FULL Download Ebook PDF Globalization and Media in The Digital Platform Age PDF Ebook

(eBook PDF) Globalization and Media in
the Digital Platform Age

Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebooksecure.com/download/ebook-pdf-globalization-and-media-in-the-digital-p
latform-age/
Globalization and Media in the
Digital Platform Age
Global media expert Dal Yong Jin examines the nexus of globalization, digital media, and
contemporary popular culture in this empirically rich, student-friendly book.
Offering an in-depth look at globalization processes, histories, texts, and state pol-
icies as they relate to the global media, Jin maps out the increasing role of digital plat-
forms as they have shifted the contours of globalization. Case studies and examples focus
on ubiquitous digital platforms, including Facebook, YouTube, and Netflix, in tandem
with globalization so that the readers are able to apply diverse theoretical frameworks
of globalization in different media milieu. Readers are taught core theoretical concepts
which they should apply critically to a broad range of contemporary media policies, prac-
tices, movements, and technologies in different geographic regions of the world—North
America, Europe, Africa, Latin America, and Asia—with a view to determining how they
shape and are shaped by globalization.
End-of-chapter discussion questions prompt further critical thinking and research. Stu-
dents doing coursework in digital media, global media, international communication, and
globalization will find this new textbook to be an essential introduction to how media
have influenced a complex set of globalization processes in broad international and com-
parative contexts.
Dal Yong Jin is Professor of Communication at Simon Fraser University. His major
research and teaching interests are on Globalization and Media, transnational cultural
studies, digital platforms and digital gaming, and the political economy of media and
culture. He has published numerous books, including Korea’s Online Gaming Empire;
De-convergence of Global Media Industries; Digital Platforms, Imperialism and Political
Culture; New Korean Wave: Transnational Cultural Power in the Age of Social Media; and
Smartland Korea: Mobile Communication, Culture and Society. With Micky Lee, Jin also
published a textbook titled Understanding the Business of Global Media in the Digital Age
(2017). He is the founding book series editor of Routledge Research in Digital Media and
Culture in Asia.
Globalization and Media in the
Digital Platform Age
Dal Yong Jin

First published 2020
by Routledge
52 Vanderbilt Avenue, New York, NY 10017
and by Routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon, OX14 4RN
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
© 2020 Taylor & Francis
The right of Dal Yong Jin to be identified as author of this work has been asserted by him
in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised
in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or
hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information
storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.
Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks,
and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
A catalog record for this title has been requested
ISBN: 978-0-367-35146-5 (hbk)

ISBN: 978-0-367-34360-6 (pbk)
ISBN: 978-0-429-33003-2 (ebk)
Typeset in Times New Roman
by codeMantra
Contents
Preface ix
1 Globalization in the Age of Digital Platforms? 1

Is Globalization Dying? 1
Globalization in the Era of Digital Platforms 2
What Is a Digital Platform? 2
Definitions of Globalization 4
Keywords in Globalization 4
Three Paradigms to Globalization Studies 5
Modernization Approach 5
Critical Political Economy Approach 6
Cultural Globalization Approach 7
Six Dimensions in Globalization Studies 8
Economy 8
Politics 9
Culture 10
Technology 11
Global Consumption 11
Diaspora 12
How to Interpret Globalization: The World Is Flat vs. The World
Is Asymmetrical 13
Questions 15
2 Media History in the Age of Globalization 16

Oral Communication and Early Written Materials 17
The Printing Press and Capitalism 18
The Telegraph and the Electronic Media Era 20
Development of Broadcasting: The Core of Electronic Media 23
The Advent of the Digital Age 24
Digital Platform and Media Convergence Era 25
Evolution of Social Network Sites 27
Questions 29
vi Contents
3 Approaches to Globalization in the Age of Digital Platforms 30
Theorization of Globalization: Political Economy vs. Cultural Studies 30
Free Flow of Information 33
World-System Theory 34
Cultural Hybridization 35
Case Study: Hybridization in Japanese Popular Culture and the
Korean Wave 37
Glocalization/Localization 38
Regionalization 40
Transnationalization 41
Soft Power and Cultural Diplomacy 42
Questions 44
4 From Cultural Imperialism to Platform Imperialism 45

Definitional Essay: The Discourse of the West vs. the East
in Media Studies 45
The Evolution of Imperialism 47
Cultural Imperialism 48
Is Imperialism Disappearing in the Era of Globalization? 50
Development in Local Culture 50
Peripheral Vision 51
Active Audience Theory 51
Counter-Reverse Cultural Imperialism 52
Emergence of Platform Imperialism 53
Increasing Dominance of American Platforms 54
Commodification of Data and Digital Platforms 55
Asymmetries in Digital Platforms 57
Questions 57
5 The Nation-State: Dead or Alive 59

The Formation of Nation-State in the 15th Century 60
Major Roles of the Nation-State 61
The End of Nation-State 62
What Is Replacing Nation-States? The Rise of Non-Nation Entities 63
Critiques to the Globalists 65
Balances between Nation-States and Globalization 66
Nation-States in the Media and Cultural Industries 66
Nation-State and Digital Platforms 67
Interplay between Nation-States and Platform Corporations 68
Questions 71
6 The Business of Global Media Industries 72

The Growth of the Global Media Industries 73
Major Media Corporations around the World 74
Alphabet (Google) 75
The Walt Disney Company 76
Corporate Convergence 77
Contents vii
The Emergence of De-convergence in the Media Industry 80
Case Study: De-convergence of News Corporation 81
New Wave of Media Convergence 82
Convergence between Digital Platform and Digital Platform 83
Convergence between Content Firms and Content Firms 84
Questions 85
7 Smartphones in the Era of Globalization 87

Smartphone Revolution in the Early 21st Century 88
Globalization in the Smartphone Era 90
Case Study: iPhone’s Globalization Process 92
Global Dominance of Android Operating System 93
Global Digital Divide in the Smartphone Era 95
Questions 97
8 Globalization and Broadcasting 98

Changes in the Global Broadcasting System 99
Global Trade of Television Programs 99
Global Television Formats 101
Case Study: Television Formats in the Korean Broadcasting Industry 103
Netflix as a Cultural Platform in the Broadcasting Industry 105
Growth of Netflix 107
Netflix as a Digital Platform 108
Globalization of Netflix in the Realm of Screen Media 108
Questions 110
9 The Cultural Politics of Film 111

Growth of the Global Film Markets 111
Globalization and Films 114
Global Trade of Films 114
Runaway Productions 114
Remaking of Films 115
Cultural Issues Embedded in the Globalization of Film 116
Hollywood vs. The Third Cinema 117
Hollywood as The First Cinema 117
Asian Cinema as The Third Cinema 119
Bollywood 119
Chinese Cinema 120
Mexican Cinema 122
Western Cinema vs. Third Cinema 123
Case Study: The (Indie) Film Industry in the Digital Platform Era 123
Questions 125
10 The Culture of Global Music 126

