It can be difficult to communicate efficiently in a global setting. Owing to ethical and cultural discrepancies, even though all parties use the same language, there may be misunderstandings. The current economic encounters have reinforced the need for companies to reinforce their internal communication ability in order to handle and monitor outward intimidations. As the communities turn out to be more globally interconnected, the capability to communicate across cultural limits has become increasingly necessary. International organizations have to consider the way they communicate with the clienteles and staffs from diverse cultures so as to to fulfill the administration's undertaking and generate worth for shareholders. The form in which businesses communicate and market their products and services around the globe has been diverged by technology. In the recent years, there have been many instances in the world of business about poor organizational performance which comes from poor communication. It is vital for businesses on the lookout to gain a good advantage in the universal market, considering the effect of globalization on cross-cultural interaction. However, despite technological advances, businesses must remain aware of the cultural annoyances that can obstruct their efforts to upsurge market share and profits.
The argument about the effect of globalization on cultural diversity is complex. Globalization is enabled by technological advancements that dissolve international borders and display cultures to a new ground. Globalization has the potential to be a liberating force. It can link the globe, promote economic growth, provide intelligence, and aid in the development of a global village. Once it comes to cultural diversity and globalization, inconsistent contrast, and a tangible undercurrent crop up.
Apart from that, globalization has the capability to summon and inspire individuals, give a platform for expression of oneself, foster a sense of community by socialization, and create job openings. It also has the potential to deny people power by deception, facilitate more colonization, and accelerate the erosion of egoism, identity of oneself, and collective uniqueness. Intellectuals see two opposing delusions: one of a big business monoculture in which states and cultural communities alike lose their autonomy and sovereignty, and the other of a vivacious celebration of multiplicity through which different cultural clusters engage directly and harmoniously, free of restricting political energies such as state governments. Globalization has had a variety of detrimental effects on cultural diversity, including multinational corporations' role in fostering a consumer society, exploiting workers and consumers, and influencing social values. Local cultural influences may be "drowned out" by the increased availability of mainstream media and goods. The essay seeks to argue out the negative aspects of globalization with its relation to evolution with time and how critics have developed in their arguments comprehending how globalization has created a resurgence of stronger nationalism emerging in some cases into extremism.
The main argument reflects on the rapid growth of modernization that has led to the world's disenchantment. Modernization, which has affected family life in terms of socio-economic conditions, cultural values, schooling, and communication, is a phenomenon linked to the advent of sophisticated machines, improved technology, and other systems that make life easier. Modernity refers to the notion of progress in social and cultural processes, either for the better or for the worse, in culture and how life today differs from life in the past. Even though modernization's rapid growth has built positive features making the globe more standardized and connected, it has also done away with cultural diversity and disconnected people. There are three main ideas on globalization and culture; the first one explains that the globe undergoes what is known as a clash of civilizations (Pieterse, pg1389). The cultural disparity is referred to as absolute and spawning rivalry and skirmishes. In addition to that, the other ideological nature of this form is Mcdonaldisation which could be illustrated in an example of how foods from the globe have been Americanized with some bit or no form of addition from the Americans. It is said that the two concepts are enclosed with modernism.
The last concept described is that of Hybridisation which refers to the postmodern susceptibility to travel culture, denoting a process known as trans-local culture mixing. The process of hybridization reveals the difference to be subjective, and the relationship can also be defined as an affirmation of similarity with a slight shift in perspective. Hybridization as a perspective belongs to the more complex end of intercultural ties, emphasizing the mixing of cultures rather than their separation. The concept of cultural hybridity itself unravels or, at the very least, requires reworking. Hybridization has now become part of a wider trend in cultural growth as the culture industry has become much more global and localized.
On the other hand, hybridization entails more than the blending, merging, and formulation of disparate elements into a culturally faceless whole. The three concepts contain certain theoretical principles, which make them examples. Each of the concepts represents the specific politics of disparities as absolute and long-lasting, erasable as being erased, and fraternization. In the process, it builds up new, trans-local forms of disparities. Theorists claim that older sources tend to have a precarious outlook of globalization and generally want to preserve their nationalism. The concepts above are interdependent with globalization; hence they do not contradict globalization. Therefore, the advanced awareness of cultural disparities is a function of globalization.
