LANDSCAPE
al popularculture."In A. Scott
ledge.
2
Giddenson globalmodernity."
!ldofthemodernworld-system."
ytoBoyne",InM.Featherstone
GEOLINGUISTIC
AS
REGION
GLOBAL
SPACE
niry,63-6. London: Sage.
n therebe sucha thingasworld
The
case of Latin
America
and the World-System,
91-105.
:sandltiformatics,1~4), 357--64.
John
Sinclair
a regulatorymythm theglobal
~outBorders:
AsiaSpeaks
Out,259-
In order to understand how the globalization of television production and
distribution has developedand assumedthe ever more intensive and complex forms
it has today, it is necessary,though not sufficient, to take language and culture into
account as primary "market forces" which enable the major producers and
distributors of television programs and services to gain accessto markets outside
their nation:; of origin. In this context, it becomes helpful to discard the metaphor
of the "wo]:"lds" which share a common language in favor of the concept of
"geolinguistic region." Such regions have been the initial basis for the globalization
of the medi.l, notably in television programs and services. It should be emphasized
that a geolinguistic region is defmed not necessarily by its geographical contours,
but more ill a virtual sense,by commonalities of language and culture. Most
characteristJically,these have have been established by historical relationships of
colonizatioIJl,as is the casewith English, Spanish, and Portuguese. However, in the
age of international satellites, not only do former colonies counterinvade their
erstwhile m2LSters
with television entertainment, but geolinguistic regions also corne
to include p<:rhapsquite small, remote and dispersed pockets of users of particular
languages, n1ostoften where there have been great diasporic population flows out
of their original countries, such as Indians now living in the Gulf States, Britain,
and North ,-\merica, or the unique case of the Spanish-speaking minorities of
diverse origin who inhabit the US.
The para.digm case of a geolinguistic region is Spanish, which is the "mother
tongue" of some twenty countries in Latin America. The Portuguese situation is
different, in that all the speakers of Portuguese in Latin America are in the one
country, Brazil.just as the United Statescontains about four times as many native
speakersof I~nglishasdoesthe UK (Crystal, 1997: 30 and 60), Mexico's population
of 96 million is more than twice that of Spain, with its 39.7 million, and Brazil has
sixteen time; as many people as Portugal. Yet as well as Spain, there is one other
major Spanish-speaking nation outside of Latin America but in that geolinguistic
region to be 1:akeninto account, evenif it is one in which Spanish is not the dominant
19
THE NEW COMMUNICATIONS
LANDSCAPE
language: if we take the current estimate of 26 million people of Hispanic origin
living in the US, which is nearly ten per cent of its total population of 265.8
million, the US would be the fifth-l~~est Spanish-speaking country in the world
(El EstadodelMundo, 1996: 614-9).
In the geolinguistic regions of Sparlish and Portuguese,certain media corporations have arisen which have been abte to exploit the massive size of the domestic
markets for which they produce as the key to the opening up of foreign markets in
other nations that speak the same lan!~age. These other countries have provided
them with a "natural" constituency foJrtheir output, and in spite of the fact that all
of them also import English-language television programming and other media
products such as fIlms, the crucial fact is that the most popular programs, indeed
entire television genres such as the :Latin American soap opera or telenovela
in
particular, are in the same language and cultural ambit of the countries which so
avidly consume them as imports.
...US
Latin Alnenca a,spostcolomai space
:
I
:!!
1:1
!
I
i Ii
I.
GEOLIN
within a few decades,F
that the name "Latin A
to further its own inter!
attempting to establisl
although "Latin Ameri(
linguistic descriptor ref;
either Spanish or Portl
Mexico in North Amer
has highly politicized a
As to the present ceJ
indirect interventions; :
juntas; and "covert opc
been motivated by a
corporations in Latin
determination to main1
government has pI
b0th lorce
C:
and di p I on:
Mil cuatrocientos
noventa
y dos: 1492 wa:; the year which marks the beginning of "a
major extended and ruptural world-historical event ...the whole processof exploration, conquest, colonisation and iIJ(lperial hegemonisation" (Hall, 1996: 249).
The same year in which Christopher Columbus landed on the islands of Cuba
and Hisp:aniola, and claimed them for th~ Spanish Crown.' saw the beginnings of
the creaUon of the "proto-modern" naUon-state of SpaIn (Galeano, 1973: 22;
Wars, or the Alliance fc
asserted its political as
postcolonial era (McC
Williamson, 1992: 61-3). Soon after, an agt:eementto regulate territorial rivalries
with their neighboring kingdom of ]>ortugal, the Treaty of Tordesillas in 1494,
established a dividing line between the Spanish- and Portuguese-speaking nations
of the Americas just as existed in Iberia (Schwaller, 1987: 69; Bakewell, 1991: 5 7~
80).
