A
AN
NT
TH
H//SSO
OC
CII 449988C
C,, 22001155
Course Coordinator:
Dr. Maximilian C. Forte
Dept. of Sociology & Anthropology
Concordia University
Office: H-1125-11
Office Hours:
Wednesdays & Fridays: 1:15pm–2:45pm
Contact: [email protected]
Fall Semester, 2015–2016
03 credits
September 9 – December 2, 2015
Meeting days and times:
Wednesdays: 10:15am–1:00pm
Campus: SGW, H-564
Course Website:
https://culturalimperialism.wordpress.com/
“The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas: i.e., the class which is the ruling material force of
society is at the same time its ruling intellectual force”. ~ Karl Marx, The German Ideology (1845).
“Cultural imperialism rests on the power to universalize particularisms linked to a singular historical tradition by
causing them to be misrecognized as such”. ~ Pierre Bourdieu & Lois Wacquant (1999, p. 41).
“What, after all, distinguishes an empire? It is a major actor in the international system based on the
subordination of diverse national elites who—whether under compulsion or from shared convictions—accept the
values of those who govern the dominant center or metropole. The inequality of power, resources, and influence is
what distinguishes an empire from an alliance....Empires function by virtue of the prestige they radiate as well as
by might, and indeed collapse if they rely on force alone. Artistic styles, the language of the rulers, and consumer
preferences flow outward along with power and investment capital—sometimes diffused consciously by cultural
diplomacy and student exchanges, sometimes just by popular taste for the intriguing products of the metropole,
whether Coca Cola or Big Mac”. ~ Charles S. Maier, Harvard historian (2002, p. 28).
“For the United States, a central objective of an Information Age foreign policy must be to win the battle of the
world’s information flows, dominating the airwaves as Great Britain once ruled the seas”. ~ David Rothkopf
(1997, p. 39), US Department of Commerce, first administration of US President Bill Clinton.
“America stands supreme in the four decisive domains of global power....culturally...it enjoys an appeal that is
unrivalled, especially among the world’s youth—all of which gives the United States a political clout that no other
state comes close to matching. It is the combination of all four that makes America the only comprehensive global
superpower”. ~ Zbigniew Brzezinski, National Security Adviser to US President Jimmy Carter, The Grand
Chessboard: American Primacy and its Geostrategic Imperatives (1997, p. 14).
-1-
1. Introduction
Hamburgers, Coca-Cola, Hollywood, English, pop music, blue jeans, chewing gum, and the dollar.
Harvard, Columbia, and Stanford. Rockefeller, Carnegie, Kellogg, and Fulbright. Bank of America,
Sheraton Hotels, and AT&T. NBC, General Electric. NATO, neoliberalism. Add to these
“McDomination,” “Coca-colonization,” and various ideas about the “Disneyization” of the world, or the
“McDonaldization” of society, or “Wal-Martization,” and one begins to get a sense of the compass of
critical theories of “cultural imperialism”. Such theories, once prevalent in the 1970s, received new life in
the early 21st-century as it became clearer that “globalization” was not an amorphous, multidirectional
free flow of culture between equals, but rather a new phase of dominance and inequality, of the
production of a hierarchy of values on a global scale.
As the opening quotes suggest, this seminar is about the combination of culture, knowledge, ideology
and power, on a large international scale, as shaped by an imperial state and its allied corporations. We
begin by focusing on a theoretical approach in the social sciences concerning what theorists call “cultural
imperialism”—an approach that is arguably among social science’s most prominent and influential
theories, internationally and especially in formerly colonized nations. We shall also consider the many
limitations and criticisms of these theories, while ending the seminar with an examination of how
cultural imperialism has been resuscitated in practice, if not vindicated in theory. While answers to the
many questions raised by this seminar (see section 3 below for a sample) will often be fragmentary,
inconclusive, and open to considerable debate, the real value of the seminar lies in developing the most
productive questions about matters which are often removed from question about contemporary political
and cultural problems and conflicts.
Theories of cultural imperialism, which came into view from the late 1960s and then especially the
1970s, often explained the phenomenon as one that involves the domination of other cultures by
products of the US culture industries primarily, as these theories often focused their attention on the US
as the leading producer and global distributor of movies, music, news, and commercial advertising. One
of the leading theorists, Herbert I. Schiller, defined cultural imperialism more broadly as, “the sum of
the processes by which a society is brought into the modern world system and how its dominating
stratum is attracted, pressured, forced, and sometimes even bribed into shaping social institutions to
correspond to, or even promote, the values and structures of the dominating ‘centre of the system’”
(Schiller, 1976, p. 9). However, from the 1980s onward, cultural imperialism began to be used
interchangeably with “media imperialism,” “ideological imperialism,” and “electronic colonialism”.
Media imperialism focused on the dominance of US-originated media and media content, a dominance
that grew from the end of World War II through the Cold War. The media were seen as functioning as
systemic mechanisms to propagate capitalism through cultural homogenization. Studies of USdominated media literacy, US media conventions, and US market domination in media, found the
cultural imperialism thesis to still be useful, especially as Hollywood and “the seven majors” continue to
dominate the audio-visual landscape of most countries. While acknowledging the significance of “media
imperialism” as a phenomenon that is still important, critics within the field felt that it featured too
prominently, and they began looking at other ways some cultures attempt to dominate others, i.e.,
through science, religion, the arts, education, language, and so forth. Indeed, some of the earliest
references to “cultural imperialism” in academic journals date back to the 1930s, with reference to the
role of Christian missionaries in China.
While heavily focused on the role of mass media and advertising of consumer products, cultural
-2-
imperialism has commonly been associated with the cultural ways in which capitalism has been spread,
and is often associated with the leading imperial power of the present times, the United States, such that
this field often bleeds into an exposé and critique of cultural “Americanization”. However, even while
acknowledging the key role played by the US, many newer critical theories of cultural imperialism link
with studies of neoliberalism and structural adjustment policies that have paved the way for Western
media, governance, education, arts, self-interpretation, etc. Thus the scope of study of cultural
imperialism now factors in the role of liberalized markets, US-style politics, the influence of US elites on
local oligarchies, and the formation of a global network of economic, political, and military leaders.
Critics of the theory of “cultural imperialism” argued that what the proponents of the theory were
discussing was not actually imperialism; alternately, they demonstrated that there has been no
homogenization of cultures; in the same vein, ethnographers showed active selection, not passive
audiences that merely absorbed and internalized whatever came from abroad; while others balked at the
slogan-like simplifications and accusations present in writings about cultural imperialism. Others note