There is a central problem of worldwide interactions and flows. Also, heterogenization and Homogenization tend to clash in the context of globalization. Homogenization occurs when a strong culture infiltrates local culture and becomes the dominant culture in the region, intending to eradicate local culture. As a result, society becomes more homogeneous. All aspire to the ideals of the West. Specific cultures and religions are also lost as a result. There is even more industry competition. Cultural heterogeneity or multicultural society, on the other hand, implies that area culture has been widely disseminated and embraced by other communities and cultures, thus increasing local cultural diversity. It is possible that this would result in wealthier countries incentivizing developing countries to conserve their natural environments and follow more sustainable practices. It can be stated that in normal cases that homogenization arguments can be in terms of Americanisation or commoditization, of which both the arguments are highly related. This can be referred to the past in terms of culture and how it is entangled to larger worldwide forces in the cultural styles of capitalism, which have done a lot to display to the Americans that the past is generally another nation.
Moreover, it is also argued out that the intricacy of the current worldwide economy, which is related to specific fundamental disjunctures amongst culture, economy, and politics, has at the current times begun to theorize. Researchers note down that the relationship between the scopes that comprise mediascapes, ethnoscapes, financescapes, technoscapes, and ideoscapes is a good elementary foundation for determining such disjunctures. They elucidate that these terms with a common word ‘scapes’ are highly perspectival paradigms, infected by the dialect, ancient and political situationless of diverse kinds of actors. These actors comprise conglomerates, nation-states, diasporic groups, and subnational movements and groupings, and descale to families, villages, and also include the individual actor as a perspectival set of the landscape. Every term offers itself a building block of numerous words consisting of historically positioned thoughts of an individual and groups spread worldwide (Appadurai, pg628).
In the sense of heterogenization and Homogenization, cultural Homogenization refers to the loss of cultural diversity as a result of the popularization and dissemination of a broader range of cultural symbols, including not only physical artifacts but also ideas, rituals, and values. Though cultural Homogenization is a by-product of globalization, the same mechanism often has the opposite effect, causing each culture to overpower the others, resulting in heterogeneity. As a result of globalization, a centralized society is known as cultural Homogenization, or Western culture's dominance emerges. Despite the exchange of cultures, the contradictions between forces remain the same. As a result, the cultural exchange can be considered only one of several mechanisms. Generally, there are similar arguments that criticize worldwide flows, for example, the comparison of ethnoscapes to the concept of hybridization. In addition to that, we lay an argument on the basis that we dwell in a flexible system that is pivoted around multinational organizations, worldwide financial markets, and a robust system of technological research and growth. Nevertheless, this kind of system is flawed since the dominant values and interests gather up everything valuable while detaching everything that is losing value or that which is not valuable. Therefore, it is vital to halt and reverse the downward spiral of exclusion and instead use communications and technology, and information in the empowerment of humankind.
We exist in a network of interconnected but asymmetrical nodes, which may have a hierarchy, but no center. All these nodes are vital for the functionality of the network. They are also essential for money circulation, information, goods, technology, images, services, or even individuals throughout the network (Castells). It's then accurate to argue on the basis that it is not steadiness that is the most precarious discrepancy in this structural logic; rather, it's the rejection or inclusion because the networks persistently move along and reform in an endless variation. Those that exist within this network can share and add on their chances overtime. The individuals who become switched off or drop out view their likelihoods die out. If we are all into reintegrating economic development and social growth in the information age, we require intense technological upgrading of firms and households, as wells as entire nations. This plan will be of higher interest for everyone, including the businesses. The potential human requirements to become reinvested in areas where the marginalization of nations, or cities, or neighborhoods have had their potential wasted. Capitalism in globalization can be said to be greedy as it only cares about a few individuals' greatest good rather than the greatest good of the many.
Economic imperialism and its economic showcase ultramodernity; this can then explain that it is damaging the planet in its present phase. Ethnocentrism can be termed as the way by which individuals look basically from an angle of one's own culture. As a result, based on your norms, values, and beliefs, you can make incorrect assumptions about other people's actions. Reluctance or aversion to attempting the food of another culture, for example, is ethnocentric. Cultural variations are viewed as neither inferior nor superior by social scientists. They would be able to contextualize their study subjects within the relevant cultural context while also examining their own perceptions and assumptions. In ethnocentrism, the hypnotic examination of our current anxieties about dehumanization brought forth by technology, wealth, and power is the apex of cruel divisions. We exist at a time of unprecedented problematic identity fanaticism, and the triumph of globalization has generally been harboring the de-legitimizing of relativists disclosure. Human rights, economics, transcultural variables, and democracy have been placed at the forefront and are not able to be questioned. We have reverted and are witnessing a true return to Anti-western and Western ethnocentricity. The arrogance over the high point in the growth that has been reached in the market economy can be termed as a new form of ethnocentricity.