Globalization and Music 127
The Global Music Industry in the 21st Century 127
YouTube as a Social Media Platform and Localization 129
viii Contents
Online Streaming Services and Globalization: European Spotify
Now Plays in Japan 131
The Global Rise of K-Pop in the Age of Social Media 132
Hybridization of K-pop around the Globe 134
Case Study: BTS and a Global Fandom 136
Questions 138
References 141
Index 161
Preface
The close relationship between Globalization and Media has been one of the most
significant subjects in communication studies since the mid-1990s. The linkages of
Globalization and Media have meticulously expanded due to the indispensable role of
media and culture in the globalization process. From popular culture like films and
television programs to digital technologies, including the Internet and smartphones,
media have facilitated and expedited the contemporary globalization process. A lthough
globalization in terms of the integration of the world into a single unit e xisted several hun-
dred years ago, even partially, new media have certainly played a key part in advancing
globalization over the past two decades.
In the early 21st century, the partnership between Globalization and Media has fun-
damentally changed with the emergence of digital platforms. Unlike traditional media,
like broadcasting and music, digital platforms, such as social media (e.g., YouTube),
smartphones and relevant apps, online streaming services (e.g., Spotify), and o ver-the-top
services (e.g., Netflix) have changed the contours of global cultural consumption and pro-
duction so that people heavily rely on these platforms. The Internet, as one of the most
significant digital technologies, has already resolved time and space constraints so that
it contributes to the growth of our global society. Digital platforms have furthermore
shifted our world because they allow people to connect with each other in real time; to
consume the same experiences while sharing them with friends; and to produce their own
cultural materials, as can be seen in the growth of YouTubers. For example, Netflix has in-
creased its role as a new exhibition outlet as people enjoy movies and television programs
on this particular platform instead of visiting theaters. Partially because of Netflix and
other over-the-top (OTT) services, movie theaters in North America have started to face a
new challenge as the number of movie-goers has slightly decreased. Likewise, Spotify has
changed global youth’s music consumption habits as many college students enjoy popular
music through online streaming music services instead of buying CDs. In all but a few
countries, like Japan and Germany, people around the globe primarily listen to music via
online digital platforms.
This book examines the nexus of Globalization and Media, focusing on digital plat-
forms as a reflection of the surge and influences of various platforms in our contemporary
society. This does not mean that we give up on studying the important role of tradi-
tional media in the globalization process. What I rather emphasize is the shifting milieu
surrounding Globalization and Media. As digital platforms have greatly increased their
impacts on our daily activities and cultural lives, it is time to critically interpret the crucial
relationship between globalization and digital platforms from various perspectives.
Given their short history, there are no available textbooks emphasizing digital platforms
and their roles in the globalization process. While several academic works on digital
platforms (Jin, 2015a; Srnicek, 2016; Gillespie, 2018; Steinberg, 2019) have just recently
x Preface
been published, providing important discourses and ideas, they have not focused on
lobalization yet. In particular, textbook-level discourses are still missing, despite the fact
g
that undergraduate and graduate students who study globalization need new perspectives
and directions. Therefore, I hope that these carefully documented discussions in the form
of a textbook will shed light on more recent trends in the shifting globalization process.
Some parts of the book have been developed from my original works. I have continued
to develop my research on globalization and published several relevant articles and books,
such as “Where Is Japan in Media Studies in the Post-Cold War Era: Critical Discourse of
the West and the East” (2009, in Social Science Research 22(1): 261–293); “Reinterpretation
of Cultural Imperialism: Emerging Domestic Market vs. Continuing U.S. Dominance”
(2007, in Media, Culture and Society 29(5): 753–771); and Digital Platforms, Imperialism
and Political Culture (2015, Routledge), although I have fundamentally advanced and
re-organized my perspectives with new cases and information. This current book project
is also made possible because of my teaching experience with Globalization and Media at
several institutions, including Simon Fraser University in Canada and Korea Advanced
Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST). Students in my various classes have helped
me rethink the trajectory of globalization, and some students especially provided their
meaningful observations and ideas through presentations and discussions in classes.
I would like to express my thanks to the students who shared their ideas and opinions
together.
Meanwhile, I also want to thank a few media scholars who supported the book writing
process. Professor Kyong Yoon at the University of British Columbia Okanagan always
listened to my viewpoints and progresses while providing invaluable friendship. Professor
Ju Oak “Jade” Kim at Texas A&M International University provided some suggestions
and thoughts after reading the original table of contents and ideas. Marc Steinberg at
Concordia University in Canada and I have exchanged ideas on platform imperialism
and the increasing role of Asia-based digital platforms, which confirmed the necessity of
this book. Finally, I want to thank Erica C. Wetter, who has been very supportive since
our meeting on the book project during the 2018 IAMCR (International Association for
Media and Communication Research) conference held in Eugene, Oregon, in the USA.
Her effective editorship has been very helpful during the entire process. Without their
supports and interests, the resulting book would not be the same.
1 Globalization in the Age of Digital
Platforms?
Is Globalization Dying?
While globalization as a practice goes back to several hundred years ago, media globalization
as part of academic discourse mainly started to appear in the 1990s. With the rapid growth
of information and communication technologies (ICTs) and relevant socio-economic dimen-
sions, including political, economic, and cultural elements developed during the same period,
globalization has become one of the most popular topics and theories in all academic fields,
and in particular in media studies. It is certain that “there was a period in which that word
globalization seemed to many people to capture the essence of what was going on around
them” (Rosenberg, 2005, 3). During the 1990s, many politicians, academics, and cultural pro-
ducers observed the spread of economic liberalization, the rise of new ICTs, the increased
salience of international organizations, and the resurgence of a cosmopolitan Human Rights
Agenda; many of them believed that “the world was opening up to a new form of intercon-
nectedness, and that a multi-layered, multilateral system of global governance was emerging”
(Rosenberg, 2005, 3). As Toby Miller and Marwan Kraidy (2016, 22) point out, “global media
studies, therefore, is an interdisciplinary rubric that emerged in the 1990s to describe the con-
vergence of areas of study traditionally known as international communication and compar-
ative media systems.” Global media studies reflects conceptual disciplinary and ideological
changes, and its name notwithstanding, the field remains dominated by a few major forces,
including the United States.
However, since around the mid-2000s, some theoreticians (Rosenberg, 2005) claim that
“the age of globalization is over” as the world has not seemed to follow what the globalists
predicted, which is the integration and/or interdependence of the globe, and consequently,
the decreasing role of the nation-state. In the 2010s, the opposing paradigm to globaliza-
tion has even become more pronounced. As can be seen with Brexit (British Exit) in Eu-
rope in late 2019 and the border wall issue between the United States and Mexico, which
is under consideration by President Trump’s administration, many parts of the globe are
dis-integrating and focusing on national priorities rather than global ones. The Guardian
of the United Kingdom (Sharma, 2016) indeed claims,
even if Brexit does not herald the unravelling of Europe or of the global economy, it is
the most important sign yet that the era of globalization as we have known it is over.
Deglobalization will be the new buzzword.
As such, global politics and economy have continued to shift their dynamics as both the
United States and the United Kingdom have changed their political and economic policies
starting in the 1980s. These two countries initiated and forced neoliberal globalization—
guaranteeing maximum profits to the private sector through deregulation, privatization,
2 Globalization and Digital Platforms
and liberalization while pursuing a small government function—but they have suddenly
changed direction to focus on the separation of their countries from global affairs. Since
they are the giants who decide the roles of nation-states in the global society, other small
countries may follow this trajectory once again, and perhaps deglobalization may be real-
ized in contemporary society.
However, globalization is not simple at all. While there is an increasing trend of national
priority movements, global citizens, from both the West (e.g. the United States, the United
Kingdom, France, and Germany) and the East (e.g., countries in Asia, Africa, the Middle
East, and Latin America) are still witnessing the borderless flow of information, people,
and capital, which facilitates the integration of the world into one single global unit. In
particular, in the realm of media and culture, the level of interconnectivity has increased.
Globalization has become more complicated than ever instead of disappearing as several
players, whether Western-based or non-Western-based actors, such as nation-states, in-
ternational agencies, transnational corporations, and even consumers, are increasingly
involved. How to comprehend globalization over the next decade or so, therefore, relies
on people’s understanding of two major elements: the directions of flow of people, culture,
and capital, and the role of major players in the globalization process.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Globalization in the Era of Digital Platforms

Unlike the political and economic milieu surrounding the contemporary world in the
early 21st century, globalization as a form of the integration of the globe into a single unit
in the field of media and ICTs has continued and even substantially grown. With the rapid
growth of digital platforms, such as social media (e.g., Facebook and YouTube), search
engines (e.g., Google), smartphones and their operating systems (e.g., Android and iOS),
digital games, and online streaming services (e.g., Netflix), the global cultural markets
have been closely connected and increasingly interdependent. On the one hand, some dig-
ital platforms have played a key role as cultural producers, and on the other hand, other
digital platforms have worked as cultural distributors, although the boundaries between
production and distribution, which were previously clearly separated, are getting blurry.
Digital platforms like Netflix, YouTube, and Facebook in the United States have es-
pecially increased their market shares around the globe to continue and extend their
hegemonic dominance. Although several emerging markets and cultural producers in
non-Western countries like Mexico, Brazil, India, and South Korea (hereafter Korea)
have developed their local-based popular culture and digital platforms to become a major
part of the global society, their roles are still limited. These countries furthermore utilize
American-based platforms, including YouTube, to disseminate their popular culture to
both regional and global markets. Regardless of shifting power dynamics in politics and
economy, the integrations in the realm of culture and technology have never stopped, and
therefore, globalization is alive and vivid in this particular context.
What Is a Digital Platform?

Digital platform is a buzzword in our daily lives. “The rise of digital platforms is hailed as
the driver of economic progress and technological innovation” (van Dijck et al., 2018, 1).
Whenever we turn on TV and read newspaper articles, it is not uncommon to learn about
digital platforms. From elementary school students to college students, watching YouTube
and using smartphones are very common and daily routines. “Individuals can greatly
Globalization and Digital Platforms 3
benefit from this transformation because it empowers them to set up businesses, trade
goods, and exchange information online while circumventing corporate or state interme-
diaries” (van Dijck et al., 2018, 1). Digital platforms heavily influence the contemporary
cultural industries and their popular culture. The digital platform has been a relatively
new concept in media studies; however, there are already several significant works of this
new concept and phenomenon.
A few media scholars (Gillespie, 2010, 2018; Hands, 2013; Jin, 2015a; Srnicek, 2016; Steinberg,
2017; van Dijck et al., 2018) have adopted and used the notion of platforms; however, they
barely developed any reliable definitions. In general, a platform describes the current use of
digital technology and culture, and it explains “the online services of content intermediaries,
both in their self-characterizations and in the broader public discourse of users, the press
and commentaries” (Gillespie, 2010, 349). As Gillespie (2010, 349) points out, intermediaries
like YouTube and Google provide “storage, navigation and delivery of the digital content of
others.” As Lev Manovich (2013, 7) also points out, “platforms allow people to write new soft-
ware,” and “these platforms, such as Google, Facebook, iOS, and Android, are in the center
of the global economy, culture, social life, and, increasingly, politics.”
These explanations, however, do not convey the true nature of digital platforms, which
can be explained in several different but interconnected ways. Most of all, as Van Dijck
(2013, 29) points out,
a platform is a mediator rather than an intermediary: it shapes the performance of so-

