New York University
Department of Media, Culture, and Communication
Media and Global Communication
MCC-UE 1300
Course Description
This course seeks to cover the landscape in contemporary theorizing and research on cultural
globalization. It is organized broadly around three partially competing/partially complementary
theories of globalization – homogenization, enduring differences, and hybridization. We will
attempt to bring each of these theories to life with case studies of the production, distribution, and
reception of cultural forms and experiences from across the globe. Our focus will be first and
foremost empirical, that is, oriented to describing and understanding as fully as possible what is
happening and why. But we will also address at various times normative issues, that is, what
should be done. Hopefully, by the end of this course, you will have a better sense of what
globalization is, what forces are driving it, and what you can or want to do about it as a student
and scholar, future communications professional, citizen, consumer, activist, and/or global
cosmopolitan.
Teaching / Course Objectives
*
to provide students with a thorough understanding of how media differ around the world
and to develop an appreciation of cultural differences;
*
to provide students with knowledge of the major descriptive and explanatory theories of
cultural globalization;
*
to help students develop skills in primary and secondary research about media in global
regions which interest them;
*
to provide students with the opportunity to hone their writing and oral presentation skills,
working both individually and in teams.
Texts
Required Books (Available at NYU Bookstore)
Jan Nederveen Pieterse. 2009 Globalization and Culture: Global Mélange. New York:
Rowman & Littlefield.
Daniel Hallin and Paolo Mancini. 2004. Comparing Media Systems: Three Models of Media and
Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (NYU digital library full electronic
version; also available for purchase at NYU Bookstore).
2
Recommended:
Dayan Thussu. 2006. International Communication: Continuity and Change. London: Hodder
Arnold. (Hard copy available at reserve desk).
Jeremy Tunstall. 2008. The Media Were American: U.S. Mass Media in Decline. New York:
Oxford University Press. (Hard copy available at reserve desk).
Pdf texts: Available on Blackboard under “Course Documents” (indicated in schedule with
asterisk).
Course Assignments and Evaluation
Grading for this course will be based on your performance on the following:
(1) Attendance and Active Participation (10 %): Please come to class, on time, remain in class for
the 75 minutes we are all together, and be prepared to discuss the assigned readings.
Attendance is required and if you need to miss class for any reason, you must notify me in
advance. Please bring a paper copy of the assigned reading (article or book) to the class, so that
we will all be, literally, on the same page. I strongly encourage active, annotated reading
practices. Cell phone use (including texting) is not permitted in class. Laptops should only be used
for note-taking. Use of laptops for email or internet surfing, unless linked to a class assignment, is
not permitted: violation of this policy will negatively affect your participation grade. Nonassigned high-quality and relevant postings to your blog may contribute positively toward your
participation grade. Finally, I strongly encourage you to regularly read the New York Times, Wall
Street Journal, the Guardian, or other major national or international news publications. I will
sometimes assign additional short texts from these or other periodicals and you are encouraged to
bring to class any articles, blogs, etc. that you think are relevant to the
class topic of the day.
(2) Mid-Term Exam (25 %): Essays and short answers. Covers lectures and readings from the
first half of the course.
(3) Region / Country Analysis (40 %):
--Assigned individual blog entries on selected themes related to “your” country / region (20%)
--Collaborative research project (team-based blog entry and in-class presentation incorporating
literature review, field research, data analysis, and in-class presentation) (20%)
(4) Final Exam (25 %): Essays and short answers. Focuses on lectures and readings from the
second half of the course. Will also include questions about student presentations.
3
Grading Policies
It should go without saying that plagiarism is strictly prohibited. This policy will be strictly
enforced. “Plagiarism, one of the gravest forms of academic dishonesty in university life, whether
intended or not, is academic fraud. In a community of scholars, whose members are teaching,
learning and discovering knowledge, plagiarism cannot be tolerated. Plagiarism is failure to
properly assign authorship to a paper, a document, an oral presentation, a musical score and/or
other materials which are not your original work. You plagiarize when, without proper
attribution, you do any of the following: Copy verbatim from a book, an article or other media;
Download documents from the Internet; Purchase documents; Report from other’s oral work;
Paraphrase or restate someone else’s facts, analysis and/or conclusions; Copy directly from a
classmate or allow a classmate to copy from you.” (NYU Steinhardt School of Education
Statement on Academic Integrity)
Basic standards:
A = excellent. Outstanding work in all respects. Your exams and essays are thoroughly researched,
appropriately documented, logically organized and rhetorically convincing. Your analysis is not
only comprehensive and sound, but creative and original. In short, you not only get it, but begin to
see through it!
B = good. Your understanding of course materials is complete and thorough, and there is at least
some evidence of your own critical intelligence at work. You demonstrate basic competence in
research, writing and oral presentation.