While it is not the intention here to provide a potted history of the Iberian
nations and their American colonies, it is important to establishthe main features
of their colonial relationships. In this regard, it is significant to note that, although
Latin America is the oldest postcolonial region outside the Mediterranean and its
nations have had their independence for the longest period of time, relative to Asia
and Mrica, it also had the longest period under colonization, for independence
The story is told that v
of Spain with his graIn)
she asked him what SUt
the perfect instrument
that we now recognize
of colonization, but tl
first nation to have a n
there are several Otht
mention a surviVing r.
in the Americas over,
Relative to the otJ
did not begin to happen until some 3:00 years after settlement.
However, the banishment of Spain from Latin America ushered in an era in
which other European powers and then the US could set up neocolonial
relationships with the new nations tlu'Oughtrade and investment. This initial trade
with Europe laid the basis for the indebtedness and dependency which have
continued to characterize the region. Rene Chateaubriand, French foreign minister
at the time, observed, "In the hour cf emancipation the Spanish colonies turned
into some sort of British colonies" (quoted in Galeano, 1973: 216), referring to the
considerable investments which Britun was able to make throughout the region,
once the main barrier to its unconcealed ambitions there had been removed. Yet
"language-of-power"
for a vast empire, but t
become standardized
dimension of nationh,
Anderson seesthe nal
of their kind (1991: 4
that all the new Ame]
Spanish, Portuguese,(
born shared the same
they had to free them~
Lan
gu
a.
g
I
l
20
ilij
! '!
iJ
-
LANDSCAPE
ion people of Hispanic origin
its total population of 265.8
;peaking country in the world
guese,certain media corporae massivesize of the domestic
~ning up of foreign markets in
other countries have provided
and in spite of the fact that all
:ogramming and other media
ost popular programs, indeed
an soap opera or telenovela
in
nbit of the countries which so
.a1
III space
ch marks the beginning of "a
...the whole process of explolonisation" (Hall, 1996: 249).
.nded on the islands of Cuba
Crown, saw the beginnings of
>f Spain (Galeano, 1973: 22;
to regulate territorial rivalries
rreaty of Tordesillas in 1494,
i Portuguese-speaking nations
1987: 69; Bakewell, 1991: 57potted history of the Iberian
: to establish the main features
,nificant to note that, although
ide the Mediterranean and its
period of time, relative to Asia
lIonization, for independence
settlement.
America ushered in an era in
S could set up neocolonial
i investment. This initial trade
lnd dependency which have
lriand, French foreign minister
n the Spanish colonies turned
.10,1973: 216), referring to the
make throughout the region,
there had been removed. Yet
GEOLINGUISTIC
REGION
AS GLOBAL
SPACE
within a few decades,France also was involved: indeed, Fernand Braudel records
that the name "Latin America" was in fact fIrst used by France in 1865, expressly
to further its own interests at a time when the French emperor Napoleon III was
attemptin!~ to establish a European monarchy in Mexico (1993: 427). Thus,
although "Latin America" since has been adopted universally as a neutral culturallinguistic dlescriptor referring to all those nations which share a "Latin" language,
either Spanish or Portuguese, in a a region stretching from the US border with
Mexico in North America to the tip of continental South America, asa concept it
has highly politicized and tendentious origins in European colonial rivalries.
As to the present century, the US government has a long history of direct and
indirect iru:erventions; support for client states led by repressive dictatorships and
juntas; and "covert operations" and "low intensity conflicts.". These tactics have
been motivated by a desire to protect the massive private investment by US
corporations in Latin America, often denounced as "US imperialism," and its
determinaltion to maintain the "security" of the region against whatever forces the
US government has perceived to be inimical to those interests. Proceeding with
both force and diplomacy {as in the Good Neighbor Policy between the World
Wars, or the Alliance for Progress in the I 960s),the US has clearly and consistently
asserted its political as well as economic hegemony over the entire region in the
postcoloni;u era (McClintock, 1992: 89-90; Williamson, 1992: 322-7).