that the spread of Western cultural products requires that infrastructures, rules, and technical specialists
be put in place, and that markets exist for such products, both of which are two very serious
contradictions/limitations to cultural imperialism. In response, those defending the theory of cultural
imperialism partially revised their work and responded to some of the criticisms: that we cannot isolate
the production of meaning from its political economic context, and that coercion still happens; that
selective diffusion/reception do happen means that the cultural imperialism thesis needs to be modified,
but not necessarily rejected.
Unfortunately, often pushed into the background (if not further), are older anthropological theories of
relevance, such as theories of nativism, revitalization, cargo cults, and creolization. The seminar director
will thus use parts of lecture time to address some of these theoretical approaches (also, see the
bibliography for this seminar, on the website). This seminar also inserts anthropological work on
“technological determinism,” as a long-neglected approach of relevance to cultural imperialism,
understood in the deepest possible sense.
The main literature used for this seminar—both the course text, and many of the journal articles listed as
optional reading—examine how material forces, how political economy, shape the content and
distribution of ideas, with the end result being ideological hegemony, or the “preponderant influence” of
a particular way of thinking about self and the world. In other words, a large part of cultural imperialism
has to do with the exertion of power in telling us what to think (e.g. media effects), what to think about
(e.g. agenda setting), and even how to think (e.g. technological determinism), in order that we may do
certain things (e.g. become loyal consumers and obedient citizens). Currently, cultural imperialism
encompasses issues of consumption, governance, education, language, media ownership, media
messaging, and the exporting of “culture” via the Western-dominated film industry. More recently,
cultural imperialism has grown to include the practice of the US military-industrial complex in
producing misinformation, which has led to renewed interest in cultural imperialism in contemporary
debates about soft power, Hollywood’s collaboration with the US military, cultural diplomacy, and the
dominance of cyberspace.
This seminar is designed to complement Globalization & Transnationality (ANTH 385), also offered
by the seminar director, which focuses heavily on neoliberalism and cultural theories of globalization. It
is also related to parts of other courses offered by the seminar director, most notably: Media
Ethnographies (ANTH/SOCI 398G), in relation to “media effects,” “agenda setting,” and critiques of
-3-
the “hypodermic needle” model of transmission; Visual Anthropology (ANTH 377), concerning
“technological determinism” and the impact of photography on Indigenous self-perceptions; Indigenous
Resurgence (ANTH 303), with respect to acculturation, nativism, and revitalization; and The New
Imperialism (ANTH/SOCI 498N), in connection with “soft power,” “militainment”, “information
operations,” “winning hearts and minds,” and the globalization of counterinsurgency. For links to the
websites for these courses, please see:
http://openanthropology.org/za/?p=231.
2. Thematic Structure of the Seminar
To begin by summarizing, the seminar is essentially structured as follows, with the focus being on the
theory (or theories) of cultural imperialism:
What was/is the theory  criticisms of the theory  apologia, resuscitation
The following is an outline of the themes covered in this seminar:
Introduction
Part 1: Theories, Practices, and Arenas of Cultural Imperialism
Imperialism and Culture, Part 1
Imperialism and Culture, Part 2
Media Imperialism
Academic Imperialism
Scientific and Linguistic Imperialism
Part 2: The “New International Information Order”
Part 3: The Cultural Imperialism of Media Technology?
Part 4: Critiques of Theories of Cultural Imperialism
Part 5: Contemporary Cultural Imperialism
Neoliberalism
“Good Governance”
Soft Power, Militainment, Information Operations
3. Some of the Seminar’s Central Questions
1. What is “cultural imperialism”? Who or what exerts it?
2. Is the study of “cultural imperialism” different from the study of “culture and empire,” or
“imperial culture”? If so, in which way(s)?
3. Why did the theories of cultural imperialism emerge when they did?
4. Is the study of “cultural imperialism” different from studies of “acculturation,” “assimilation,”
“syncretism,” “cargo cults,” and “creolization”? If so, in which ways do they differ?
5. Saying that “cultural imperialism is old,” or that it “dates back to Spanish and Portuguese
conquests,” is an answer to a question. Then what is the question? Is the question an interesting
and important one?
6. Does cultural imperialism differ from capitalism, neoliberalism, or globalization?
-4-
7. Can you find evidence of cultural imperialism actually existing and succeeding? If so, then why
and how does cultural imperialism work?
8. If cultural imperialism successfully worked, then why has military force been used by the US to
impose its aims on other nation-states?
9. Do the following examples disprove, or prove, cultural imperialism? Examples: a) South Asian
professors in Western universities, writing in English; b) South Asian computer specialists
working in Silicon Valley, California.
10. Does the existence of “reverse cultural flows” entail “reverse cultural imperialism”? Examples of
such “reverse flows” could include the spread of Reggae to North America, the proliferation of
sushi restaurants, and the adoption of Maori tattoo patterns.
11. If preserving “local cultural diversity” is the aim of critics of cultural imperialism, does this
presume the existence of untouched, homogeneous cultures and locales that remain apart from
the world capitalist system?
12. What makes “cultural imperialism” cultural ? Is not imperialism always cultural?
13. What is “culture” for the theorists of cultural imperialism? In other words, with which
assumptions about culture—with what culture concept—are these theories of cultural
imperialism operating?
14. In criticizing theories of “cultural imperialism,” are anthropologists also abandoning their
previously influential theories of assimilation, acculturation, cultural domination, nativism, and
invention?
15. Do anthropologists tend to reject cultural imperialism as a suitable theory, while sociologists and
members of other disciplines tend to have supported the theory? If so, why might that be the
case?
16. How do politics and economics intertwine to shape institutions, ideologies, and social
consciousness? What are the consequences, both expected and unintended, of such intertwining?
17. Do the media “capture” people? Is the “brainwashing” role of media not an extreme position to
support? What assumptions about people do such positions entertain? On the other hand, what
assumptions operate in theories of agency, of the knowledgeable individual?
18. Can we discuss “imperialism” without naming the imperial power at the centre of imperialism?
Why would we?
19. To the extent that some critiques of cultural imperialism are critical of “Americanization,” then
who is “the American” in their theory? What does “American” mean in Americanization?
20. If cultural imperialism is not just about media, or not just about “Americanization,” then doesn’t
cultural imperialism become too broadly defined to be workable as an analytical framework?
21. How is an image of US “goodness” perpetrated/perpetuated despite widely available contrary
information? Where are the social sciences in all of this?
22. Are most governments “subservient” to the US, and if so, why?
23. Does acknowledging the singularity of US power, especially since the demise of the USSR, mean