cial acts instead of merely facilitating them. Technologically speaking, platforms are
the providers of software, (sometimes) hardware, and services that help code social
activities into a computational architecture.
More specifically, digital platforms have various functions, which are connected. First,
the term “platform” designated something like a computing infrastructure, the hardware
basis for computational activities. Some people associate platforms with their compu-
tational meaning (Bodle, 2010), which is an infrastructure that closely supports the de-
sign and use of specific applications or operating systems in computer systems and/or
smartphones.
However, the platform extends beyond the computational domain (Jin, 2015a). Plat-
form has come to denote what we would call social media: sites or platforms as they were
known, on which users could post, contribute, share, and so on, to a particular web-based
and then app-based media interface—whether Facebook, YouTube, or Twitter (Steinberg,
2017). This trait does mean that the platform can be configured as a transactional or me-
diatory mechanism. In other words, digital platforms should be judged “by market forces
and the process of commodity exchange” (Dijck, 2012, 162). Platforms have both a direct
economic role as creators of surplus value through commodity production and exchange
and an indirect role through advertising (Garnham, 1997). In this paradigm, the platform
“signifies something akin to the mediation structure or intermediary that makes certain
kinds of transactions possible. This is also arguably the cultural dominant form of plat-
form” (Steinberg, 2017, 189). As some theoreticians argue (Feenberg, 1991; Salter, 2005),
technologies are not value neutral but reflect the cultural bias, values, and communicative
preferences of their designers. Platforms clearly reflect designers’ values and preferences
that are oftentimes at odds with the values and preferences of the users (Bodle, 2010).
As such, it is critical to comprehensively understand the notion of platforms. Putting
together these dimensions, we can consider that platforms have emerged not simply in a
functional computational shape, but with cultural values and communicational aspects
embedded in them. As the growth of new media cannot be separated from society, we
must address digital platforms as a complicated but interconnected whole (Jin, 2015a).
Digital forms of power are connected together through the three core pillars of digital
platforms: hardware, corporate sphere, and cultural and political values. Domination
over these three elements provides a great source of power to the United States over other
countries. As Moran and Punathambekar (2019) point out, due to American dominance
in the realm of digital platform, it is critical to understand the ways in which global digital
platforms like YouTube and Facebook penetrate in the early 21st century. A closer under-
standing of the technological functions, characters of platforms as a corporate sphere,
and their cultural values help people determine the distinctive prospects of platforms in
the globalization process, which has been closely related to imperialism theory.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Definitions of Globalization
Globalization is the major framework in international communication research in the
early 21st century. There are several features characterizing globalization. Most of all,
globalization implies the borderless flow of information between various countries. The
flow of information can be made possible as countries, international agencies, and trans-
national corporations work together to integrate and interconnect, which means that
many constituents attempt to converge their units, not politically but economically and
culturally to make one big umbrella. Marshal McLuhan (1964) especially termed the in-
tegration of the world into one village through the use of electronic media as a “global
village” in 1964. As for the definition, McLuhan (1964, 254) described the ways in which
electronic technology has contracted the globe into a village because of “the instantaneous
movement of information from every quarter to every point at the same time.” McLuhan’s
definition of global village certainly provides several important conceptual ideas for
understanding globalization, which are supported by media technology. Based on these
basic characterizations, we can identify several keywords explaining globalization below.
Keywords in Globalization
• Borderless flow of information
• Integration
• Interconnectivity
• Interdependence
• Convergence
• Global village
• Global economy
While the significant role of media technology plays a part, there are several different
dimensions expediting the globalization process, including flows of people and capital be-
tween various countries. People are moving from one country to another country, and
some corporations like McDonald’s, Starbucks, and Dunkin Donuts also have their stores
in many countries. Consequently, globalization, driven by the flows of people, culture, and
capital, conceptually makes a borderless, singular village. Globalization is thus a process
by which the global politics, economy, and culture are becoming a connected and interac-
tive whole (Giddens, 1999). However, as Anthony Giddens (1999) himself argued, “globali-
zation is a complex set of processes, not a single one,” mainly because the flows of these
elements occur in a more complicated way than in one simple direction. Ritzer (2007, 1)
also defines globalization as “an accelerating set of processes involving flows that encom-
pass ever-greater numbers of the world’s spaces and that lead to increasing integration and
interconnectivity among those spaces.” Robertson (1992, 8) already defined globalization
as a concept referring “both to the compression of the world and intensification of con-
sciousness of the world as a whole.” These scholarly definitions commonly emphasize the
compression of time and space and the interconnectivity of the world as a result.
What I want to emphasize furthermore are the players who develop the globalization
processes and the diversity of flows that shifts the globalization dynamics. Therefore, in
this book, globalization is not only the integration of the world as a whole, but also the
diversification of the processes in actors, flows, and dimensions in expediting global in-
terdependence. There are many different actors and directions in the globalization pro-
cess, and without understanding this complexity, people cannot fully comprehend the
real nature of globalization. Previously, forces of globalization were linked with a few
Western countries, in particular the United States, and they seemed to “subjugate weaker,
national/cultural identities” (Shim, 2006, 26). However, as the case of BTS—a globally
popular Korean boy band—in the late 2010s implies, several non-Western countries have
expanded their roles to become major actors, which potentially changes the directions of
cultural flows. This fundamental question requires us to contemplate who the major play-
ers are and in which directions people, capital, and culture flow. In this regard, we must
identify several major paradigms and dimensions when we analyze globalization.
Three Paradigms to Globalization Studies

Globalization refers to the process and context of our world becoming integrated. There are
several approaches explaining the globalization process, and mainly three major paradigms
constitute globalization discourses: modernization, critical political economy, and cultural
globalization, known as hybridization. As can be seen in Chapters 3 and 4, under these fab-
rics, there are several theoretical frameworks interpreting the globalization process.
Modernization Approach
One of the oldest approaches to globalization started with modernization theory in the 1960s.
Modernization theory called upon developing countries to learn from, and imitate, the West.
Since developing countries could use media to learn from the West, it is the media-oriented
version of globalization (Giddens, 1991; Curran, 2002; Shim, 2006). The project of moder-
nity, which was mainly developed in Europe starting in the 17th century, has been
largely concerned with making a break with the past by modernizing arts, literature,
culture and religion. The quintessential aspects of modernity include a respect for
individual freedom, the belief in human beings’ ability to decide their destiny, and the
adoption of science and technology.
(Habermas, 1990; Giddens, 1991; Neyazi, 2010, 911)
As Alberto Martinelli (2005, 101) especially argues, “globalization is one of the most visi-
ble consequences of modernity and has in its turn reshaped the project of modernity.” For
him, “modernization is a global process.”
Modernized countries like the United States, the United Kingdom, and France,
equipped with advanced technologies, cultures, and systems, especially demand devel-
oping countries to follow their leads. In other words, modernity summarizes the modern
transformation of social life, from pre-modern to modern, technologically, culturally,
politically, and economically, and modernization theory “called upon the developing
world to learn from and imitate the West” (Curran, 2002, 167).
The major issue here is that the modernization process flows from a few advanced and
modernized countries to less-developed countries, and one of the major areas that these
modernized countries ask developing countries to follow is their economic system, which
is capitalism, triggering some problems. As Robert McChesney (1998) criticized, globali-
zation is an outcome of modernity because it provides an aura of inevitability to the rise of
neoliberalism and corporate control of the media. “Globalization erodes the sovereignty
of the nation-state that has been the key institution and the basic element of structuration
of modern society” (Martinelli, 2005, 102). Again, modernity is closely related to media
and culture, as international communication systems could be used to spread the mes-
sage of modernity. International communication systems, prior to globalization studies,
could transfer the economic and political models of the West to the independent countries
after World War II (Thussu, 2006). Some believe that several ICTs and the media would
help transform traditional societies. Modernization as one major approach and media are
meticulously related and connected.
Critical Political Economy Approach

The second approach to Globalization and Media developed by critical political econ-
omists claims that globalization should be comprehended as one element of the trans-
formation of contemporary capitalism. This paradigm addresses “the centrality of the
economy as the prime mover of social and cultural change” (Ampuja, 2004, 68). In par-
ticular, “the new media and information technologies have made it possible for multi-
national corporations to extend their reach,” and “the media corporations (themselves
global entities) create a demand for commodities and deliver audiences to powerful
advertisers” (68).
From a critical political economy approach, one of the most important processes is
the concentration of power in the hands of transnational corporations and, in connec-
tion with this, the deregulation and liberalization of media systems throughout the world.
Under this circumstance, as Herman and McChesney (1997) clearly pointed out, since
the 1990s, the media markets have become truly global for the first time in history, and
they have been dominated by a few Western-based transnational corporations that hold
substantial economic and cultural power. At the same time, the developments in media
markets around the globe prove a constant imbalance of cultural flows, as several Amer-
ican media corporations and platforms, such as Walt Disney, Netflix, Google, and Apple
dominate both content production and distribution channels.
This approach emphasizes that the global integration of the world has been actualized
by a few Western countries, in particular the United States. For this perspective, globali-
zation is nothing but Americanization, which means that the United States as a major
force has greatly increased its influence in the global cultural markets. As can be seen
in the global film sector, films produced by Hollywood majors have continued to pene-
trate global box offices. As a result of the fearful lobbying by Hollywood majors, the U.S.
government has demanded non-Western countries, like Mexico, Korea, and China, to
open their national film markets, and therefore, the global film markets are controlled by
Hollywood with a few exceptions. As will be detailed in Chapter 4, cultural imperialism
as a major approach to globalization studies emphasizes that the world becomes a single
unit and tastes American popular culture in every corner of the world. This approach,
therefore, has focused on an asymmetrical power relationship between the United States
and the remaining countries in the globalization process.
For critical political economists, the essential feature of the globalization of media is
the ongoing commodification of culture. The main argument made by critical political
economists is that globalization is about the formation of a worldwide capitalistic system
that promotes the interests and values of powerful Western-based transnational corpora-
tions (Ampuja, 2004). This approach also discusses the globalization of media or culture
in terms of homogenization.
Cultural Globalization Approach

The third paradigm in Globalization and Media emphasizes the cultural elements of
globalization. This cultural paradigm was born mainly “out of critiques of the so-called
cultural imperialism thesis. Cultural globalization theorists argue that the globalization
of media is not leading to the homogenization of global culture under the auspices of
Western consumerism” (Ampuja, 2004, 67). For Roland Robertson (1995), a key cultural
globalization theorist, cultural globalization refers to a process in which the relations
between the local and the global are being re-organized instead of homogenized. At one
level, global transnational media corporations have to adjust their production so that
they meet the standards of local markets and their needs. On another level, local cul-
tural forms may become globally marketed phenomena. Robertson refers to this feature
as glocalization—the combination of globalization and localization.
The cultural paradigm emphasizes the idea that global cultural flows are multidirec-
tional and that this trend leads to a proliferation of new cultures—to a formation of new
kind of cultural forms, in which the local and global are mixed together in various ways.
Cultural globalization emphasizes different cultures to redefine itself as hybridization.
This process is devoid of Western domination, because, for example, in popular music,
new stylistic innovations can come from the third world. For the cultural paradigm, with
its conception of global culture as a new type of hybridization, “the earlier cultural impe-
rialism perspective, which emphasized the analytic separation of core and periphery, now
seems outdated” (Ampuja, 2004, 67).
For its representatives, a global cultural change is not a unitary process. Rather, it is com-
plex and a very paradoxical development. Cultural theorists see globalization typically in
a positive light: it creates new forms of cultural expression, and it offers new opportunities
for previously marginalized groups to be heard, thus promoting cultural diversification.
Many cultural globalization analysts claim that the dynamics of capitalistic markets foster
the freedom of cultural expression: globalization “pluralizes the world by recognizing the
value of cultural niches” (Waters, 1995, 136). Globalization is “hailed especially in the sense
that it frees local cultures from narrow national contexts” (Ampuja, 2004, 67).
This approach has two different dimensions, which are closely connected. On the one
hand, some claim that non-Western countries, such as Mexico, Brazil, Korea, and India,
develop their own unique cultures and export them to other countries. On the other hand,
others argue that these non-Western countries are advancing hybridity in popular culture so
that they play a key role in the global markets. In other words, cultural firms in these coun-
tries are not only admitting and consuming Western cultures, but also developing hybrid
culture by mixing two different cultures between local and global and eventually penetrate
other countries, including the United States. Cultural globalization, also known as hybrid-
ity, rejects a one way cultural flow and argues that local cultural producers in these countries
are able to create popular culture by mixing local mentality and uniqueness with Western
and universal characteristics. Since local-based popular culture in this context has been
made through hybridization processes, contra-flow of local culture could not be done with-
out cultural globalization. In this transnational context of the nexus between the periphery
and the core, hybridity reveals itself as encouraging new practices of cultural expression: the
local appropriates the global, including global goods, conventions, and styles, including mu-
sic, film, and gaming and inscribes their everyday meaning into them (Bhabha, 1994; Young,
2003; Shim, 2006). As such, depending on one’s own different positions, globalization can be
understood differently. Admitting that diverse paradigms in globalization studies exist, it is
important to develop careful critical thinking to interpret Globalization and Media.
Six Dimensions in Globalization Studies

