diverse media or just enhance it, as new producers need to remediate media in such a way as to change it enough from the original works? Anderson (2004), succinctly states, ‘in a globalised society, all the world’s cultures become the property of all the world’s people’. While not an overarching law, this statement reflects a globalised web 2.0 society. A simple search on YouTube for example will find countless remediation’s of some of the most historically significant and not so significant works from human history, but cases against a YouTube producers are not as numerous. Does this mean that copyright is almost a redundant law? The case that may have the most impact on globalised societies was the Authors Guild versus Google. Google claimed fair use when scanning and making available books they borrowed from public libraries on their for profit search engines. The court agreed with Google which means the biggest company in the world now plays one of the biggest roles in exposing a globalised society to culturally diverse media (Supreme Court of the United States, 2015). This one case gives voice to so many individuals that the defence of fair use is valid, and gives rise to the notion of globalisation encouraging and