C = barely adequate. Your writing is vague and incoherent or riddled with grammatical or spelling
errors. You do not make proper use of source materials, and there is little depth or concreteness to
your research or analysis. Your understanding of concepts and ideas is incomplete and often
misguided, but there is at least some evidence that you “got” something from this
course.
D = unsatisfactory. Work exhibits virtually no understanding or even awareness of basic concepts
and themes of course. Your participation has been inadequate or superficial. Either you have not
been paying attention or you have not been making any effort.
F= failed. Work was not submitted or completed according to the basic parameters outlined in the
course syllabus (basic requirements for word length, topical focus, types and number of sources,
documentation of primary source materials).
Grades are calculated according to the following scale:
94-100 A; 90-93 A-; 87-89 B+; 83-86 B; 80-82 B-;
77-79 C+; 73-76 C; 70-72 C-; 67-69 D+; 63-66 D; 60-62 D-; 0-59 F
LATE POLICY: Blog entries posted after the designated day and time will be downgraded. For
each 24-hour period it is late, it will be downgraded one full grade (B+ to C+, etc.).
You are responsible for keeping a digital copy of all assignments.
4
Schedule (subject to revision; readings may be added or subtracted; *=articles or excerpts from
books available on Blackboard):
WEEK 1
Tues, 1.24
Thurs., 1.26
WEEK 2
Tues., 1.31
Thurs., 2.2
WEEK 3
*BLOG #1:
Introductions and Overview
Theorizing and ‘Internationalizing’ Global Communication Research
Pieterse, Globalization and Culture, chs. 1 and 3
*Dayan Thussu, “Why internationalize media studies and how?” In D.K. Thussu,
ed., Internationalizing Media Studies (London: Routledge, 2009), pp. 13-31.
Cultural Imperialism vs. Active Audiences
*Herbert Schiller, “Not Yet the Post-Imperialist Era,” Critical Studies in Mass
Communication, 8 (1991): 13-28.
*Elihu Katz and Tamar Liebes, “Decoding Dallas: Notes from a cross-cultural
study.” In H. Newcomb, ed., Television: The Critical View (New York: Oxford
University Press, 1987).
McDonaldization
George Ritzer, The McDonaldization of Society (Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine
Forge Press, 2011), ch. 1, pp. 1-22.
Max Weber, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, selections.
PICK A COUNTRY AND EXPLAIN WHY DUE MON., 2.6, 12 noon*
Tues., 2.7
Starbuckization / De-McDonaldization?
Ritzer, McDonaldization, chs. 7, 8, and 10 (pp. 143-188, and 215-239)
Thurs., 2.9
Global Public Sphere
*Peter Dahlgren, “The Public Sphere and the Net.” In W.L. Bennett and R.M.
Entman, eds., Mediated Politics (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press,
2001), pp. 33-55.
*Sonia Serra, “The killing of Brazilian street children and the rise of the
international public sphere.” In J. Curran, ed., Media Organisations in Society
(London: Arnold, 2000), pp. 151-171.
Recommended:
*Jürgen Habermas. [1964] 1991. “The Public Sphere.” Pp. 398-404 in C. Mukerji
and M. Schudson (eds.), Rethinking Popular Culture. Berkeley, CA: University
of California Press.
5
WEEK 4
Tues., 2.14
Thurs., 2.16
WEEK 5
*BLOG #2
Tues., 2.21
Thurs, 2.23
WEEK 6
Tues, 2.28
*BLOG #3
Thurs., 3.1
Research Methods and Sources
Consultation with NYU media/communications librarian Alexa Pearce
Global Network Society
*Manuel Castells, “Communication, Power and Counter-Power in the Network
Society.” International Journal of Communication 1 (2007): 238-266.
*W. Lance Bennett, “New Media Power: The Internet and Global Activism.” In
N. Couldry and J. Curran (eds.) Contesting Media Power (Lanham, MD:
Rowman and Littlefield, 2003), pp. 17-37.
COUNTRY OVERVIEW
DUE MON., 2.20, 12 noon*
Digital and Other Media Divides
*Debra Spitilnuk, “Mobile Machines and Fluid Audiences: Rethinking Reception
through Zambian Radio Culture.” In F.D. Ginsburg et al., eds., Media Worlds
(Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2002), pp. 337-354.
Global Region Group Meetings
Enduring Differences: Clash of Civilizations
*Samuel P. Huntington, “The Clash of Civilizations?” Foreign Affairs 72, 3
(1993): 22-49.
*Fouad Ajami, “The Summoning.” Foreign Affairs 72, 4 (1993): 2-9.
*Kishore Mahbubani, “The Dangers of Decadence: What the Rest Can Teach the
West,” Foreign Affairs 72, 4 (1993): 10-14.
*Edward Said, “The Clash of Ignorance,” The Nation, October 4, 2001.