Different academic disciplines focus on diverse elements in globalization studies; however,
the fields of media, culture, technology, and global consumption are commonly major inter-
ests. Including these dimensions, media studies also emphasizes several relevant areas as core
domains that media scholars, students, and practitioners analyze. Here are six major domains
that this book attempts to discuss as the most significant areas that people might find useful.
• Economy
• Politics
• Culture
• Technology
• Global consumption
• Diaspora
Economy
Some of the earliest discussions on globalization explore in great detail how the evolution
of international markets and companies led to an intensified form of global interdepend-
ence. These discussions point to the growth of international agencies, such as the Euro-
pean Union (EU), the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA, now replaced by
the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement in 2018), and other regional trading blocs
(Steger, 2014). As one columnist for HuffPost (Sato, 2014) argues, “globalization was orig-
inally proposed as a way for developed countries to seek additional growth opportunities
abroad, after it became difficult to achieve economic growth domestically. It was prem-
ised on international competition and the pursuit of ever-increasing economic growth.”
Globalization is mostly witnessed in the realm of economy as the national economies of
all countries are now interconnected. Transnational corporations in both Western and
non-Western countries have increased their economic interdependence and worldwide
corporate enterprise. Countries around the world have also substantially developed a great
deal of economic exchange as they organize several economic agencies, including EU,
NAFTA, and now USMCA (United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement), the WTO (World
Trade Organization), and G20 (Group of Twenty). Of course, these economic entities do
not last forever as several countries attempt to exit from these international organizations
to pursue their own benefits.
In the case of Brexit, the United Kingdom voted to leave the EU. It was scheduled to
depart on March 29, 2019. European countries previously banded together
to promote trade, defend human rights, protect the environment and repel threats.
They sign treaties and join international groups, and each time they do, they give up
a bit of independence. That happened in a big way with the creation of the EU, a free-
trade zone and global political force forged from the fractious states of Europe.
(Hutton, 2017)
The question always was, could this extraordinary experiment hold together? The people
of the United Kingdom responded to this question in a June 2016 referendum, “shocking
the world by voting to leave the bloc they had joined in 1973.” For many, the EU was
expensive, out of touch, and a source of uncontrolled immigration (Hutton, 2017).
As U.S. President Donald Trump has also redirected the NAFTA system toward US-
MCA in 2018 in order to bring more benefits to the United States, these global economic
entities are in jeopardy, which suggests anti-global movements initiated by a handful of
Western countries. This does not mean a debacle of economic interdependence between
countries is imminent. Many small countries feel that they must continue to work together
so that they can benefit from the bigger markets rather than just their own small markets.
The world is already connected, and people acknowledge the importance of interdepend-
ence; therefore, they do not follow these two countries. Instead, they may stick together
to further develop a closer global economy than before. The United States and the United
Kingdom possibly continue to work independently, and these deglobalization movements
may not remain the mega trend in the long run in the global economy.
Politics
Until the early 2000s, in the field of communication studies, International Communi-
cation was one of the major courses that students took to study the dynamics of major
players in initiating the flows of information and cultural goods. However, starting around
the same period, International Communication as an academic course in the Department
of Communication in many universities disappeared as Globalization and Media has re-
placed this particular course. While there are several major differences between these
two classes, one of the primary areas differentiating them is the role of the nation-state.
In the International Communication class, the nation-state was one of the most power-
ful players as it mainly decided the flow of culture and information. In other words, the
international trade of television programs and music was decided by government poli-
cies, and the foreign exchange rates between countries were decided by the nation-states.
With the growth of economic integration and interdependence, however, several players,
in particular transnational corporations and international agencies, such as the WTO,
the USMCA, and EU, have rapidly increased their roles, resulting in the decreasing role
of the nation-state. Partially as a reflection of these new trends, Globalization and Media
has started to replace International Communication as a new core course in the field
of communication. As such, most of the debates on “political globalization involves the
weighing of conflicting evidence with regard to the fate of the nation-state,” as economic
globalization potentially leads to “the reduced control of national governments over eco-
nomic policy” (Steger, 2014, 7).
As several scholars (Strange, 1996; Sinclair, 2007) argued, the nation-state as a mean-
ingful unit in the global trade of culture and technology seemed to decline, as diverse
globalization processes, including the increasing role of transnational corporations and
the national markets, undermine the significant role of the governments. Harvey (2006)
especially points out that the nation-state has been challenged in global cultural trade,
although the pivotal role of the nation-state is still worthy of careful attention. In other
words, several globalization theorists predict the end of national boundaries and national
labels, including national corporations and national industries, which have brought about
the end of national economies. What they emphasize is that the reach of national regula-
tions and actions cannot control transnational organizations and global affairs (Ryoo and
Jin, 2018). As national economic policies cannot be as effective as they once were, many
countries have to rethink their identities because old politics are obsolete. For example,
after the Cold War ended in 1991, many people believed that nations no longer have en-
emies. In the neoliberal era, when the role of government must limit its power in order
to guarantee the maximum profit of corporations, nation-states around the globe have
developed deregulation, liberalization, and privatization.
However, as has been briefly discussed, the United States and the United Kingdom
have recently developed nationalistic political directions in global affairs in the 2010s.
The September 11 terrorist attacks against the United States in 2001 also changed
the course, as people began to think about terrorists as the new enemies and that
nation-states must protect their own citizens from their attacks. These new develop-
ments ask us to recast the roles of the nation-state as considered below, which will be
fully discussed in Chapter 5:
• Does globalization bring about the weakening of state power?

• Do nations lose some of the economic power they once had?
• Have the nation-states lost most of their sovereignty?
• If so, who and which agencies and organizations have replaced the nation-state?
• And therefore, are the nation-states still powerful?
Culture
While both economic and political domains are significant elements for the globalization
process, culture is one of the most fundamental dimensions as it nurtures globalization.
Cultural flows through television, films, and new media, such as the Internet and smart-
phones, have played a crucial role in increasing interdependence between countries and
people. Along with the technological domain, focusing on ICTs, culture and media would
be the drivers for globalization.
The flow of culture around the globe is not new. From the beginning of the 20th century,
several cultural products like films immediately started to flow beyond national bound-
aries. Later, television programs produced in a few countries, in particular in the United
States, were received in many parts of the planet. American music has also become pop-
ular in many countries. As such, Hollywood movies, American television programs, and
MTV, as well as CNN as a news channel, have become symbols of globalization.
Of course, there are several new developments as, at least, a few, if not many, countries
have advanced their own popular cultures to become part of the global markets. As
American and European citizens also admit these products, some Westerners enjoy very
similar local or regional options in their own territories. Starting in the early 1990s, and
in many cases in the early 21st century, once small and peripheral countries in the realm
of popular culture and media, such as Mexico, Brazil, India, Turkey, and Korea have
substantially advanced their own popular cultures and penetrated the regional markets,
and partially followed by the Western markets. Telenovelas developed by Mexico and
Brazil, Bollywood movies in India, and the Korean Wave in the 2010s are certainly inter-
esting local cultures that people in many countries enjoy. These countries have certainly
advanced their national images as some of the major powers in the realm of cultural
production.
In the 21st century, it is not important to identify the nationality of popular c ulture.
What is significant is that people around the globe are increasingly consuming culture
developed by other countries, and therefore, are culturally integrated. This does not
mean that all people accept other countries’ popular culture. Many people in Asia and
Latin America resist American culture, and some people in North America and Western
Europe are reluctant to receive popular culture from Asia and Latin America. Instead of
culturally becoming a global village, they prefer their own culture to other culture. In this
context, we have to address several key points in understanding the globalization process
in culture:
• What is the direction of cultural flow?