Language:
"the
perfect
instruxnent
of empire"
The story is told that when, in 1492, Antonio de Nebrija presented Queen Isabel
of Spain with his grammar of Castilian, the first of any modem European language,
she asked lJlimwhat such a work was good for. "Language," replied the scholar, "is
the perfect instrument of empire" (Williamson, 1992: 62). Castilian is the language
that we now recognize as "Spanish", which became a world language in the process
of colonization, but the name servesas a reminder that although Spain was the
fIrst nation to have a national language (Klee, 1991: I), even in Spain its~lf today;
there are several other languages still widely spoken in distinct regions, not to
mention a:~urviving range of native languages and imported linguistic influences
in the Americas over which Spanish was imposed.
Relativt: to the other languages of the Iberian peninsula, Castilian was a
"Ianguage-of-power" (Klee, 1991: I), not just as the language of administration
for a vast elmpire, but the language upon which a "national print-language" could
become st:mdardized, and so create the "imagined community," the cultural
dimension of nationhood, in Benedict Anderson's influential formulation. In fact,
Anderson seesthe nation-states of the Americas as the fIrst independent nations
of their kirld (1991: 45-6), models for the postcolonial world. He makes the point
that all the new American nations established in the independence era, whether
Spanish, Portuguese,or English-speaking,were "creole states," that is, the colonialborn share,:lthe same language and cultural heritage as the metropolis from which
they had to free themselves.At least for these creole elites, there was no issue of an
21
THE NEW COMMUNICATIONS
LANDSCAPE
GI
alien language,asthere would be later with the new nations of the twentieth century
in Asia and Africa. The outcome is that, compared to the other postcolonial
continents, Latin America exhibits a unique linguistic homogeneity, for the most
part at the level of a fIrst languiige, and at the very least at the level of a lingua
franca, a common tongue, amongst native peoples. Even the differences between
Spanish and Portuguese are not 30 great asthose which exist between the different
languages of most neighboring countries in Asia or Africa. However, this homogeneity is tempered by some heterogeneity which should not be ignored.
English speakersare familiar with sometimes considerable national variations
in English, such as between British, American, Australian, and Indian English,
and furthermore, with regional variations within a nation, such as English as it is
spoken in New York compared to Atlanta or Los Angeles. Such variations can be
differences in grammar and vo<:abulary as well as of pronunciation and accent,
some of which might be partic\;llarly difficult to understand, or carry a negative
status.Just so are there the same kinds of variations in the Spanish-speakingworld:
the characteristic lisp of Iberian Spanish is not used in the Americas, for example.
Similarly, national groups such as Argentinians and Mexicans can be sensitive
about each other's accents, in the same way as an American accent might still
grate when heard on British or P.ustralian television. Yet, although not all English
speakersare exposed to a wide riillge of variations, by and large English speakers
the world over can understand each other. This is one of the factors which makes
English the world's principal geolinguistic region, and the basisfor its development
as a global television market. The point here, however, is that this also has been
true for the Spanish- and Portuguese-speakinggeolinguistic regions, although the
traditional predominance of Latjn American companies is now challenged in the
age of international satellite trarlsmission and globalization by US-based services
transmitted in the region's languages.
In such an era, we have to think of how viewers might relate in different ways
to television programming from various sources at distinct levels. For example, at
the local level, viewers get the local news and sport in their city or district and at
the national level, networked ne'NSand entertainment programming produced in
and for the national market. There are two transnational levels: the world-regional
level, at which te/enovelas
and other entertainment from the major producers in
Latin America circulate; and tht: global, which usually means subscriber services
like CNN -all in Spanish or Pomlguese,of course.So, viewers in ljrna, for example,
can enjoy watching a local league sporting match and then the national news,
affIrming their identities as ljrnans and Peruvians respectivel~ However, watching
an Argentinian or Mexican te/enovela
reminds them of the similarities they share
with neighboring countries in tht~ir region (and perhaps also the differences),while
flipping over to CBs. Telenoticia:; or a Hollywood film dubbed into Spanish might
make
feelthe
more
liketoprivileged
of theany
globe.
Thisthem
is not
place
specluatecitizens
on whether
of these levels is becoming
of the world hav
Latin America aJ
virtue of their m
"imagined como
the larger televisi
are talking here I
and the Spanish-!
by Iberian coloni
to be included as
In the absenct
viewers, and whi
Hispanic (Spani!
the submerged d
counterweight 0
international im.
there is a demanc
has developed its
these levels,and t
advantage out of
themselveshegeJ:
within their respt
Now that maJ
that passing thro
market is, if not
American experi
just of the audit
consensus amon
programming frc
not available, fro
Joseph Straubha
that programmir
programming if
in genres that SIr
The develoJ:
programming bt
and Brazil as "n
(1995)cIassificati.