that one is buying into “American exceptionalism”? In other words, can theories of cultural
imperialism become imperialist theories, or is the question a specious one?
-5-
4. Research, Study, and Participation
Graded Course Components
 Research Paper Prospectus = 5%
 Mid-Term Essay Exam = 40%
 Research Paper = 40%
 Participation = 15%
Total = 100%
Schedule of Assignments
 Wednesday, October 7, 2015  Mid-term exam is assigned; check your email.
 Friday, October 16, 2015  Prospectus is due—send your prospectus by 11:00pm (23h00), by email
to [email protected] (as an attachment—only .doc, .docx, .rtf, .odt, .txt formats are
acceptable—do not send PDFs)
 Friday, October 23, 2015  Mid-Term Exam is due, by 11:00pm (23h00), by email to
[email protected] (as an attachment—only .doc, .docx, .rtf, .odt, .txt formats are
acceptable—do not send PDFs)
 Friday, December 4, 2015  Research Paper is due, by 11:00pm (23h00), by email to
[email protected] (as an attachment—only .doc, .docx, .rtf, .odt, .txt formats are
acceptable—do not send PDFs)
Notifications of receipt of your assignments will usually be sent out within 12 hours after the passing of
the deadline.
Overview
It is of central importance to all of the work in this seminar that you cover the entire lecture and
assigned reading material. This is central to both the mid-term exam, and the final research paper. The
final research paper will double as a final exam, in the sense that it is expected that you will bring to bear
on your topic what you have learned in the seminar, and the paper will be judged in part on how well
and to what extent you use and apply seminar materials. As a result, seminar participants should feel free
to use research articles and assigned readings as listed in this syllabus, and in the bibliography on the
website for this seminar. In addition, any or a bundle of the central questions listed above can be used as
the basis for a research paper, along with any of the listed readings (both assigned and optional). You
can also modify the questions listed, or raise your own questions.
The mid-term essay exam will consist of a single question dealing with the theory of cultural
imperialism, or some aspect of the theory. Having a solid theoretical foundation will also be essential for
the analytical work in your research paper. The exam will be assigned on Wednesday, October 7, 2015,
but will not be due until Friday, October 23, 2015 (see above for details). Details on word limits,
referencing, etc., will be provided on the exam assignment sheet. You will be notified by email when the
assignment sheet has been uploaded.
The research paper prospectus, which is due on Friday, October 16, 2015, involves the following:
A prospectus identifies the topic that you intend to investigate (for example, see the topics listed
in the schedule of lectures and readings), and the kinds of questions and/or problems your paper
seeks to address. You should be indicating what you want to research, and why—please see the
-6-
next section first, however. Please offer at least a preliminary outline of how you intend to
conceptualize and explain your paper. The prospectus, with your name, email address, and
proposed title of your paper, should be typed single-spaced and must not exceed 500 words.
To plan your prospectus, see the following paragraph.
A research paper in this seminar can be one of three different kinds:
(1) A book review essay—where a major work in the field is the centre of discussion and analysis, for
which you should use a cluster of related articles and/or book chapters from other writers who directly
address the work in question. Your analysis should integrate analytical/theoretical works from the
seminar. Examples of the kinds of review essays considered for this option are listed here:
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showMostReadArticles?journalCode=canf20, or you can read one
produced by the seminar director at,
http://0-www.tandfonline.com.mercury.concordia.ca/doi/abs/10.1080/00664677.2014.899201
A book review essay could also focus on a novel—for example, V.S. Naipaul’s The Mimic Men, is
perfectly suited to address some of the key themes and concepts in this seminar. In your prospectus
(above), indicate the book that you have chosen (with its complete bibliographic details).
Other examples of major works in the field that could be reviewed would include:
 Ariel Dorfman & Armand Mattelart, How to Read Donald Duck (details and link in this syllabus)
 Edmund Carpenter, Oh, What a Blow that Phantom Gave Me! (details and link in this syllabus)
 John Tomlinson, Cultural Imperialism: A Critical Introduction, 2001
 Ariel Dorfman, The Empire’s Old Clothes: What the Lone Ranger, Babar, and Other Innocent
Heroes Do to Our Minds, Duke University Press, 2010
(2) A case study would involve primarily describing, and then analyzing, a major case of what could be
considered either “cultural imperialism in action,” or a refutation of cultural imperialism. Examples of
the former could include some much needed, up to date, papers on classic cases such as McDonalds,
Coca-Cola, Wal-Mart, or more recent examples of the marriage between the military, news, and
entertainment (“militainment”), or discussions of “soft power” and “public diplomacy”. An example of
possible refutation might be a paper focusing on the Brazilian film and television industry, how
television is received or produced in parts of Africa, or reinterpretations and reworkings of Western
media products in non-Western cultures. Case studies should rely heavily on primary sources when
possible, as well as using published works on the specific topic, and remember to integrate
analytical/theoretical works from the seminar.
Primary sources could be reports produced by a corporation, or examples of its advertising campaigns, or
interviews with its CEO, or published testimonials from employees or consumers. To understand what
is meant by a “primary source” or “primary document,” think of it as offering an insider’s view, as a
product of a key actor, as a testimonial, or direct evidence unmediated by anyone other than the original
source. Primary sources could include: diaries, speeches, letters, interviews, news footage, photographs,
posters, autobiographies, or official records and reports by states, international organizations,
corporations, NGOs, and so forth.
(3) A third option for the research paper would be a theoretical literature review or critique. In many
ways this would be an extension of the mid-term exam, going into greater depth and incorporating more
-7-
reading (even from the syllabus itself). The aim here would not be to describe empirical cases, so much
as thinking through the conceptual and explanatory problems or strengths of theories of cultural
imperialism and/or their refutation. A number of the questions listed in section 3 would be relevant
here. Please indicate your main question in your prospectus (and in the final paper itself).
Research papers are due on Friday, December 4, 2015 (see above for details)—without exception, and
without any extensions to be offered under any except the most extreme circumstances. Research papers
are not to exceed a total word limit of 3,000 words, not including citations and references. Please follow
the bibliographic formatting style that you see in this syllabus, in the bibliography for this seminar, and
refer to sources in text—for other details, see:
https://newimperialism.wordpress.com/research-handbook/
Also not included in the total word count, is an abstract of your paper, which must appear at the top of
your final paper, right after the title of your paper and your name. Follow the guidelines for producing
an abstract as presented here:
https://newimperialism.wordpress.com/abstracts/
Abstracts are not optional and they count towards the grade for the paper. Producing an abstract
involves focus, concentration, and organization, which are critical in the production of an advanced
