Click on the icons on the left to navigate around.
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
"Let's trash McDonald's!"
We can easily interpret the first picture, McDonald's is money-minded and earning too much with its lies. It started off as a chain of fast-food restaurants, primarily selling hamburgers, chicken, french fries, milkshakes and soft drinks, but who would have expected it to be a branding which certain people love most and others hate it. With the successful expansion of McDonald's into many international markets, the company has become a symbol of globalization and the spread of the American way of life. McDonald's has become emblematic of globalization, sometimes referred as the "McDonaldization" of society.
McDonaldisation is often accused of harming domestic jobs. There are also accusations of Americanisation are not too far away. A few years back, anti-globalization protests were taken to McDonald's restaurants in Australia.
Those residing outside the United States, like us, often hear the American cultural invasion. McDonald's, 7-Eleven, Nike all become part of our lives.
Culture is seen as an integral part of national identity and with an increasingly global society, people are concerned that national culture will be dimished. Yet what seems to grow stronger are international brands. They are not necessarily American (Sony, Mercedes-Benz, Nokia are Japanese, German, Finnish) but many are (Coca-Cola, McDonald's), because American companies have capitalized their forces. Everyone is concerned with their own identity being changed.
The second picture saw MacDonald’s as American soldiers attacking Iraq. Since this globalization overrides the interests of individuals, countries and democracy in favour of a global trans-national system and because people are so afraid that their identity will be moulded with America’s, they try to stop these forces.
However, some Americans believe there is a strong eastern influence these days, with Hollywood adopting ideas from Hong Kong Chinese film-making (i.e. Infernal Affairs, The Departed).
In my opinion, Americanisation may not be something great but it is something that cannot be changed easily. It is almost irreversible.
Culturized at 11:36 PM
Is TV part of Culture? Is "TV culture", global or local? Who produces/owns TV programmes/networks? How "free" and "competent" are we to interpret TV messages? Are TV programmes totally dependent on the ability of audience interpretation for its influence?
Yes, TV causes cultural globalisation. Internationally consumer brands, the global popular cultural icons and the communication of events by satellite broadcasts to hundreds of millions of people at a time are visible marks of globalisation invading the cultural area. Some feel that the most public symbols of globalisation consist of Coca-cola, Madonna and the news on CNN. The most directly and easily perceived and experienced forms of globalisation is the cultural form.
"This is about globalisation, MTV and global youth culture."
Based on my knowledge, MTV is an American cable television network. The original purpose of the channel was to show music videos. Today, MTV broadcasts a variety of music, pop culture, youth culture, and reality television shows aimed at young adults. Since its premiere, MTV has revolutionized the music industry. However, after watching this video, I realise that MTV is actually owned by Viacom. Viacom is an very big American media conglomerate with various worldwide interests, thus its major impact internationally.
Since they can be so powerful, are we free to interpret these programmes? People are wondering now if the media are offering a clear analysis of voices of the media. Not only on TV, what you see on the frontpage of your newspapers may be different from what you really see on the streets. (i.e. Protests, riots). Media tends to give one-sided reports and misrepresents what is really going on. Footages are often flawed. Yet, not many will question what is portrayed by the media. We do not have the ability to do that. TV programmes are not dependent on the ability of audience interpretation for its influence. In fact, it is the opposite. We, the audiences, are dependent on the media and it influences us.
Culturized at 10:32 PM
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
No Logo is one of the most influential books about the anti-globalization movement and an international bestseller written by Canadian journalist Naomi Klein. The book focuses on branding and often makes connections with the anti-globalisation movement. The growth of multinationals and the globalization of their impact can be summarized by the rise of the brand.
Using hundreds of media examples, this video shows how the commercial takeover of public space, destruction of consumer choice, and replacement of real jobs with temporary work - the dynamics of corporate globalization - impact everyone, everywhere. Naomi Klein argues that globalization is a process whereby corporations discovered that profits lay not in making products, but in creating branded identities people adopt in their lifestyles.
The growth in the wealth and cultural influence of multi-national corporations over the years can be traced back to an idea developed by management theorists in the mid-1980s: successful corporations must primarily produce brands, as opposed to products, as written in the book. As the book suggested, 'brand builders are the new primary producers in our so-called knowledge economy'. One of the key elements that keeps companies as multinationals is the extent to which they look to 'outsource' products.
Nike, Levi, Coca Cola and other major companies spend huge sums of money in promoting and sustaining their brands. One strategy is to try and establish particular brands and make them integrate into the way people understand and see themselves. As we have already seen with respect the operation of multinationals this has had a particular impact on children and young people and education.