• What is cultural imperialism and does cultural imperialism theory explain the con-
temporary flow of popular culture?
• How can we understand the increasing role of the small cultural markets (e.g., Mexico
and Korea) in the global market?
Technology
The technological domain is important as ICTs are the drivers for globalization. ICTs
have expedited the connection/interaction of countries and played a key role in creating
a global village. Starting with the telegraph, developed in the mid-19th century, several
different new media technologies, including telephone, satellite, the Internet, social me-
dia, and smartphones have substantially advanced a borderless global entity. High school
and college students from the world in the United States and Canada simply connect with
their families back home via instant mobile messengers like WeChat, Kakao Talk, Line,
WhatsApp, and Facebook Messenger. In the late 2010s, teens and people in their twenties
engage in eSports (electronic sports) anytime and anyplace, and for them, national bound-
aries are meaningless.
Meanwhile, the expansion of ICTs has also been crucial for the growth of European
capital as in the case of the telegraph and the expansion of American capital in the case
of telephones and smartphone technologies. The availability of fast and reliable informa-
tion actualized by the expansion of ICTs has been created within the overall context of
capitalism in the early 21st century. Winseck and Pike (2007) discussed, with the example
of the global expansion of cable and wireless companies (e.g. Western Union, Eastern Tel-
egraph Company, Commercial Cable Company, Anglo American Telegraph Company or
Marconi) in the years 1860–1930, that at the time of Lenin there was a distinct connection
between communication, globalization, and capitalist imperialism. They argue that
the growth of a worldwide network of fast cables and telegraph systems, in tandem
with developments in railways and steamships, eroded some of the obstacles of ge-
ography and made it easier to organize transcontinental business. These networks
supported huge flows of capital, technology, people, news, and ideas which, in turn,
led to a high degree of convergence among markets, merchants, and bankers.
(Winseck and Pike, 2007, 1–2)
In the 2010s, digital platforms, including Google, YouTube, Netflix, and smartphones
have certainly taken a pivotal role in the globalization process. People around the world
have connected on these digital platforms as people enjoy music, film, and television pro-
grams through them, while global citizens instantaneously communicate through mobile
instant messengers like WhatsApp, WeChat, Kakao Talk, and Line.
Global Consumption
People throughout the world in the early 21st century experience the same or similar goods
and services due to the integration of the planet. Although the global flows of popular
culture and food are not new, people consume some foods and cultures originated in other
countries in our own countries or enjoy them while traveling to other countries. For exam-
ple, people do not need to visit the United States to enjoy Disneyland anymore as there are
now several Disneyland parks, including in Paris, Tokyo, and Hong Kong. People also en-
joy Starbucks coffee in more than 70 countries (Knoema, 2018), and McDonald’s is present
in almost every corner of the world (close to 120 countries). More importantly, whenever
they turn on their televisions, people in many countries can enjoy American music, film,
dramas and news on MTV, HBO, Netflix, and CNN in addition to their countries’ cable
channels. This kind of global consumption has been known to contribute to Americaniza-
tion as these cultural products flow from the United States to the rest of the world.
Of course, sometimes, Asian and Latin American foods also arrive in North A merica
and Europe. One of the most significant examples is the California roll invented by
Hidekazu Tojo who was born and trained as a chef in Japan. After learning the basic
skills at home in southern Japan, he travelled to Osaka to study the intricacies of being
a Japanese chef, before moving to Vancouver in 1971 (White, 2012). Here he eventually
created a new type of sushi for North Americans and established Vancouver as a sushi
capital, at least for Vancouverites. Tojo stated,
When I came to Vancouver, most Western people did not eat seaweed, so I tried to
hide it. I made the roll inside out. People loved it. A lot of people from out of town
came to my restaurant—lots from Los Angeles—and they loved it. That’s how it got
called the California roll. I was [going] against Japanese tradition with the inside-out
roll, but I liked it, and my customers liked it. And so it spread all over—even into
Japan.
(White, 2012)
Diaspora
The sixth domain in globalization studies is diaspora, symbolizing the flows of people in
several different forms, like immigration, study abroad, and refugee, which constitute the
integration and interconnectivity of the world. What is interesting is that the flows of peo-
ple have mainly occurred as people in non-Western countries to Western countries unlike
other previous five domains. People from countries like Mexico and China move to North
America and Western Europe to pursue a better life and opportunity.
In fact, the United States has been the top destination for international migrants since
at least 1960, with one-fifth of the world’s migrants living there as of 2017. According to
American Community Survey (ACS) data, more than 43.7 million immigrants resided in
the United States in 2016, accounting for 13.5% of the total U.S. population of 323.1 million.
When 1.49 million foreign-born individuals moved to the United States in 2016, India was
the leading country of origin, with 175,100 arriving in 2016, followed by 160,200 from China/
Hong Kong, 150,400 from Mexico, 54,700 from Cuba, and 46,600 from the P hilippines.
India and China surpassed Mexico in 2013 as the top origin countries for recent arrivals. In
contrast, Canadian arrivals dropped 19%: 38,400 in 2016, versus 47,300 in 2015 (National
Policy Institute, 2018).
This trend is a bit different in Canada. According to the Census of Population in
Canada (Statistics Canada, 2016), among the recent immigrants to Canada, people
from the Philippines were the largest, followed by India and China. Until the mid-2000s,
Chinese were the largest; however, people from the Philippines and India accounted for
27.7%. Unlike the United States, people from the Middle East, including Iran and Syria,
also made large segments as a reflection of the liberal immigration policy enacted by the
current Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.
Many refugees have also moved mainly from non-Western countries to Western coun-
tries like the United States, Canada, Germany, and France. In 2015 and 2016, the refugee
crisis dominated the global news due to a sharp rise in the number of people coming to
Europe to claim asylum. After the Arab uprisings of 2011, the number of people coming
to Europe to seek asylum began to rise. In particular, during Syria’s civil war in the 2010s,
hundreds of thousands of people have died, and about 5.1 million Syrians fled the country
as refugees (The Guardian, 2018).
Overall, globalization has continued to happen mainly because of these six domains,
and the following chapters discuss their major characteristics in conjunction with several
theoretical frameworks.
How to Interpret Globalization: The World Is Flat vs. The World

Is Asymmetrical
Globalization itself has been complicated as can be seen thus far; it is not possible to
simply identify its characteristics. As several approaches and dimensions discussed thus
far explain, it is not possible to categorize globalization from either a positive or negative
aspect. In particular, when we discuss the power relationships between several players,
including the West and the East, the debates on globalization can be easily convoluted.
In this regard, two of the most compelling ideas in interpreting globalization were de-
veloped by Anthony Giddens (1999) and Benjamin Barber (1992). On the one hand, during
his lecture on BBC in 1999, Giddens divided globalization processes into two different
groups known as the skeptics, which are mostly against globalization processes, and the
radicals, which are mostly for globalization processes. The skeptics believe that globaliza-
tion is not real as the economic integration is mainly regional, not global, while the radi-
cals consider that globalization is real and happening because the global market is much
more developed and bigger than it was several decades ago. For the radicals, nations have
lost most of the sovereignty they once had, and politicians have lost most of their capabil-
ity to influence events, while for the skeptics, governments still intervene in economic life
and the welfare states remain intact.
Based on this dichotomy, Giddens (1999) sided with the radicals by saying that
the level of world trade today is much higher than it ever was before and involves a
much wider range of goods and services. But the biggest difference is in the level of
finance and capital flows. Geared as it is to electronic money—, the current world
economy has no parallels in earlier times.
The problem with skeptics and radicals is that both have not properly understood the
concept of globalization and its implications for us. Both also see the phenomenon almost
solely in economic terms. As discussed, globalization is political, technological, and cul-
tural, as well as economic, and globalization is a complex set of processes, not a single
one. However, Giddens’s notion of globalization ignored the long history of globalization,
which had preceded industrialization, and he had recent economic integration in mind
(Briggs and Burke, 2009, 268).
On the other hand, Barber (1992) envisioned globalization as the war between the op-
posing ideologies of McWorld (forces of the free market, consumerism) and Jihad (a type
of Holy War). McWorld (MacDonald’s, Microsoft, Mac Computer) represents for glo-
balization, while Jihad represents against globalization. Barber believes that all national
economies are vulnerable due to the inroads of transnational corporations within which
global trade is free and access to banking is open. In many parts of the world, transnational
corporations such as MacDonald’s, CNN, and Apple “increasingly lack a meaningful na-
tional identity that neither reflects nor respects nationhood as an organizing or regulative
principle.” In contrast to this, however, several small countries in the Middle East and
Eastern Europe fiercely attempt to protect their own identities. Their major goal
is to redraw boundaries, to implode states and resecure parochial identities: to es-

cape McWorld’s dully insistent imperatives. The mode is that of Jihad: war not as an
instrument of policy but as an emblem of identity, an expression of community, and
end in itself.
(Barber, 1992)
However, both destroy the nation-state and the democracy. McDonald’s needs to expand
and merges with others and destroys nationhood. MacWorld therefore throws nations
into one homogeneous global theme park. Jihad has fragmented the nation in retreating
to the local identities. Both hurt civil society and belittle democratic citizenship. “Jihad
delivers a different set of virtues: a vibrant local identity, a sense of community, solidarity
among kinsmen, neighbors, and countrymen, narrowly conceived. But it also guarantees
parochialism and is grounded in exclusion” (Barber, 1992) (Table 1.1).
It is not prudent to consider globalization simply as a winner or a loser game. As glo-
balization has continued to grow, we are already deeply influenced by the globalization
process, and therefore, it is not time to choose either pro-globalization prospects or
anti-globalization prospects. In particular, in the realm of media and digital technology,
the process of globalization in the late 2010s has been much different from the early 2000s
due to the emergence of digital platforms. Until the late 2000s, global flow in culture
mainly occurred through global trade, and therefore, material possessions. Back then,
people had to buy or borrow cultural products in order to enjoy them; however, in the
2010s and 2020s, people simply use various digital platforms like YouTube, and therefore,
there is no need to possess cultural products such as films, television programs, and music.
Global platforms’ strategies are different from traditional cultural industry corpora-
tions. Over the past several decades, one of the major discourses in globalization in the
field of culture has been the potential homogenization, and therefore, elimination of local
identity due to the dominant role of Western cultural industries. However, in the era of
digital platforms, they are developing glocalization models (see Chapters 3 and 8). For
example, Netflix has continued to penetrate the global cultural market. While selling their
cultural products, these platforms provide funds to local cultural producers. The border-
less flow of capital has substantially increased in the 2010s, and therefore, their global
market dominance also seems to continue to increase.
Table 1.1 M
acWorld vs. Jihad
MacWorld Jihad
For globalization Against globalization

Forces of the free market A type of Holy War
Consumerism/demand integration and Bloody Holy War on behalf of partisan identity
uniformity
Driven by universalizing markets Driven by parochial hatreds: parochial community
to protect itself from the cosmopolitan universal
standards of the West
Destroy nationhood Fragment the nation in retreating to the local
Source: (See Barber, 1992).

Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
“‘Yours truly,
“‘Sarabella Brande.’
“Now, what do you think of that?” inquired Jessie, looking
alternately at her two staring sisters.
“I say that it is a hoax, of course! Some joke of yours, Jessie,”
returned Honor, with a playful snatch at the letter. “What is all that
gibberish about Uncle Pelham being a mother to one, and mother
not being a blind horse, and the climatological condition of the hills,
not to mention the snakes and the beaux? You ought to be ashamed
—I could have done it better myself.”
“Read it—examine the post-mark,” said Jessie, now flinging it on
the table.
Yes, there was no room for doubt; it was a bona-fide Indian
epistle. As Honor turned it over critically, she suddenly exclaimed—
“Have you seen this—the gem of the whole production—the
postscript?”
Both sisters bent forward eagerly, and there, just at the top of the
last and otherwise blank sheet, was scribbled as a hasty afterthought
—
“P.S.—Be sure you send the pretty one.”
“She must be a most original old person,” said Honor, with
sparkling eyes. “And, in the name of Dr. Johnson, what is a
‘tamasha’?”
“Ask me something easier,” rejoined Jessie.
“Then what does mother say to this remarkable invitation?”
“You might know better than to ask that!” broke in Fairy, who had
been listening with evident impatience. “In this family it is, ‘What
does Jessie say?’ What do you say, Jess?”
“I say, never refuse a good offer. It is only for twelve months; and,
of course, one of us must go!”
“Then, will you go?” inquired Fairy, with elevated brows.
“Am I the pretty one?” Jessie demanded sarcastically. “I should be
bundled back by the next steamer.”
“No, of course; I never thought of that,” rejoined her sister,
meditatively. “I am the pretty one; there has never been any question
of that—has there, girls?”
“No, never,” returned Jessie, in her most matter-of-fact tone, and
she and Honor exchanged stealthy glances.
For some seconds Fairy seemed buried in thought, as she drew
patterns on the table-cloth with a fork. At last she looked up, and
exclaimed—
“It is only for twelve months as you say, Jess; twelve months soon
fly round.” And she threw back her shawl, and leant her elbows on
the table. “Never refuse a good offer—such as a pony, a rickshaw—
whatever that is—the new dresses, the best society, the best beaux!”
and she burst into a peal of shrill laughter, as she exclaimed, “Do
you know, girls, that I think I shall go!”
A pause, the result of utter stupefaction, followed this unexpected
announcement.
“Yes,” she continued, with increased animation, “I believe I should
like it, of all things. The idea grows on me. I am thrown away here.
What is the use of a pretty face if it is never seen? Did she say thirty-
five pounds for outfit? I can make that go a long way. I don’t take
yards of stuff, like you two giantesses. My tailor-made and my spring
dress are new. I’ll just run up and talk it over with the mater.” And she
pushed back her chair, and bustled out of the room.
Jessie and Honor remained gazing at one another across the
table, in dead suggestive silence, which was at last broken by
Jessie, who said in a tone of quiet despair—
“I wish that ridiculous letter had never come. At first I thought it a
capital thing. I thought you ought to accept.”
“I!” cried Honor; “and, pray, why should you select me?”
“For half a dozen excellent reasons; you are pretty, young, bright,
and popular. You have a knack of making friends. All the people
about here and in the village would rather have your little finger than
the rest of us put together. You walk straight into their hearts, my
love, and therefore you are the most suitable member of this family
to be despatched to India to ingratiate yourself with our rich
relations.”
“Your fine compliments are wasted, Jess—your ‘butter’ thrown
away—for I am not going to India.”
“No; and Fairy has ere this selected her steamer and travelling
costume; if she has made up her mind to go, nothing will stop her—
and Uncle Pelham and Aunt Sally have never been told that Fairy is
—is—so small. What will they say?” regarding her sister with
awestruck eyes and a heightened colour.
What, indeed, would Mrs. Brande—who was already boasting of
her niece from England, and loudly trumpeting the fame of the lovely
girl she expected—say to Fairy? What would be her feelings when
she was called upon to welcome a remarkably pretty little dwarf?
“It must be prevented,” murmured Honor. “She cannot be allowed
to go.”
“Is Fairy ever prevented from doing what she wishes?” asked
Jessie, with a solemn face.
To this pertinent question her sister could find no adequate reply.
After a pause she rose and said—
“Let us go upstairs, and hear what she is saying to mother.”
Mrs. Gordon was sitting up in bed with a flushed face and anxious
expression, listening to the brilliant description of Fairy’s future
career in India.
Fairy, with both elbows on the bed, and her pointed chin in her
hands, was rapidly enumerating her new dresses, and wondering
how soon they would be ready, declaring how fortunate it was that
she had a quantity of patterns in the house, and that if her mother
would only advance twenty pounds she could do wonders. She
talked so incessantly, and so volubly, that no one had a chance of
advising, objecting, or putting in one single word. Her mother and
sisters listened in enforced, uneasy silence, to the torrent of this little
creature’s almost impassioned eloquence.
“It will take a fortnight to get ready,” she said. “This is the fifteenth
of March; what a scurry there will be! You two girls will have to sew
your fingers to the bone—won’t they, mother?”
Her mother faltered a feeble assent.
“I shall want at least twelve gowns and half a dozen hats. I must
go into Hastings to-morrow.” She paused at last, with scarlet cheeks,
and quite breathless.
“There is nearly a week before the mail goes out,” ventured
Jessie; “and it is rather too soon to decide yet. The letter only came
an hour ago, and there is much to be considered, before mother can
make up her mind as to which of us she can spare, and——”
“The whole thing is quite settled,” interrupted Fairy in her sharpest
key—Jessie was not her favourite sister—“only you are always so
fond of interfering and managing every one, from mother down. Aunt
Sara expressly asked for the pretty one; you saw it in black and
white, and mother says I am to please myself—did you not, mother?”
appealing to her parent, whose eyes sank guiltily before the
reproachful gaze of her eldest daughter. Nevertheless she bravely
sighed out—
“Yes, Fairy, I suppose so.”
“There!” cried Fairy, triumphantly. “You see mother has decided,
and I have decided. I am not like some people, who take weeks to
make up their minds, especially when moments are precious. I must
write a quantity of letters for the early post. Honor, do you remember
the name of Mrs. Travers’ dressmaker? and do you think I should get
a habit and riding-boots?”
CHAPTER VI.
“ROWENA”—FULL LIFE SIZE.
The astonishing news that had come to Merry Meetings, was soon
shared by the entire village, thanks to Susan’s sister, who filled the
post of messenger and charwoman. The letter was warmly
discussed, in the sanded parlour of The Cause is Altered inn, over
the counter at Hogben’s the grocer, at the rectory, at Dr. Banks’, and
also by the Trevors—the family at the hall—a family to whom the
Misses Gordon were indebted for most of their trivial gaieties.
Opinion, whether in hall or tap-room, was for once unanimous. Of
course one of the Gordons must accept her rich uncle’s offer, and
that without any foolish or unnecessary delay. Although it was a wet
afternoon, Cara and Sophy Trevor, Mrs. Banks, the rector, and Mrs.
Kerry, arrived almost simultaneously at Merry Meetings, and half
filled the drawing-room; which was of moderate size, with a southern
aspect, and deep comfortable window-seats. The furniture was old-
fashioned, and the carpet threadbare, but a few wicker chairs, a
couple of Persian rugs, a quantity of pictures, books, flowers, and
needlework, covered many deficiencies; it was the general sitting-
room of the family, and if not always perfectly tidy, was at any rate
delightfully home-like, vastly different to so many of its name-sakes,
which have a fire on stated days; gaunt, formal apartments, solely
devoted to visitors. Mrs. Gordon’s friends dropped in at all hours, but
chiefly at five o’clock, and the tea and hot cakes, dispensed at Merry
Meetings, were considered unequalled in those parts.
Behold a selection of Mrs. Gordon’s nearest neighbours gathered
eagerly round her hearth, whilst Honor made tea in thin, old shallow
cups.
“We all met at the gate!” explained Cara Trevor, “and have come,
as you see, to call on you in a body, to hear your news with our very
own ears. Is it true, dear lady, that one of the girls is going out to
India immediately?”
“Yes,” replied Mrs. Gordon. “I heard from my sister-in-law this
morning, she and my brother are most anxious to have one of their
nieces on a visit; they give us very short notice—only a fortnight.
Honor, my love, Cara will take another cake.”
“No, no, thank you,” cried Miss Trevor, impatiently. “Pray do go on,
and tell me all about this delightful invitation, Honor. Where is your
uncle; in what part of India?”
“He is at Shirani, a hill station, most of the year. I believe he has
rather a good appointment, something to do with the revenue.”
“I know all about Shirani,” answered Sophy Trevor, with an air of
unusual importance. “We had a cousin quartered there once; it is a
capital place for shooting, dancing, picnics, and tennis-parties—so
different to this dead and alive Hoyle. It really ought to be spelt
without the y. I wish some one would ask me to India. I would be
ready to start to-night, with just a couple of basket-trunks and a
dressing-bag. Which of you is going? I suppose you have not
thought of it yet?” but she looked straight at Honor.
“Oh, it is quite settled,” rejoined Fairy, in her clear shrill voice. “It
was decided at once, as there is not a second to spare. You are to
lose me,” and she laughed affectedly. She had an extraordinarily
loud laugh for such a little woman.
But there was no responding echo—no, not even a smile; on the
contrary, an expression of blank consternation settled down on every
countenance.
Mrs. Banks was the first to recover the power of speech, as with a
somewhat hysterical giggle, she remarked to the company the self-
evident fact—
“I suppose the Indian mail came in to-day?”
“Yes,” responded Jessie, adding significantly, “and goes out on
Thursday, so we have not sent an answer to Uncle Pelham as yet.”
“He does not know what is in store for him,” murmured Mrs. Kerry
to Mrs. Banks, as she rose and put her tea-cup on a table beside
her. Meanwhile Fairy had produced a number of bundles of patterns
of dress materials, and requested the two Miss Trevors to give an
opinion of their merits. This created a merciful diversion. Most
women enjoy turning over patterns, even patterns for mourning, and
in desultory talk about dressmakers and chiffons, the visit came to a
close.
“Did you ever hear such an utterly crazy notion?” cried Mrs.
Banks, as soon as she and the two Miss Trevors were outside the
hall door. “I could scarcely believe my senses.”
“And no wonder,” said Sophy Trevor. “She should not be allowed
to go; but she is so desperately obstinate, that if she has made up
her mind to start, all England will not stop her.”
“My husband shall stop her,” returned Mrs. Banks, emphatically.
“He shall put it on her health, and say that she is too delicate, and
that the climate will kill her!”
“I doubt if even that would keep her at home,” said Cara, who
knew Fairy well. “How wretched Mrs. Gordon looked. Fairy is her
idol, and turns her round her little finger, and I like Fairy the least of
the family—she is so selfish and so vain. Poor Honor is her slave,
and indeed they all give in to her far too much; but if they allow her to
go out to India, they will never see a penny of their rich uncle’s
money. He is expecting a nice, comely, ordinary girl, not a little
monster!”
“Oh, Cara!” protested her sister, in a deeply shocked voice.
“Well, you know she is a monster of selfishness and vanity,”
retorted Cara with unabashed persistence.
The Rev. James Kerry, who was trudging behind with his wife,
displayed an unusually elongated upper lip—sure sign of excessive
mental perturbation.
“Preposterous!” he exclaimed. “That child exercises a most
baneful influence over her parent. I must see Mrs. Gordon alone,
and reason her out of this insane project.”
“And so you will, no doubt, in five minutes,” assented his partner
briskly, “and as soon as you have left, Fairy will reason her back
again. Surely, my dear, you know Mrs. Gordon? The whole matter
rests in Fairy’s hands, and our only hope is that she may change her
mind, or get the influenza, and there is but little chance of either.”
It was now the turn of the Rev. James to expostulate angrily with
his companion.
The next three days were a period of unexampled misery to most