Chile, and Peru
of the nations i.
America and the
decade
hasexparu
seen, '
due to the
dominant over the others, as th.~oristsof cultural imperialism and globalization
have tended to fear. Rather, the point is that even though viewers in other regions
in new service ar
of Westinghoust
22
GEOLINGUISTIC
1 century
tcolonial
the most
a lingua
between
different
lis homo.by
rariations
l English,
ish as it is
ns can be
d accent,
Lnegative
ng world:
example.
: sensitive
night still
ill English
1 speakers
ich makes
lelopment
I has been
hough the
1gedin the
~dservices
~rent ways
xample, at
rict and at
roduced in
ld-regional
oducers in
ler services
)r example,
onal news,
r, watching
they share
1ces),while
mish might
; becoming
obalization
her regions
~
REGION
AS GLOBAL
SPACE
of the world have accessto all these levels, including the world-regional, only in
Latin America are audiences in a whole host of nations able to be addressed by
virtue of their more or less common linguistic and cultural heritage as a kind of
"imagined community" on a world-regional scale,a feature of the region which
the larger television producers have been well-placed to exploit. Furthermore, we
are talking here not just of th,~geographic region of Central and South America
and the Spanish-speaking Caribbean, but of the whole geolinguistic entities created
Iberian colonization: that if;, the nations of Spain and Portugal themselveshave
to be included aspart of the rt:gion in which their respective languages are spoken.
In the absenceof comparative audience studies, it is not possible to say how far
viewers, and which kinds of viewers, might be drawn in by the idea of a common
Hispanic (Spanish) or Lusitallian (Portuguese)identity, or alternatively, how far
the submerged differences between and within the Latin nations might provide a
counterweight of resistance against being addressed as a member of such an
international imagined comnlunity (Waisbord, 1996: 24-5). What is clear is that
there is a demand for local, national and regional programming, that Latin America
has developed its own television programming and genres which are popular at all
these levels,and that a small mlmber of producers have been able to seizea strategic
advantage out of emphasizinl~ similarity at the expenseof difference, and so build
themselveshegemonic positions over the commercialization of cultural similarities
within their respective geolinguistic regions.
Now that many countries have had almost fIfty years of television, it appears
that passing through an initi~J stage of dependence to a maturity of the national
market is, if not universal, then certainly a common pattern, of which the Latin
American experience is paral:ligmatic. Crucial in the transition is the growth not
just of the audience size, but of domestic program production, the emergent
consensus amongst observeJrsbeing that audiences come to prefer television
programming from their OWJ1
country, and in their own vernacular, or if that is
not available, from other countries which are culturally and linguistically similar.
Joseph Straubhaar calls this "cultural proximity:" "audiences will tend to prefer
that programming which is ct.:>sest
or most proximate to their own culture: national
programming if it can be supported by the local economy, regional programming
in genres that small countrie:; cannot afford" (1992: 14).
The development of Latin American national markets for television
programming bear out this hypothesis, including the pre-eminence of Mexico
and Brazil as "net exporten:" within the region, to follow Rafael Roncagliolo's
(1995)classification. Venezuellaand Argentina are "new exporters", with Colombia,
Chile, and Peru seeking to join them, but coming from far behind, while the rest
of the nations in the region, most of which are the smaller nations of Central
America and the Caribbean, are "net importers" (1995, p. 337}. However, the last
decade has seen rapid growth in the number and variety of channels available,
due to the expansion of cable and satellite modes of distribution, which has brought
in new service and content providers, including US corporations. Indeed, the age
of Westinghouse's CBS Telenoticias and Time-Warner's HBO Ole, and other
23
~."II
,_l
,,11..
GEOLINGl
such special Latin services provided ~ the major US cable channels, is already
moving into a further stage defmed by Wleadvent of digital direct-to-home (DTH)
satellite delivery; This new "postbroadc~LSt"technology has encouraged the major
Latin American producers and distributors to enter strategic alliances with US
satellite and cable services.These alliances, with their plans extending to Europe
as well as Latin America, mark the beginning of a phase which brings Latin
American television into the mainstream of globalization.