Significantly, the focus on brand rather than qualities of the product also has its shortcoming. Damage to the brand can do harm to sales and profitability. If a brand becomes associated with failure or disgrace then it can face major problems in the market. For instance, when a sports star used to advertise a brand turns out to be a drug-taker, it greatly affects the image of the brand.
In conclusion, for globalised branding to succeed, the brand must be established and produces inherent quality.
Culturized at 9:42 PM
Sunday, April 22, 2007
Globalisation can be otherwise known as ‘ruthless international capitalism’, says Johan Norberg Nike means victory. It is hungered after by kids across the world. Nike is the symbol of the unacceptable triumph of global capital. A Nike is a shoe that simultaneously kicks people out of jobs in the West, and tramples on the poor in the Third World. They are sold for 100 times more than the wages of the people who make them.
Nike has more than 500 contract factories around the world located in 45 different countries. Most of the factories are located in Asian Continent including countries like: China, India, Turkey, Thailand, Vietnam, Pakistan, Philippines, Malaysia, Korea and others. It spreads all over, not only in the US and becomes multi-national.
Today Nike has almost four times more workers in Vietnam than in the United States.
Working in a Nike factory in Vietnam is tough, and the conditions are poor, comparing it to the factories in US. But the workers are more than satisfied. They compare the work at Nike with the way they lived before. In fact, the average pay at a Nike factory in Vietnam is $54 a month, almost three times more than other jobs in Vietnam.
Workers at the factory are considered rich. But the most important thing is that they do not have to work outdoors on a farm any more. Furthermore, the Nike job comes with a regular wage, with free or subsidised meals, free medical services and training and education. Foreign factories work well and produce much more. This is due to the privileges they get.
These facts make Nike sound more like Santa Claus. Howver in actual fact, corporations such as Nike don’t bring these benefits and wages because they are generous. It is globalisation. With their investments in poor countries, multinationals bring new machinery, better technology, new management skills and production ideas, a larger market and the education of their workers and these are what raises productivity. It benefits Nike instead. Moreover, lower costs are needed to have a factory in Vietnam than in the US.
This is another example whereby Nike comes into globalization.
Culturized at 6:13 PM
Globalization refers to increasing global connectivity, integration and interdependence in the economic, social, technological, cultural, political, and ecological spheres.
Using the cultural aspects of a country is a type of soft power. Soft power grows out into many other countries. For instance, Hollywood not only affects the US, it also has its impact internationally. This is globalization.
I’m sure everybody has heard of Nike. The video above is a commercial done by Nike that has been broadcasted across Asia including Korea and Japan. The advertisement features many popular stars including BoA, Park Ji Sung, Michelle Wie and last but not least, LeBron James. All of them play significant roles, bringing about the idea of globalization in the commercial.
Let me start off with a brief introduction and their global influence.
BoA, as many should know, is the leading star of the ‘Korean Wave’. Other than her native language, Korean, she is also fluent in Japanese and speaks conversational English. Not only do Koreans and Japanese know her, she is popular across Asia. In addition, she will be stepping onto the international stage soon.
Park Ji Sung is another Korean who has remarkable achievements. He currently plays for the South Korean National team and Manchester United. As we all know, Man U is a very popular football club internationally. He is first of his countrymen to play in the much sought-after English Premier League. In the 2002 FIFA World Cup, he is pivotal in helping take South Korean to the Semi-Finals. His international achievements are notable.
Another sports player, Michelle Wie is a 18 year old female golfer, also the youngest woman ever selected to play as the U.S. team. Even though she is an American passport holder, she is a Korean. Wie has gained fame for her attempts to make a cut at a PGA Tour event, an important competition for many international golfers. In 2006, she was named in a Time magazine article, “one of 100 people who shape our world”. Time magazine, known by many, is prestigious and it is indeed a great honour to be featured in it. To some extent, we can see how influential she can be. Possibly not now, but without doubt, the future of the international golf scene.
Lastly, there is LeBron James. This NBA player has signed with Nike a $90 million show contract and released a series of advertisements. James was highly promoted within the national media in the United States as a future NBA star.
The commercial made use of stars all over the globe, particularly Koreans since it is after all for Asia broadcast. How effective can this use of stars be? Consumers, especially fans are attracted to the commercial. They want to have the same outfit as what their idols are wearing. I’m sure the profits made by Nike is heaps higher than the amount they had paid these stars. Globalisation can cost more than the $90 million Nike paid LeBron. Despite the high cost, globalization benefits them more.
Nike is now an established company and the largest sportswear supplier in the world. We have to give due credit to globalization and marketing for their achievements.
Culturized at 5:13 PM
About
Han Xinci
--> belongs to staplebullets.
--> belongs to 2B/06
A CULTURAL expert ;)
She knows about Globalization too!