research paper.
Finally, participation in seminar discussions is a must. This seminar promotes active learning, which
cannot happen by being withdrawn and without investment in shaping interpretations of the assigned
materials. That also entails regular attendance as a prerequisite (though not sufficient by itself).
Participants will have questions, comments, and opinions to share. However, if daunted by speaking
spontaneously, or feeling that there is a competitive environment where a few voices dominate,
participants should approach the seminar director concerning the option of presenting prepared
summaries of assigned readings. In some instances, the seminar director will instead opt to assign verbal
presentations of summaries of readings, for the purposes of review and discussion in the seminar.
-8-
5. Required Text
This seminar relies on a combination of a single text and an assortment of journal articles (all of which
are accessible to you via your Concordia Library account, using your MyConcordia login details).
The text can be purchased from the bookstore, or borrowed from the Reserve in Webster Library, or
accessed electronically. Our text is:
Cultural Imperialism: Essays on the Political Economy of
Cultural Domination,
Edited by Bernd Hamm and Russell Smandych,
Peterborough, ON: Broadview Press, 2005
Webster 3-hour course reserve: http://clues.concordia.ca/record=b3173192
Electronic access to e-book:
http://0-site.ebrary.com.mercury.concordia.ca/lib/concordia/detail.action?docID=10116318
or via, http://clues.concordia.ca/record=b2349522
Concordia Bookstore:
http://bkstore.concordia.ca/services/ShowBookDetail.asp?book=11305224
6. Seminar Policies, Student Resources
Extensions and Incompletes
Extensions are not taken by students, under any circumstances. An extension can only be granted by the
course coordinator, in advance of the due date for an assignment, and only under either extreme or
special circumstances. Extreme circumstances only include severe illness that occurred for most of the
duration of the assignment period itself, pending the provision of documentation, or a death in the
immediate family (parents or siblings). Since no exams are written in class, students with documented
learning disabilities will not receive extensions for their work—student services may be able to assist with
developing your time management skills for work done separate from class time.
Incomplete grades are not granted in this seminar, and no student should expect to receive an INC
notation.
There is one major exception to these policies: in the event of a major public health crisis, or events
beyond the University’s control, alternative course requirements and grading policies will be developed
and used.
Please do not call the Department’s main office for course-related inquiries.
-9-
Guidelines and Resources Necessary for Assignments
For the take-home essay exams:
 Use assigned readings and lecture notes.
 Lecture notes do not need to be cited as such in your essay. Omit references to “class notes” and
“lectures,” as well as discussions.
 When quoting material from assigned readings, simply end the sentence in which the material
appears with a basic reference in parentheses, like this: (Smith, 1998, p. 92). That is the surname of
the author, the year of the publication, and the page number where the material appears. Be careful to
note that editors of collections with multiple authors, are not to be cited as if they were authors.
 Only if you decide, on your own initiative, to quote items that were not assigned, should you provide
a formal list of References at the end of your essay. Please keep in mind that citing outside sources
will not, in and of itself, warrant a boost in your grade. When preparing the list of References (if one
is needed), follow the basic format shown in this syllabus.
How work is graded
For all work done in this seminar you will receive a numerical grade which will be converted to a letter
grade when final grades are processed. To translate numbers into letter grades, please consult the
following chart, copied directly from a faculty handbook in the Department of Sociology and
Anthropology. It is vital that you understand that the characterizations below (i.e., “excellent”) are
central in guiding the instructor’s evaluation of the quality of a paper.
Work that covers all of the basics, in a reasonably competent fashion, without major flaws, is deemed
“satisfactory.” Work that has few flaws, and shows an advanced understanding, writing and research
ability is deemed “very good.” Work that leaves little room for improvement (within the context of
expectations of a 400 level course), demonstrating that the student has taken considerable initiative,
showing sophisticated understanding and ability, is deemed “excellent.”
A+
A
AB+
B
BC+
90-100
85- 89
80- 84
77- 79
73- 76
70- 72
67- 69
C
63- 66
C60- 62
D+
57- 59
D
53- 56
D50- 52
F or FNS
40 (30-49)
R
20 ( 0-29)
5. Other Policies and Resources for Students
Announcements, E-Mail Use
In the event of an unscheduled cancellation of a class, the appropriate notice is posted by the University
on its website. See the “Class Cancellations” link on www.concordia.ca. In addition, digital billboards on
campus will announce the cancellation. You will also be notified by email.
For the duration of this course, please check your email at least once each week, and look for any
- 10 -
messages that begin with the course number.
Having said that, please ensure that you have the right email address entered in your MyConcordia
student profile. That is the same email address to which course messages are sent.
Disclaimer
In the event of extraordinary circumstances beyond the University’s control, the content and/or
evaluation scheme in this course is subject to change.
Improving Students’ Academic Experience
The University offers many services that can help students. To improve students’ ability to succeed in
their courses, get the most out of the university experience, and ensure their success in completing their
degree, it is strongly recommended that you make a note of the following list of services:
 Writing Assistance: http://cdev.concordia.ca/our-services/learning-support/writing-assistance/
 Concordia Counseling and Development offers career services, psychological services, student
learning services, etc. http://cdev.concordia.ca/
 Advocacy and Support Services: http://supportservices.concordia.ca/
 Student Transition Centre: http://www.concordia.ca/extended-learning/stc/
 New Student Program: http://cdev.concordia.ca/our-services/services-for-new-students/
 Access Centre for Students with Disabilities: http://supportservices.concordia.ca/disabilities/
 Student
Success
Centre:
http://cdev.concordia.ca/our-services/resources-and-drop-incentres/student-success-centre/
 The Academic Integrity Website: http://www.concordia.ca/programs-and-courses/academicintegrity/
 Financial Aid & Awards: http://faao.concordia.ca/main/
 Health Services: http://www-health.concordia.ca/
- 11 -
7. Schedule of Lectures and Readings
Introduction
Session 1: Wednesday, September 9, 2015
 Origins, structure, motivation for the course
 Introduction: theoretical, conceptual, and thematic overview
 Research papers and the exam
Readings:
 Please read the course syllabus by this date, in its entirety.
Part 1: Theories, Practices, and Arenas of Cultural Imperialism
Imperialism and Culture, Part 1
Session 2: Wednesday, September 16, 2015
Monday, September 21, 2015
• Deadline for withdrawal with tuition refund from two-term and fall-term courses.
• Last day to add two-term and fall-term courses.
Readings:
 [course text] Part 1, Defining Cultural Imperialism, Introduction: pp. 1–2
 Nkrumah, Kwame. (1965). Neocolonialism: The Last Stage of Imperialism. New York:
International Publishers.
https://culturalimperialism.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/nkrumah_neocolonialism.pdf