We must then come to realize that since any single value can only dwell within a unique cultural context, there are no values that can transcend the plurality of cultures. However, the successes that come from ordinary eurocentrism have made this possible by the excess is the outcome of globalization, namely, the rise of ethnic terrorism and fundamentalism. The word 'Eurocentrism' relates to an ideology that assumes European history and traditions to be "normal" and superior to all the others, either indirectly or specifically, thus assisting in the production and justification of Europe's dominant role within the global capitalist world system. We must then protect our respect and tolerance for others by questioning the way in which we all can co-dwell in a shrinking world. This does not give the meaning that we must imagine a single universal culture; rather, it should be a matter of keeping some enough critical distance for other individuals to provide certainty to our own (Latouche, pg12). The West nations' problem is that there are only two attitudes that they have to hang onto. One of the attitudes is their denial of other cultures, and the other one is their denial of their own culture for the benefit of containing a very unique universalism. It then becomes worrisome when we are in denial of this fact because its relative, and it explains further that in the West, Religion and, more specifically in science, works as vehicles as an absolutizing of the relative.
Furthermore, students studying media and communication hope to find common ground with cultural imperialism and cultural identity globalization. We should agree that various complexities characterize the relations between society, globalization, and media. Nonetheless, there are diverse ways through which the global, international, state, and local complement each other and ways in which regional domination can consequentially drive national or global dominance (Demont-Heinrich, pg673). We should reflect on the benefits and drawbacks of cultural imperialism and cultural globalization strategies while paying particular awareness to the topic of control. The culture-infected scholarship is approach is usually concerned with the macro-level issues and questions. In contrast, the scholarship beached in the globalization of culture that is much concerned with the micro-level. There are a number of scholars of media and communication that propose an approach that joins together macro and micro-level analysis by keenly weighing structure or agency considerations.
Moreover, the importance of power points out that not all social actors contain an equivalent effect in the creation of a shared culture that can circumnavigate across and within all the stages circumnavigating the worldwide social order. The ancient tales of some groups, which are basically hybrid in their nature, are more heard than others that are not equally popular, and the vocal sound of the others are seldom but matters quite a lot when heard. This should be taken in as a larger petition to elementary human egalitarianism and the significance of provision of every individual with an equivalent chance to contribute to their meaningful contributions to the larger collective to form the global cultural stage, rather than an appeal for just preserving pure national cultures and identities. Owing to the circumstances of transculturality, the question of power differentials crops up. It is then suggested that there should be a productive middle ground between globalization of culture and cultural imperialism. Therefore, a conclusion was made as although it can be very complex to find a moderate analytical approach to balance the powers between the micro and the macro. Generally, such kind of an attitude can also pay consideration to the diverse types in which confrontation to regional and local cultural domination can puzzlingly support the fuelling of national or international cultural hegemony. International media and communication studies have changed with the passing times, and therefore it should be ultimately part of the national evolution theory.
The Local-nexus works as a vibrant location of positioning, individuality building, and essentializing with a bit of peril of resulting into radicalized drawbacks when talking of founding a sense of sociocultural and self rootless inside within the variety of cultural globalization. In these times of globalization, there are hardly any local contents that are able to evade the influence of cultural globalization's transformative effects (Ozer, pg30). Further, we can continue to say that essentialists’ thinking has been prompted by cultural globalization that transforms the local sociocultural context, making the people feel excluded and marginalized by the very rapidly sociocultural and local change. It can then be stated that the uncertainty that is enhanced by globalization, for example, the ethnic defense to an unconfident lifetime affection, can lead to a know-how of cultural and heterogeneity reflux, which will challenge the firm structures, and therefore makes things less predictable for the contemporary globalized societies. This, in turn, can lead to very strong negative reactions as these changes can be qualified as interference from the exterior the local context. Researchers have revealed that insecure life attachment consequence of the feeling of exclusion, fear, unfair treatment, and the lack of opportunity in the country of residence that results in negative reactions that include its direct association with a radical defiance with its authorization of both illegal and by fierce means relating to radicalism by means of ethnic fortification, and multicultural achievement, This article is much more unique but still regards the effects of globalization and the tensions felt in Homogenization specifically and its negative effects.