of the inmates at Merry Meetings. Fairy was feverishly gay and
feverishly busy. Though a severe cold kept her at home, she was
never separated from her beloved patterns, no, not even when in
bed. Most of her time was spent in writing to shops, making
calculations in pencil, trimming hats, and searching through fashion-
plates. She now had but two topics of conversation, India and dress.
Meanwhile her mother and sisters looked on, powerless, and in a
manner paralyzed by the sturdy will of this small autocrat. In these
days there was considerable traffic to and fro from Merry Meetings,
and an unusual amount of knocks and rings at Mrs. Gordon’s
modest little green hall door. The postman, instead of bringing one
paper and a meagre envelope as of yore, now staggered under a
load of large brown-paper parcels, and an immense variety of card-
board boxes. Telegrams were an every-day arrival, and letters
poured in by the dozen. Fairy’s preparations were advancing
steadily, though her sisters whispered gravely to one another, that
“she must not be allowed to go.” Who was to prevent her? Not her
mother, who sat in her usual armchair, looking harassed and woe-
begone, and now and then heaved heartrending sighs and applied a
damp pocket-handkerchief to her eyes.
Not the rector. He had reasoned with Fairy long and, as he
believed, eloquently; but in vain. He pointed out her mother’s grief,
her great reluctance to part with her favourite child, her own
uncertain health, but he spoke to deaf ears; and Dr. Banks, despite
his wife’s proud boast, fared but little better. He solemnly assured
Fairy that she was not fit to go to India, to undertake the long journey
alone; and, whatever her aunt might say, the climate was only suited
to people with robust constitutions. “Was she robust?” he demanded
with asperity.
“He knew best,” she retorted in her pertest manner. “One thing she
did know, she was going. Her aunt had especially invited her, and
why should she not have some amusement and see something of
the world? instead of being buried alive at Hoyle. It was not living, it
was mouldering.”
“At any rate she would live longer at Hoyle than in India,” the
doctor angrily assured her. He was furious with this selfish,
egotistical scrap of humanity, who had always secured the best of
everything that fell to the lot of her impoverished family.
“As for amusement,” he continued, “she would not find it very
amusing to be laid up perhaps for weeks. She was a feverish
subject, had she thought of the sicknesses that periodically scourged
the East—cholera and small-pox?” Fairy, who was constitutionally
nervous, shuddered visibly. “Had she thought of long journeys on
horse-back, she who shrieked if the donkey cocked his ears! She
was, in his opinion, much too delicate and too helpless to think of
leaving home.”
Her determination was somewhat shaken by Dr. Banks’ visit, and
by a feverish cold; was it a foretaste of India already? But where filial
duty and fear had failed to move her, vanity stepped in, and secured
a complete surrender!
The spoiled child of the family was sitting alone in the drawing-
room late one afternoon, sewing pleasant anticipations and serious
misgivings, alternately, into a smart silk blouse, when her thoughts
were suddenly scattered by a loud and unfamiliar double knock. She
heard a man’s voice in the hall, and had barely time to throw off her
shawl, and give her hair a touch before the glass, when Susan
announced, “Mr. Oscar Crabbe.” He was a rising artist who had been
staying in the neighbourhood at Christmas, and had made no secret
of his profound admiration for Miss Fairy Gordon, from a purely
professional standpoint.
Oscar Crabbe was a good-looking man, with a pleasant voice, a
luxuriant brown beard, and an off-hand, impetuous manner.
“Pray excuse my calling at this unceremonious hour,” he said as
he advanced with a cold, outstretched hand. “I believe it is long after
five o’clock; but, as I was passing, I thought I would drop in on
chance of finding some one at home. How are your mother and
sisters?”
“My mother is lying down with a nervous headache; my sisters are
shopping in Hastings, so you will have to put up with me,” said Fairy,
coquettishly.
“And you are the very person I most wish to see,” returned Mr.
Crabbe, drawing his chair closer as he spoke. “I want to ask you to
do me a tremendous favour—I want to paint your portrait for next
year’s academy.”
“My portrait?” she echoed tremulously.
“Yes; I said something to you at Christmas, you may remember.”
“I thought you were joking.”
“No, indeed! I was simply feeling my way; and, if you will honour
me with a few sittings, I shall be deeply grateful. I propose to paint
you as Rowena—full life size. You are an ideal Rowena.”
“And when?”
“Oh, not for some months—not before autumn. But I always take
time by the forelock; and as I was down here at the Trevors” (had
Cara Trevor instigated this visit? History is silent, and the true facts
will never be divulged) “I thought I would seize the opportunity of
bespeaking a model for next season. I will only ask you to sit to me
for the head and hands; the dress and figure I can work at in town.
What do you say?”
“Oh, Mr. Crabbe,” clasping her tiny hands rapturously, “I should
have liked it beyond anything in the whole wide world. I am so sorry,
but——”
“But your mother would not approve?”
“Not at all. She would be enchanted; but I am going to India
immediately.”
“To India?” he repeated, after an expressively long pause.
“Yes; my aunt and uncle have invited one of us—it was most
unexpected—and I am going.”
Mr. Crabbe looked grave; then he gave a sort of awkward laugh,
and said—
“Well, Miss Gordon, I enroll myself among the number of friends
who deeply deplore your departure. I am extremely sorry—indeed, I
have a double reason for regret, for I shall never find such a
Rowena!”
“And I am extremely sorry too. There will be no one in India who
will want to paint my picture.”
“I am not so sure of that. A young fellow, a friend of mine, went out
there last October globe-trotting. He is the cleverest portrait painter I
know, though he calls himself an amateur and only paints for
amusement, and in interludes of hunting and polo-playing. He has
not to work for his daily bread, like the rest of us; but, if he had to do
so, he would make his fortune if he studied and put his shoulder to
the wheel. He has a genius for catching a true likeness, a natural
attitude, a characteristic expression, and he does it all so easily and
so quickly. A few rapid dashes, and the canvas seems to live. It is a
pity he does not take to our profession seriously and study; but his
uncle abhors ‘painting chaps,’ as he calls them; and his uncle,
whose heir he is, is a millionaire.”
“How nice! And what is the name of this fortunate young man?”
“Mark Jervis.”
“I must try and remember. Perhaps I may come across him, and
he may paint my picture; but it will be nothing in comparison to
having it done by you and hung in the Royal Academy.”
She turned her face upon her visitor with an expression of dreamy
ecstasy. A delicate colour, a brilliant sparkle in her eyes, the
becoming background of a red lamp-shade, which set off her perfect
profile, all combined to heighten the effect of Fairy’s transcendent
beauty; and Oscar Crabbe frankly assured himself that he was then
and there gazing upon the face of the most lovely girl in England. As
he gazed, he lost his head, and stammered out rapturously—
“Oh, if I could only paint you as you are now, my reputation would
be assured; you would make me famous!”
“You mean that you would make me famous,” she returned,
dropping her eyes bashfully. “Do you know that you almost tempt me
to abandon India and remain at home?”
“I wish you would. You are of far too delicate clay for the fierce
tropical sun, and India plays the devil—I mean,” picking himself up,
“it is the grave of beauty. If anything should happen to prevent your
carrying out your trip, will you let me know without fail?”
“You may be certain that I shall.”
“I wonder that one of your sisters——” he began, when the door
opened and admitted the two ladies in question. They were cold,
tired, longing for tea, and offered no serious resistance to Mr.
Crabbe’s immediate departure. He held Fairy’s hand in his for
several seconds, as if reluctant to release it, and he gave it a faint
but distinctly perceptible pressure as he said, “I will not say, ‘Bon
voyage,’ but, ‘Au revoir.’ Remember your promise,” and hurried
away.
It was noticed by her relations that Fairy was unusually silent all
that evening. She seemed buried in thought, and her pretty white
forehead was actually knit into wrinkles, as she stitched with deft and
rapid fingers. To tell the truth, the young lady was carefully weighing
the pros and cons respecting her Eastern trip. She lay awake for
hours that night, revolving various questions in her busy little brain.
On one hand, she would escape from Hoyle and enjoy a gay and
novel existence. She would be taken to balls and parties, and be the
cynosure of all eyes; she would have plenty of pocket-money, plenty
of pretty dresses, plenty of luxuries—that was one side of the shield.
On the reverse, she mentally saw a hateful journey by sea, an
unaccustomed life and climate, an ever-haunting dread of fever,
cholera, snakes; she would probably have to accustom herself to
riding wild ponies, to being borne along the brinks of frightful
precipices; she would have no one to pet her and hunt up her things,
and do her hair and mend her gloves—yes, she would miss Honor
dreadfully. Mr. Crabbe had assured her that India was the grave of
beauty. Supposing she became a fright! Dr. Banks had hinted at
shattered health. No, after all, she would remain at home; her aunt
and uncle would be in England in a year’s time, she would pay them
a nice long visit without risking either health or looks; then there
would be Rowena, a lasting and substantial triumph! She had visions
of her picture hanging on the line in the Royal Academy, and
guarded by police in order to keep the surging mob of admirers at
bay, of crowds gazing spell-bound at her portrait, of notices in the
society papers, of photographs in shop windows, of wide celebrity,
and the acknowledgment of her beauty in the face of all England.
The prospect was intoxicating. Towards dawn she fell asleep, and
enjoyed delightful dreams.
The next morning, ere descending to breakfast, she called her
sisters into her room, and said, in an unusually formal manner—
“Jessie and Honor, I may as well tell you that I have changed my
mind, and given up all idea of going to India, so I thought you ought
to know at once.”
“I am delighted to hear it,” replied Jessie, with unaffected relief.
“But why?” surveying her with questioning eyes. “Why have you so
suddenly altered your plans?”
“I have been lying awake all night, thinking of mother,” was the
mendacious reply. “I see she is fretting dreadfully; it would break her
heart to part with me, and I shall never leave her, or at least,”
correcting herself, “never leave England.”
“It is unfortunate that you did not think of mother a little sooner!”
said Jessie, glancing round the room, which was blocked up with
boxes and parcels containing purchases in the shape of hats and
shoes and jackets, and many articles “on approval.” “I think you are
very wise to stay at home; but it is a pity that you have made such
great preparations. Is it not, Honor?”
“No doubt you think so,” retorted Fairy, sarcastically. “Of course it
seems a pity that none of my pretty new things will fit either of you.”
CHAPTER VII.
FAIRY RELENTS.
Now that, to every one’s intense relief, Fairy had changed her
mind and withdrawn her claim, the question remained, Who was to
go? Public opinion, her mother, Jessie—in short, every voice save
one, said Honor. But Honor was indisposed to visit the East. She
was not an enterprising young woman, and she was fond of home;
and Fairy, when alone with her, shed showers of crocodile tears
every time the subject was mentioned. She could not bear to part
with her favourite sister; no, it was too cruel of people to suggest
such a thing. Who, she asked herself, would dress her hair, and
button her boots, and read her to sleep? And many of Honor’s
hateful tasks would fall to her, such as arranging the flowers, dusting
the drawing-room, housekeeping, going messages, for Jessie’s time
meant money, and must be respected. Aloud, in the family circle, she
said in authoritative tones, “Let Jessie go! As to looks, any looks are
good enough for India; even Jessie will seem handsome there. After
all, why should any of them accept the invitation? England was a
free country. She (Fairy) would send a nice, grateful little letter, and
keep the cheque. Uncle Pelham would never be so mean as to take
it back, and they would buy a pony instead of that maddening
donkey, and make a tennis-ground, and take a fortnight’s trip to
London, and enjoy themselves for once in their lives.”
A week elapsed. The mail had gone out without an answer to Mr.
Brande. Jessie and her mother had both talked seriously to Honor,
and she had listened with her pleasantest smile, whilst they pointed
out the advantages she would personally reap from her Eastern trip.
She made no attempt to argue the point, only asked in a playful way
who was to drive the donkey? Who was to play the harmonium in
church? for she flattered herself that she was the only person in the
parish who could do either. And there was the garden and the poultry
—the hens would be lost without her!
“We shall all be lost without you,” rejoined Jessie; “but we can
spare you for your own good.”
“I don’t want to be spared for my own good,” she answered. “I
prefer staying at home. You think that I shall carry all before me out
there! You are greatly mistaken. All your geese are swans. I am a
goose, and not a swan. I am just a country cousin, with a bad
complexion and uncouth manners.”
“Honor! you have a beautiful skin, only not much colour; and as for
your manners, they are as good as other people’s.”
“You have often said that mine are alarmingly abrupt, and that I
have the habits of a savage or a child in the way I blurt out home-
truths.”
“Oh, but only at home; and you must not always mind what I say.”
“Then what about the present moment? When you say that I ought
to go out to Uncle Pelham—how am I to know that I ought to mind
what you say now?”
“Upon my word, Honor, you are really too provoking!”
Little did Mrs. Gordon and her friends suspect how their weighty
reasons and arguments were nullified by Fairy, who nightly, with
arms wound tightly round her sister’s neck, and face pressed to hers,
whispered, “You won’t go; promise me, you won’t go.”
Jessie, the clear-sighted, at last began to suspect that Fairy was at
the bottom of her sister’s reluctance to acquiesce. Fairy was so
demonstratively affectionate to Honor. This was unusual. It was too
bad, that Fairy should rule her family, and that her wishes should be
law. Jessie conferred with her mother, and they agreed to try another
plan. They would drop the subject, and see if feminine contrariness
would be their good friend? The word “India” was therefore not
uttered for three whole precious days; patterns and passages, etc.,
were no longer discussed, matters fell back into their old
monotonous groove, save that Mrs. Gordon frequently gazed at her
youngest daughter, and heaved unusually long and significant sighs.
One afternoon, ten days after the letter had been received which
still lay unanswered in Mrs. Gordon’s desk, Honor met the rector as
she was returning from practising Sunday hymns on the wheezy old
harmonium.
“This will be one of your last practices,” he said. “I am sure I don’t
know how we are to replace you.”
“Why should you replace me?” she asked. “I am not going away.”
“Not going away,” he repeated. “I understood that it was all settled.
Why have you changed your mind?”
“I never made up my mind to go.”
“Why not? Think of all the advantages you will gain.”
“Yes, advantages; that is what Jessie is always drumming into my
head. I shall see the world, I shall have pretty dresses, and a pony,
and plenty of balls and parties, and new friends.”
“And surely you would enjoy all these—you are only nineteen,
Honor?”
“Yes, but these delights are for myself; there is nothing for them,”
nodding towards “Merry Meetings.” “I am the only person who will
benefit by this visit, and I am sure I am more wanted at home than
out in India. Jessie cannot do everything, her writing takes up her
time; and I look after the house and garden. And then there is Fairy;
she cannot bear me to leave her.”
“You have spoiled Fairy among you,” cried the rector, irritably.
“Only the other day she was crazy to go to India herself. She must
learn to give up, like other people. It is very wrong to sacrifice
yourself to the whims and fancies of your sister; in the long run they
will become a yoke of dreadful bondage. Remember that you are not
a puppet, nor an idiot, but a free, rational agent.”
“Yes,” assented the girl. She knew she was now in for one of Mr.
Kerry’s personal lectures. It might be over in two or three minutes,
and it might continue for half an hour.
“Now listen to me, Honor. I know you are a good, honest young
woman, and think this plan will only benefit yourself. You are wrong.
Your mother is in poor health; her pension dies with her. If you offend
your only near relative, how are you to exist?”
“I suppose we can work. Every woman ought to be able to earn
her bread—even if it is without butter.”
“Honor, I did not know that you held these emancipated views. I
hope you won’t let any other man hear you airing them. As for work!
Can Fairy work? Jessie, I know, can earn a few pounds, but she
could barely keep herself; and if you fall sick, what will you do? It is
best to survey matters from every standpoint. Your aunt and uncle
have practically offered to adopt you. You will return in a year’s time;
you will have made many friends for yourself and sisters, developed
your own at present limited views of the world, and bring many new
interests into your life. Your absence from home will be a
considerable saving. Have you thought of that?”
“A saving!” she echoed incredulously.
“Of course! Don’t you eat? A healthy girl like you cannot live on air;
and there is your dress.”
“I make my own dresses.”
“Nonsense!” with an impatient whirl of his stick. “You don’t make
the material. How can you be so stubborn, so wilfully blind to your
own interests. If another girl had your chances, Honor Gordon would
be the very first to urge her to go; and that in her most knock-me-
down style. You have a much keener view where other people’s
affairs are concerned than your own.”
“Of course, it is only for a year,” said Honor. “I shall be back
among you all within twelve months.”
“Yes, if you are not married,” added the rector, rashly.
“It appears to be the general impression in Hoyle, that going to
India means going to be married,” said the girl, firing up and looking
quite fierce. “Please put that idea quite at one side, as far as I am
concerned.”
“Very well, my dear, I will,” was the unexpectedly meek response.
Touched by his humility, she continued, “Then you really think I
ought to go?”
“My good child, there can be no two opinions. Every one thinks
you ought to go.”
“Except Fairy.”
“Fairy has no right to stand in your way, and your absence will be
an excellent lesson for her. She will learn to be independent and
useful. Now, here is my turn, and I must leave you. Go straight home
and tell them that you are ready to start, and that the sooner your
mother sees about your escort and passage the better.”
And he wrung her hand and left her. Honor walked home at a
snail’s pace, thinking hard. If Fairy would but give her consent, she
would hold out no longer against every one’s wishes. She would go
—yes, without further hesitation. After all, it was only for one year.
But, although she did not know it, Fairy had already yielded. Jessie
and Mrs. Banks had been talking to her seriously in Honor’s
absence, and she had been persuaded to listen to the voice of
reason—and interest.
If she had gone to India, as she intended, she would have been
parted from Honor, and of her own accord.
This fact, brusquely placed before her by Mrs. Banks, she was
unable to deny, and sat dumb and sullen.
“Uncle Pelham is sure to take to Honor,” added Jessie, “and he will
probably do something for us all, thinking that we are all as nice as
Honor, which is not the case. She will be home in a year, and there
will be her letter every week.”
“Yes, and presents,” put in Mrs. Banks, significantly. “She will have
plenty of pocket-money, and will be able to send you home no end of
nice things.”
Fairy sniffed and sighed, dabbed her eyes with her handkerchief,
and finally suffered herself to be coaxed and convinced, and when
her sister opened the drawing-room door, with rather a solemn face,
she ran to her and put her arms round her and said—
“Honor, darling, I have promised to let you go!”
That very day the important epistle was despatched to Shirani,
and Fairy, to show that she did nothing by halves, actually dropped it
into the letter-box with her own hand. And during the evening she
once more produced the bundles of patterns, and threw herself heart
and soul into the selection of her sister’s outfit.