Galtung, Johan. (1971). “A Structural Theory of Imperialism”. Journal of Peace Research,
8(2), 81–117.
http://0-jpr.sagepub.com.mercury.concordia.ca/content/8/2/81.full.pdf+html
Optional Readings:

Goldstein, Cora Sol. (2005). “Before the CIA: American Actions in the German Fine Arts
(1946–1949)”. Diplomatic History, 29(5), 747–778.
http://0-dh.oxfordjournals.org.mercury.concordia.ca/content/29/5/747

Domosh, Mona. (2004). “Selling Civilization: Toward a Cultural Analysis of America’s
Economic Empire in the Late Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries”. Transactions of
the Institute of British Geographers, 29(4), 453–467.

Cooper, Laura E., & Cooper, Lee. (1993). “The Pendulum of Cultural Imperialism: Popular
Music Interchanges Between the United States and Britain, 1943–1967”. The Journal of
Popular Culture, 27(3) 61–78.
http://0-onlinelibrary.wiley.com.mercury.concordia.ca/doi/10.1111/j.0020-2754.2004.00141.x/epdf
http://0-onlinelibrary.wiley.com.mercury.concordia.ca/doi/10.1111/j.0022-3840.1993.00061.x/epdf

Niblo, Stephen R. (1983). “British Propaganda in Mexico during the Second World War:
The Development of Cultural Imperialism”. Latin American Perspectives, 10(4), 114–126.
http://0-www.jstor.org.mercury.concordia.ca/stable/2633451

McDonald, Gay. (2010). “The Modern American Home as Soft Power: Finland, MoMA
- 12 -
and the ‘American Home 1953’ Exhibition”. Journal of Design History, 23(4), 387–408.
http://0-jdh.oxfordjournals.org.mercury.concordia.ca/content/23/4/387.full.pdf+html

Emmison, Michael. (1997). “Transformations of Taste: Americanisation, Generational
Change and Australian Cultural Consumption”. Australian and New Zealand Journal of
Sociology, 33(3), 322–343.
http://0-jos.sagepub.com.mercury.concordia.ca/content/33/3/322.full.pdf+html

Mulcahy, Kevin V. (2000). “Cultural Imperialism and Cultural Sovereignty: US-Canadian
Cultural Relations”. The American Review of Canadian Studies, 30(2), 181–206.
http://0-search.proquest.com.mercury.concordia.ca/docview/60564402 —or:
http://0-www.tandfonline.com.mercury.concordia.ca/doi/pdf/10.1080/02722010009481050

Matusitz, Jonathan. (2014). “Grobalization: An Analysis of the Wal-Martization of the
World”. Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing, 26(4), 298–315.
http://0-www.tandfonline.com.mercury.concordia.ca/doi/pdf/10.1080/08974438.2013.833568
Imperialism and Culture, Part 2
Session 3: Wednesday, September 23, 2015
Readings:
 [course text] Part 2, Cultural Imperialism: History and Future, Introduction: pp. 31-32
 [course text] Chapter 2, “Cultural Imperialism: The Political Economy of Cultural
Domination,” by Bernd Hamm: pp. 18–30.
 [course text] Chapter 18, “Enrique Dussel and Ali Shari’ati on Cultural Imperialism,” by
Abbas Manoochehri: pp. 290–300.
 Marx, Karl. (1932[1846]). The German Ideology: Critique of Modern German Philosophy
According to Its Representatives Feuerbach, B. Bauer and Stirner, and of German Socialism
According to Its Various Prophets. Marxists Internet Archive.
Please read the section titled “Ruling Class and Ruling Ideas” found here:
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/german-ideology/ch01b.htm

Dorfman, Ariel, & Mattelart, Armand. (1971). How to Read Donald Duck: Imperialist
Ideology in the Disney Comic. New York: I.G. Editions, Inc. (pp. 9–33 + 80–99)
https://culturalimperialism.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/dorfman-mattelart-how-to-read-donald-duck.pdf
Optional Readings:




[course text] Chapter 3, “Cultural Imperialism: A Short History, Future, and a Postscript
from the Present,” by Susantha Goonatilake: pp. 33–51
[course text] Chapter 4, “Imperialism as a Theory of the Future,” by Ashis Nandy: pp. 52–59
[course text] Part 6, Postcolonialism and Cultural Imperialism, Introduction: pp. 265-266
Wallerstein, Immanuel. (1990). “Culture as the Ideological Battleground of the Modern
World-System”. Theory, Culture & Society, 7(2), 31–55.
http://0-tcs.sagepub.com.mercury.concordia.ca/content/7/2/31.full.pdf+html

Christophers, Brett. “Ships in the Night: Journeys in Cultural Imperialism and
Postcolonialism”. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 10(3), 283–302.
http://0-ics.sagepub.com.mercury.concordia.ca/content/10/3/283.full.pdf+html

Matheson, David. (1996). “Imperial Culture and Cultural Imperialism”. European Journal of
Intercultural Studies, 7(1), 51–56.
http://0-www.tandfonline.com.mercury.concordia.ca/doi/pdf/10.1080/0952391960070106
- 13 -