The consumption of television is !related in the globalization literature to
questions of cultural identity. In counterpoint to the evident trend towards cultural
homogenization, a trend towards heterogenization is also recognized: "Culture is
a multi-layered phenomenon; the pro.:luct of local, tribal, regional or national
dimensions, which is anything but a sin~:lenational culture" (Richards and French,
1996: 30). Rather too often, however, tile "local" becomes a catch-all category set
up in contrast to the global, and tends to become equated with the "national"
(Sreberny-Mohammadi, 1991). It was ;irgued earlier that we can usefully think of
different kinds of television addressing .ludiences at local, national, world-regional,
and global levels. In the debate about globalization, and cultural imperialism before
it, there tends to be a static, zero-sum ccoDceptionof culture, or at least, the assump-
Silvio Waisbord ismore
identities are "dynamic, co
1996: 27), he also argues
identities were premature
statesare still legitimate an
organization in a globalis
an empirical one, a matter
build a senseof national i
shared consumption of n
one of the world's eight gr
American nations share a
that pan-Latin American 1
and interpreted -a pro;
properties, but the wrong'
programming executives
be flexible enough to al
(Wilkinson, 1995: 207). II
heightened in program e:
tion that global or other foreign cultur:u influence carried by the media somehow
necessarily
driveslevel
out the
local, national,which
and regional
rather
thangiven
just
adding
another
of identification
co-existsidentities,
with them
in any
individual.
As Morley
and
Robins
have
observed,
'Ii e I e~-.~
In
Mexico,
entrepreneurship
:!
ifi
:!!
ill
II!
' 'Ii
''.'co r,
J.
, 1
j\1I
f
l
It
1:
,
,
I
1t
f l
!\ t
!i
Ii:
Iiii
every culture has, in fact, inges1:edforeign elements from exogenous
sources, with the various elements gradually becoming "naturalised"
within it ...cultural hybridity is, increasingly, the normal state of affairs
in the world, and in this context, any attempt to defend the integrity of
indigenous or authentic cultures. t:asily slips into the conservative defence
of a nostalgic vision of the past.
(Morley and Robins, 1995: 130)
J[
tw
Latin American nations, at the SallIe time as it shapes a commercialized Latin
American ima gm
' a ry (Schlesinger arid Morris, 1997: 10-11).
Communications Inc).
announced the previou:
,{I
Ii
of
It is in this context that the Latin Alnerican theorization of mesti1;qje
or hybridity
has much to contribute, a perspective in which cultural identity "is not simply an
object that is acted upon by externaJlforces, but rather has been rethought as a
complex field of action" .(S~esinger and ~orris, 199~: 8-9). ~though rejec~g
the concept of postcoloniallSm as not applIcable to Latm Amenca, Nestor GarcIa
Canclini is also explicit in his rejection of the dichotomies of dominator and
dominated, center and periphery, aIJldsender and receiver. This leads to a postmodernist view of identity as deter.ri1:orializedand ~ece~t~re~ (1997:.23-4:):Jes~s
Martin-Barbero also draws attention to the deterntonallZatIon of Identities, m
particular, asattributable to international television. He argues that Latin American
television production and distribution on a regional basis is deterritorializing to
the extent that the local is lost, and th.lt it subsumesthe cultural differences between
c,
i:, '!
develop!
Azcarragas, and by the e
monopolistic, cross-mew.
television market, but ha
of the Spanish-speaking'
for the structures which t
and to a more restricted
Historically, Televisa
its market dominance ir
for this international e>
what it broadcasts mea
international distributiOI
market. H~~ever, a rect
almost a billion US doD
assets; its management
domestic market for thl
partners in its internatil
A~ the end of 1995,]
that It would lead a pal
DTH Sky, which inclu,
Brazil, Organiza~oes (
i[oi
i 1\
the
24
GEOLINGUISTIC
REGION
AS- GLOBAL
SPACE
Silvio Waisbord is more agnostic. Whilt: accepting len Ang'S view that subjective
identities are "dynamic, conflictive, unsulble, and impure" (quoted in Waisboro,
1996: 27), he also argues that "Perhaps the death notices written for national
identities were premature" (1998: 389). Apart from this reminder that nationstatesare still legitimate and effective units of political, economic, and sociocultural
organization in a globalising world, Waisbord poses the question of identities as
an empirical one, a matter of audience re~:earchto ascertain "how citizens actively
build a senseof national identity beyond the interpellation of authorities and the
shared consumption of mass culture." Even if we accept that Latin America is
one of the world's eight great "civilizatioru;" (Huntington, 1997),just becauseLatin
American nations share a similar linguistic and cultural heritage does not ensure
that pan-Latin American television programming is going to be uniformly accepted
and interpreted -a program might ha,re the right language and commercial
properties, but the wrong cultural resonan,ce(1997: 24-25). Evidence from regional
programming executives suggeststhat thu; is indeed the case:programming "must
be flexible enough to accommodate quite distinct national market contexts"
(Wilkinson, 1995: 207). It follows that the sensitivity of such differences would be
heightened in program exchanges between Latin American and Iberian nations.