*Samuel P. Huntington, “Response: If Not Civilizations, What?” Foreign Affairs
72, 5 (1993): 186-194.
LIT. REVIEW: 3 ARTICLES
DUE WED., 2.29, 12 noon*
Regionalization and U.S. Decline
*Joseph D. Straubhaar, “Distinguishing the global, regional and national levels of
world television.” In A. Sreberny-Mohammadi et al., eds., Media in Global
Context (London: Arnold, 1997).
*Joseph D. Straubhaar, World Television: From Global to Local (London: Sage,
2007), selections.
*Fareed Zakaria, The Post-American World: Release 2.0 (New York: W.W.
Norton, 2011), selections.
Recommended: Tunstall, The Media Were American, excerpts from chpts. 1, 9,
10, 13, and 20 (pp. 3-10, 96-104, 125-130, 235-237, 449-455); also Tunstall, The
Media Were American, ch. 15 on Africa (pp. 285-325), esp. on
Nigeria/Nollywood
6
WEEK 7
Tues., 3.6
Thurs, 3.8
Contra-Flows: Telenovelas
*Hanna Rosin, “Life Lessons: How soap operas can change the world,” The New
Yorker, June 5 (2006): 40-45.
*Daniël Biltereyst and Philippe Meers, “The international telenovela debate and
the contra-flow argument: a reappraisal,” Media, Culture & Society 22 (2000):
393-413.
MIDTERM EXAM
SPRING BREAK, 3.12 – 3.16
WEEK 8
Thurs., 3.20
Thurs., 3.22
WEEK 9
Tues., 3.27
Thurs., 3.29
Constructed Differences: The Power of the Nation-State
*Silvio Waisbord and Nancy Morris, “Rethinking Media Globalization and State
Power.” In N. Morris and S. Waisbord, eds., Media and Globalization: Why the
State Matters (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2001), pp. vii – xvi.
*Daniel C. Hallin and Paolo Mancini, Comparing Media Systems (Cambridge,
UK: Cambridge University Press, 2004), chs. 1-4 (selections)
Western Models of News Media
Hallin and Mancini, chs. 5-7
*James Curran, Shanto Iyengar, Anker Brink Lund and Inka Salovaara-Moring.
2009. “Media System, Public Knowledge and Democracy: A Comparative
Study.” European Journal of Communication 24 (1): 5-26.
*Rodney Benson and Matthew Powers. Public Media Around the World:
International Models for Funding and Protecting Independent Journalism
(Washington, D.C.: Free Press, 2011), selections.
Non-Western Models
*James Curran and Myung-Jin Park. 2000. “Beyond globalization theory.” Pp. 318 in J. Curran and M-J. Park, eds., De-Westernizing Media Studies. London:
Routledge.
*Hallin and Mancini, Comparing Media Systems: Beyond the Western World
(Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2011), selections.
Regional Group Preliminary Presentations
7
WEEK 10
*BLOG #4
GROUP BLOG
Tues., 4.3
Guest Speaker: Karina Horsti, Finland public and digital media
Thurs, 4.5
Hybridization
Pieterse, Globalization and Culture, ch. 4-6
*Paul S.N. Lee, “The absorption and indigenization of foreign media cultures; A
study on a cultural meeting point of the East and West: Hong Kong,” Asian
Journal of Communication, 1, 2 (1991): 52-72.
WEEK 11
Tues., 4.10
Thurs., 4.12
WEEK 12
Tues., 4.17
Thurs., 4.19
DUE MONDAY, 4.2, 5 p.m.*
Bollywood
*Tejaswini Ganti, “ ‘And Yet My Heart is Still Indian’: The Bombay Film
Industry and the (H)Indianization of Hollywood.” In F.D. Ginsburg et al., eds.,
Media Worlds (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2002).
*Tunstall, The Media Were American, ch. 11 selections
Al Jazeera
*Muhammad I. Ayish, “Media Brinkmanship in the Arab World: Al Jazeera’s
The Opposite Direction as a Fighting Arena.” In Mohamad Zayani, ed., The Al
Jazeera Phenomenon: Critical Perspectives on New Arab Media (Boulder, CO:
Paradigm Publishers, 2005), pp. 106-126.
* Tunstall, The Media Were American, ch. 17 selections
Cosmopolitanism
*Ulf Hannerz, “Cosmopolitans and Locals in World Culture,” Theory, Culture &
Society 7 (1990): 237-251.
Global Region Team Reports
*(INDIV.) BLOG #5
SUMMING UP
DUE 48 HRS. AFTER TEAM REPORT*
WEEK 13
Tues., 4.24
Global Region Team Reports
Thurs., 4.26
Global Region Team Reports
WEEK 14
Tues., 5.1
Thurs., 5.3
Global Region Team Reports / Final Exam Review
FINAL EXAM