Varan, Duane. (1998). “Indigenous Terrains and the Threat of Cultural Erosion”. Critical
Arts: A South-North Journal of Cultural & Media Studies, 12(1/2), 92.
http://0-search.ebscohost.com.mercury.concordia.ca/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=1601630&site=ehost-live&scope=site
Media Imperialism
Session 4: Wednesday, September 30, 2015
Readings:
 [course text] Part 3, Media Imperialism and Cultural Politics, Introduction: pp. 77–79
 [course text] Chapter 6, “Legitimating Domination: Notes on the Changing Faces of
Cultural Imperialism,” by Katharine Sarikakis: pp. 80–92
 [course text] Chapter 7, “Content Industries and Cultural Diversity: The Case of Motion
Pictures,” by Christophe Germann: pp. 93–113
Optional Readings:

Fejes, Fred. (1981). “Media Imperialism: An Assessment”. Media Culture, 3(3), 281–289.
http://0-mcs.sagepub.com.mercury.concordia.ca/content/3/3/281

Schiller, Herbert I. (1985). “Behind the Media Merger Movement”. The Nation, 240(22),
696–698.

Shohat, Ella, & Stam, Robert. (1994). “The Imperial Imaginary”. (From: Unthinking
Eurocentrism: Multiculturalism and the Media, pp. 100–136. London: Routledge.)
http://0-search.ebscohost.com.mercury.concordia.ca/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=11022695&site=ehost-live&scope=site
https://culturalimperialism.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/shohat-stam-the-imperial-imaginary.pdf

Torrecilla, Arturo. (1980). “Cultural Imperialism, Mass Media and Class Struggle: An
Interview with Armand Mattelart”. Critical Sociology, 9(4), 69–79.

Mattelart, Armand. (1976). “Cultural Imperialism in the Multinationals’ Age”. Instant
Research on Peace and Violence, 6(4), 160–174.
http://0-crs.sagepub.com.mercury.concordia.ca/content/9/4/69
http://0-www.jstor.org.mercury.concordia.ca/stable/40724813

Mattelart, Armand. (1978). “The Nature of Communications Practice in a Dependent
Society”. Latin American Perspectives, 5(1), 13–34.

Mattelart, Armand. (1973). “Modern Communication Technologies and New Facets of
Cultural Imperialism”. Instant Research on Peace and Violence, 3(1), 9–26.
http://0-www.jstor.org.mercury.concordia.ca/stable/2633337
http://0-www.jstor.org.mercury.concordia.ca/stable/40724674

Craig, Alexander. (1976). “The Media and Foreign Policy”. International Journal, 31(2),
319–336.

Chalaby, Jean K. (2006). “American Cultural Primacy in a New Media Order: A European
Perspective”. International Communication Gazette, 68(1), 33–51.
http://0-www.jstor.org.mercury.concordia.ca/stable/40201320
http://0-gaz.sagepub.com.mercury.concordia.ca/content/68/1/33.full.pdf+html

Fuchs, Christian. (2010). “New Imperialism: Information and Media Imperialism?” Global
Media and Communication, 6(1), 33–60.
http://0-gmc.sagepub.com.mercury.concordia.ca/content/6/1/33.full.pdf+html

Falicov, Tamara L. (2012). “Hollywood’s Presence in Latin America”. The International
Encyclopedia of Media Studies (Volume II: Media Production), 1–22.
http://0-onlinelibrary.wiley.com.mercury.concordia.ca/doi/10.1002/9781444361506.wbiems044/pdf
- 14 -

Crabtree, Robbin D., & Malhotra, Sheena. (2000). “A Case Study of Commercial Television
in India: Assessing the Organizational Mechanisms of Cultural Imperialism”. Journal of
Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 44(3), 364-385.
http://0-www.tandfonline.com.mercury.concordia.ca/doi/pdf/10.1207/s15506878jobem4403_3

Gittinger, Juli L. (2014). “Is There Such a Thing as ‘Cyberimperialism?’” Continuum:
Journal of Media & Cultural Studies, 28(4), 509–519.
http://0-www.tandfonline.com.mercury.concordia.ca/doi/pdf/10.1080/10304312.2014.907873

Salwen, Michael B. (1991). “Cultural Imperialism: A Media Effects Approach”. Critical
Studies in Mass Communication, 8(1), 29–38.

Omoera, Osakue Stevenson, & Ibagere, Elo. (2010). “Revisiting Media Imperialism: A
Review of the Nigerian Television Experience”. The International Journal of Research and
Review, 5, 1-19.
http://0-www.tandfonline.com.mercury.concordia.ca/doi/pdf/10.1080/15295039109366778
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/215710892_Revisiting_Media_Imperialism_A_Review_of_the_Nigerian_Television_Experience

Moon, Shin-Il; Barnett, George A.; & Lim, Yon Soo. (2010). “The Structure of
International Music Flows Using Network Analysis”. New Media & Society, 12(3), 379–
399.
http://0-nms.sagepub.com.mercury.concordia.ca/content/12/3/379.full.pdf+html

Wu, Haoming Denis. (1998). “Investigating the Determinants of International News Flow:
A Meta-Analysis”. International Communication Gazette, 60(6), 493–512.

Wu, H. Denis. (2003). “Homogeneity around the World? Comparing the Systemic
Determinants of International News Flow between Developed and Developing Countries”.
International Communication Gazette, 65(1), 9–24.

Chang, Tsan-Kuo. (1998). “All Countries Not Created Equal to Be News: World System
and International Communication”. Communication Research, 25(5), 528–563.
http://0-gaz.sagepub.com.mercury.concordia.ca/content/60/6/493.full.pdf+html
http://0-gaz.sagepub.com.mercury.concordia.ca/content/65/1/9.full.pdf+html
http://0-crx.sagepub.com.mercury.concordia.ca/content/25/5/528.full.pdf

Meyer, William H. (1989). “Global News Flows: Dependency and Neoimperialism”.
Comparative Political Studies, 22(3), 243–264.
http://0-cps.sagepub.com.mercury.concordia.ca/content/22/3/243.full.pdf+html

McAnany, Emile G., & Wilkinson, Kenton T. (1992). “From Cultural Imperialists to
Takeover Victims? Questions on Hollywood’s Buyouts from the Critical Tradition”.
Communication Research, 19(6), 724–748.
http://0-crx.sagepub.com.mercury.concordia.ca/content/19/6/724.full.pdf+html

Lee, Paul Siu-Nam. (1988). “Communication Imperialism and Dependency: A Conceptual
Clarification”. International Communication Gazette, 41(2), 69–83.
http://0-gaz.sagepub.com.mercury.concordia.ca/content/41/2/69.full.pdf+html

Land, Mitchell. (1992). “Ivoirien Television, Willing Vector of Cultural Imperialism”.
Howard Journal of Communications, 4(1-2), 10–27.