Significantly, all the world's major elements have experienced certain changes in cultural globalization, the different customs and beliefs of different communities of the world have been widely shared. It purported a clear understanding of foreign values and ideals; there is much lesser stereotyping. Global communications have also played a significant role in world cultural development since it has done away with cultural barriers(Moran); hence communication is vital. For example, trading as an economic element of the world has brought up so many business opportunities to all the globe's diverse cultures, bringing them together and bringing about global communications.
Trading connections across the world has caused different communications strategies for governments to secure big chances with huge trade deals across continents. Accepting and understanding the languages and cultural differences that exist helps ease global communication, and that's why it can be understood as an intercultural factor. Following the kinds of drastic developments being experienced today, communication can be cited as the key tool that has promoted such developments. In the case of technology, many changes have occurred as the years went by. This should be linked to global communications; that is why with the continuously growing globalized world, it is evident that communication is very important. There have been a lot of considerations made concerning the diverse cultures and their contributions to technology, so as changes were made, they involved every single continent of the globe. At this point in time where video communications are an easier way of communicating directly between individuals who are separated by thousands of kilometers, one does not have to go through the hustle of traveling over long distances to achieve complete communication hence my conclusion that communication has very much grown globally becoming very fast and easier.
As much as cultural globalization purports world development, it is important to note that lines should be drawn with interest to protect traditional and local cultures, however much difficult it seems. This will help monitor and control the implications of globalization on culture; it can be achieved by coming up with institutions at international, national, and local levels that will effectively deal with cultural issues. Protecting cultural globalization calls for governments' strictness while entering any agreements; they should not constrain the local cultures. If anything, they ought to provide permanent legal foundations for cultural diversity. As time goes by, the efforts that are being put up in efforts of protecting local and traditional cultures are likely to perform an increasingly vital role in globalization.
In conclusion, despite globalized cultures existing, challenges exist in the local and national cultures; this is because globalization will create a world of winners and losers. This is due to the fact that it is profound and must contain inevitable consequences; there would emerge inequality and injustice in the world due to specific individuals economically dominating and being able to resist any kind of attempt to tamper with the new world order. These kinds of people are very capable of imposing their selfish desires, agendas, and work-plans as global but only for their benefit. Therefore, as much as cultural globalization has led to sharing of developmental ideas across continents, this has been made possible by the diffusion of cultures by the internet.
Appadurai, Arjun. “Disjuncture and Difference in the Global Cultural Economy.” Design: Critical and Primary Sources, 2016, doi:10.5040/9781474282888.0015.
Castells, Manuel. Information technology, globalization and social development. No. 114. Geneva: UNRISD, 1999.
Demont-Heinrich, Christof. “Cultural Imperialism versus Globalization of Culture: Riding the Structure-Agency Dialectic in Global Communication and Media Studies.” Sociology Compass, vol. 5, no. 8, Aug. 2011, pp. 666–78, doi:10.1111/j.1751-9020.2011.00401.x.
Holton, Robert. "Globalization's cultural consequences." The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 570.1 (2000): 140-152.
Latouche, Serge. "The Cultural Effects of Globalisation." Theoria 48.98 (2001): 1-13.
Moran, Robert T., Philip Robert Harris, and Sarah Virgilia Moran. Managing cultural differences: global leadership strategies for cross-cultural business success. Routledge, 2011.
Ozer, Simon. “Globalization and Radicalization: A Cross-National Study of Local Embeddedness and Reactions to Cultural Globalization in Regard to Violent Extremism.” International Journal of Intercultural Relations, vol. 76, May 2020, pp. 26–36, doi:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2020.02.007.
Pieterse, Jan Nederveen. "Globalisation and culture: Three paradigms." Economic and political weekly (,1996): 1389-1393.
Earn back money you have spent on downloaded sample
To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below.
Urgent Homework (2021) . Retrive from http://www.urgenthomework.com/sample-homework/about-globalization
"." Urgent Homework ,2021, http://www.urgenthomework.com/sample-homework/about-globalization
Urgent Homework (2021) . Available from: http://www.urgenthomework.com/sample-homework/about-globalization
Urgent Homework . ''(Urgent Homework ,2021) http://www.urgenthomework.com/sample-homework/about-globalization accessed 16/10/2021.