FULL Download Ebook PDF Globalization and Media in The Digital Platform Age PDF Ebook

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

FULL Download Ebook PDF Globalization and Media in The Digital Platform Age PDF Ebook

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

(eBook PDF) Globalization and Media in

the Digital Platform Age

Dal Yong Jin

ISBN: 978-0-367-35146-5 (hbk)

1 Globalization in the Age of Digital Platforms? 1

2 Media History in the Age of Globalization 16

4 From Cultural Imperialism to Platform Imperialism 45

5 The Nation-State: Dead or Alive 59

6 The Business of Global Media Industries 72

7 Smartphones in the Era of Globalization 87

8 Globalization and Broadcasting 98

9 The Cultural Politics of Film 111

10 The Culture of Global Music 126

Globalization in the Era of Digital Platforms

What Is a Digital Platform?

a platform is a mediator rather than an intermediary: it shapes the performance of so-

Three Paradigms to Globalization Studies

Critical Political Economy Approach

Cultural Globalization Approach

Six Dimensions in Globalization Studies

• Does globalization bring about the weakening of state power?

• What is the direction of cultural flow?

How to Interpret Globalization: The World Is Flat vs. The World

is to redraw boundaries, to implode states and resecure parochial identities: to es-

For globalization Against globalization

Source: (See Barber, 1992).

The next three days were a period of unexampled misery to most

You might also like