Sparks, Colin. (2012). “Media and Cultural Imperialism Reconsidered”. Chinese Journal of
Communication, 5(3), 281–299.
http://0-www.tandfonline.com.mercury.concordia.ca/doi/pdf/10.1080/10646179209359762
http://0-www.tandfonline.com.mercury.concordia.ca/doi/pdf/10.1080/17544750.2012.701417
- 15 -
Academic Imperialism
Session 5: Wednesday, October 7, 2015
Readings:
 Bourdieu, Pierre, & Wacquant, Loic. (1999). “On the Cunning of Imperialist Reason”.
Theory, Culture & Society, 16(1), 41–58.
http://0-tcs.sagepub.com.mercury.concordia.ca/content/16/1/41.full.pdf+html

Ilchman, Warren F., & Ilchman, Alice Stone. (1987). “Academic Exchange and the
Founding of New Universities”. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social
Science, 491, 48–62.

Cromwell, Adelaide M. (1987). “The Fulbright Program in Africa, 1946 to 1986”. Annals of
the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 491, 92–103.
http://0-www.jstor.org.mercury.concordia.ca/stable/1045057
http://0-www.jstor.org.mercury.concordia.ca/stable/1045061
Optional Readings:


[course text] Chapter 11, “The Role of GATS in the Commodification of Education,” by
Christoph Scherrer: pp. 167–190
Ordorika, Imanol, & Lloyd, Marion. (2015). “International Rankings and the Contest for
University Hegemony”. Journal of Education Policy, 30(3), 385–405.
http://0-www.tandfonline.com.mercury.concordia.ca/doi/pdf/10.1080/02680939.2014.979247

Arnove, Robert, & Pinede, Nadine. (2007). “Revisiting the ‘Big Three’ Foundations”.
Critical Sociology, 33(3), 389–425.
http://0-crs.sagepub.com.mercury.concordia.ca/content/33/3/389.full.pdf+html

Greeson, Larry E. (1991). “Cultural Ethnocentrism and Imperialism in Citations of
American and Scandinavian Psychological Research”. International Journal of Psychology,
26(2), 262–268.
http://0-search.ebscohost.com.mercury.concordia.ca/login.aspx?direct=true&db=s3h&AN=5775773&site=ehost-live&scope=site
Session 6: Wednesday, October 14, 2015: no class this week, please continue your research
Scientific and Linguistic Imperialism
Session 7: Wednesday, October 21, 2015
Readings:
 [course text] Chapter 14, “Analyzing and Resisting Linguistic Imperialism,” by Fritz Vilmar:
pp. 222–232
 [course text] Chapter 5, “Cynical Science: Science and Truth as Cultural Imperialism,” by
Bernd Hamm: pp. 60–76
 Bishop, Alan J. (1990). “Western Mathematics: The Secret Weapon of Cultural
Imperialism”. Race & Class, 32(2), 51–65.
http://0-rac.sagepub.com.mercury.concordia.ca/content/32/2/51
Optional Readings:

[course text] Chapter 15, “Protection of the World’s Linguistic and Ecological Diversity:
- 16 -


Two Sides of the Same Coin,” by Hermann H. Dieter: pp. 233–243
[course text] Chapter 16, “Eco-Imperialism as an Aspect of Cultural Imperialism,” by Gustav
W. Sauer and Bernd Hamm: pp. 244–264
Demont-Heinrich, Christof. (2008). “The Death of Cultural Imperialism — and Power
Too? A Critical Analysis of American Prestige Press Representations of the Hegemony of
English”. International Communication Gazette, 70(5), 378–394.
http://0-gaz.sagepub.com.mercury.concordia.ca/content/70/5/378
Part 2: The “New International Information Order”
Session 8: Wednesday, October 28, 2015
Readings:
 Schiller, Herbert I. (1978). “Decolonization of Information: Efforts toward a New
International Order”. Latin American Perspectives, 5(1), 35–48.
http://0-www.jstor.org.mercury.concordia.ca/stable/2633338

Nordenstreng, Kaarle. (2012). “The New World Information and Communication Order”.
The International Encyclopedia of Media Studies (Volume I: Media History and the
Foundations of Media Studies), 1–23.
http://0-onlinelibrary.wiley.com.mercury.concordia.ca/doi/10.1002/9781444361506.wbiems023/pdf
Optional Reading:

MacBride, Sean, et al. (1980). Many Voices, One World: Towards a New, More Just and
More Efficient World Information and Communication Order (Report by the International
Commission for the Study of Communication Problems). Paris: United Nations
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).
https://culturalimperialism.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/unesco-macbride-commission.pdf or
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0004/000400/040066eb.pdf
Part 3: The Cultural Imperialism of Media Technology?
Session 9: Wednesday, November 4, 2015
Sunday, November 8, 2015
• Last day for academic withdrawal from fall-term courses.
Film: Oh, what a blow that phantom gave me! [videorecording]: Edmund Carpenter / Media
Generation; a film by John Bishop, Harald Prins, 2003. [54 minutes]
Readings:
 Transcript of “Oh, What a Blow that Phantom Gave Me!”
https://culturalimperialism.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/transcript-oh-what-a-blow.pdf

McLuhan, Marshall. (n.d.). “Two Selections by Marshall McLuhan: The Galaxy
Reconfigured, The Medium Is the Message” (From: The New Media Reader)
https://culturalimperialism.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/two-selections-by-marshall-macluhan.pdf

Prins, Harald E. L., & Bishop, John. (2001). “Edmund Carpenter: Explorations in Media &
Anthropology”. Visual Anthropology Review, 17(2): 110–140.
http://0-onlinelibrary.wiley.com.mercury.concordia.ca/doi/10.1525/var.2001.17.2.110/epdf
- 17 -
Optional Reading:

Carpenter, Edmund. (1972). Oh, What a Blow That Phantom Gave Me! New York: Holt,
Rinehart and Winston.
https://culturalimperialism.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/carpenter-ohwhatablow.pdf
Part 4: Critiques of Theories of Cultural Imperialism
Session 10: Wednesday, November 11, 2015
Readings:

Sprague, Stephen F. (1978). “Yoruba Photography: How the Yoruba See Themselves”.
African Arts, 12(1), 52–59+107.
http://0-www.jstor.org.mercury.concordia.ca/stable/3335382

Kulick, Don, & Willson, Margaret. (1994). “Rambo’s Wife Saves the Day: Subjugating the
Gaze and Subverting the Narrative in a Papua New Guinean Swamp”. Visual Anthropology
Review, 10(2): 1–13.

McBride, Anne E. (2005). “Have Your Coke and Eat It Too: What Cooking with CocaCola Says about Cultural Imperialism”. Gastronomica, 5(1), 80–87.
http://0-onlinelibrary.wiley.com.mercury.concordia.ca/doi/10.1525/var.1994.10.2.1/epdf
http://0-www.jstor.org.mercury.concordia.ca/stable/10.1525
Optional Readings:


[course text] Chapter 19, “Redefining Cultural Imperialism and the Dynamics of Culture
Contacts,” by Biyot K. Tripathy: pp. 301–316
Burrowes, Carl Patrick. (1992). “Twenty Years of Cultural Imperialism Research: Some
Conceptual and Methodological Problems”. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the
International Communication Association (42nd, Miami, FL, May 20-25, 1992).
http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED349591.pdf

Jin, Dal Yong. (2012). “A Critical Analysis of Cultural Imperialism”. The International
Encyclopedia of Media Studies (Volume II: Media Production), 1–14.
http://0-onlinelibrary.wiley.com.mercury.concordia.ca/doi/10.1002/9781444361506.wbiems043/pdf

Banerjee, Indrajit. (2002). “The Locals Strike Back? Media Globalization and Localization
in the New Asian Television Landscape”. International Communication Gazette, 64(6),
517–535.

Demont-Heinrich, Christof. (2011). “Cultural Imperialism versus Globalization of Culture:
Riding the Structure-Agency Dialectic in Global Communication and Media Studies”.
Sociology Compass, 5(8), 666–678.
http://0-gaz.sagepub.com.mercury.concordia.ca/content/64/6/517.full.pdf+html
http://0-onlinelibrary.wiley.com.mercury.concordia.ca/doi/10.1111/j.1751-9020.2011.00401.x/epdf

Payne, David E., & Peake, Christy A. (1977). “Cultural Diffusion: The Role of U.S. TV in
Iceland”. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 54(3), 523–531.
http://0-jmq.sagepub.com.mercury.concordia.ca/content/54/3/523
- 18 -
Part 5: Contemporary Cultural Imperialism
Neoliberalism
Session 11: Wednesday, November 18, 2015
Readings:

Rothkopf, David. (1997). “In Praise of Cultural Imperialism?” Foreign Policy, 107
(Summer), 38–53.
http://0-www.jstor.org.mercury.concordia.ca/stable/1149331



[course text] Chapter 1, “Cultural Imperialism and Its Critics: Rethinking Cultural
Domination and Resistance,” by Russell Smandych: pp. 3–17
[course text] Part 4, Neo-Liberalism, Globalization, and Cultural Imperialism, Introduction:
pp. 147–148
Schiller, Herbert I. (1991) “Not Yet the Post-Imperialist Era”. Critical Studies in Mass
Communication, 8(1), 13–28.
http://0-www.tandfonline.com.mercury.concordia.ca/doi/pdf/10.1080/15295039109366777
Optional Readings:


[course text] Chapter 10, “Neo-Liberalism and the Attack on the Humanities: The New
Social Science of Cultural Imperialism,” by Herbert Schui: pp. 149–166
Schiller, Herbert I. (1998). “Dominating the Electronic Era: Towards a New Century of
American Imperialism”. Le Monde diplomatique (September).
https://mondediplo.com/1998/09/02schiller

van Elteren, Mel. (2003). “U.S. Cultural Imperialism Today: Only a Chimera?” SAIS
Review, 23(2), 169–188.
http://0-muse.jhu.edu.mercury.concordia.ca/journals/sais_review/v023/23.2elteren.html
“Good Governance”
Session 12: Wednesday, November 25, 2015
Readings:
 [course text] Chapter 12, “From White Man’s Burden to Good Governance: Economic
Liberalization and the Commodification of Law and Ethics,” by D. Parthasarathy: pp. 191–
210
 Mattei, Ugo. (2003). “A Theory of Imperial Law: A Study on U.S. Hegemony and the Latin
Resistance”. Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, 10(1), 383–448.
http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1260&context=ijgls

Gregg, Benjamin. (2010). “Anti-Imperialism: Generating Universal Human Rights out of
Local Norms”. Ratio Juris, 23(3), 289–310.
http://0-onlinelibrary.wiley.com.mercury.concordia.ca/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9337.2010.00456.x/epdf
Optional Readings:

[course text] Chapter 13, “Deradicalization and the Defeat of the Feminist Movement: The
Case of the Philippines,” by Sheilfa B. Alojamiento: pp. 211–218
- 19 -
Soft Power, Militainment, Information Operations
Session 13: Wednesday, December 2, 2015
Readings:
 [course text] Chapter 9, “Media Transmitted Values Transfer: The US at ‘War Against
Terrorism’ and Its Implications for the Information Society,” by Elvira Classen: pp. 136–146
 Nye, Joseph S., Jr. (2004). “Soft Power and American Foreign Policy”. Political Science
Quarterly, 119(2), 255–270.
http://0-www.jstor.org.mercury.concordia.ca/stable/20202345

Mead, Walter Russell. (2004). “America’s Sticky Power”. Foreign Policy, 141 (March-April),
46–53.
http://0-www.jstor.org.mercury.concordia.ca/stable/4147548
Optional Readings:

Nye, Joseph S., Jr. (2008). “Public Diplomacy and Soft Power”. Annals of the American
Academy of Political and Social Science, 616, 94–109.
http://0-www.jstor.org.mercury.concordia.ca/stable/25097996
- 20 -