Television markets
of the Latin world
In Mexico, the development of television has been very much formed by the
entrepreneurship of two generations of patriarchs from the one family, the
Azcarragas, and by the emergence of their company, Grupo Televisa, as a quasimonopolistic, cross-mediaconglomerate willich not only has dominated the Mexican
television market, but has been actively pLJrsuingits ambitions in most of the rest
of the Spanish-speakingworld. This international drive has been most consequential
for the structures which television has assumedboth in the Latin American region,
and to a more restricted degree, within dle US.
Historically, Televisa has been able to exploit the "competitive advantage" of
its market dominance in the world's largt~stSpanish-speaking nation as the basis
for this international expansion. The fat;t that Televisa itself produces most of
what it broadcasts means that it has ~.t stocks of programming available for
international distribution which has alread"{proven and paid for itself in its domestic
market. However, a recent downturn in its fortunes has seenTelevisa in crisis: it is
almost a billion US dollars in debt and has been desperately selling down prime
assets; its man~ement has become unstable; it is facing real competition in its
domestic market for the fIrst time, and it is being subordinated to foreign-based
partners in its international ventures.
At the end of 1995, Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation Limited announced
that it would lead a pan-regional DTH satellite subscription service consortium,
DTH Sky, which included not only Grupo Televisa, but also its counterpart in
Brazil, Organizac;oes Globo, and the major US cable corporation TCI (feleCommunications Inc). This was a response to the advent of Galaxy, an initiative
announced the previous May by the US-b:lSedsatellite division of General Motors,
2
t
J
---
",1
i
i
THE NEW COMMUNICATIONS
LANDSCAPE
GEOL
Hughes Electronics Corporation, ""hich incorporated Televisa's cable competitor
in Mexico, Multivision, along wittl TV Abril (Globo's main cable competitor in
Brazil), and Grupo Cisneros, owners of Venevision, a major television producer and
distributor based in Venezuela, another key market of the region ("Country ProfIle:
share in any of the pli
of the 1990s (Martin
casting and telecoml
ventures in Spain (pe
Mexico," 1996: 7). Both serviceshad begun transmission by the end of 1996.
Televisa
hadinternat:ional
been instrumental
in the
establishment
of PanAmSat,
theIronically,
world's first
private
satellite
television
corporation,
but the
Conve~
subsequent merger of PanAmSat with Hughes, in September, 1996, effectively
meant that Hughes acquired most of Televisa'sinterest in the restructured company
(Grupo Televisa, 1997: 73). Howe\'er, the growth of DTH depends on the recovery
of the Mexican economy as a whole, and if the market proves too small to be
profitable for both competing selVices,the company which controls the distribution
of both of them at a global level, tJl1enew PanAmSat owned by Hughes, can either
close one or the other down, or oblige them to merge. Either way, Televisa has
become most vulnerable to the strategies of both its global as well as its regional
collaborators: it might be added tllat Venevision is a partner of Televisa in the US,
although its competitor in Latin i\merican DTH.
Globo in Brazil shares a number of historical and structural similarities with
Televisa, notably a high degree 01:vertical and also horizontal integration of their
various media activities. Each of them is the largest producer and distributor of
television programming not just in their respective domestic markets but their
entire geolinguistic regions. In l:erms of broadcast television in their domestic
markets, Televisa is facing commercial competition for the flfSt time (with TV
Azteca), while Globo is much more experienced at keeping rivals at bay (notably
SBT). In cable television, where ttle exploitation of their own domestically-produced
material is less of an advantage, Globo has found a more difficult competitor in
TV Abril, just as Televisa has with Multivision in Mexican cable. In their export
activities, Televisa has found it much easier than Globo to penetrate national
markets in the rest of Latin America, but Globo has been much more successfulin
gaining entry to the market in J}ortugal than Televisa has been in Spain. In fact,
beginning as a supplier of programming to Portuguese television, Globo has been
able to acquire an interest in otle of the privatized channels, and drive it on to
market leadership (Sousa, 1997;,-It also has assumedan influential position as the
major investor in the development of cable television in Portugal (Lusomundo
Joins TV Cabo, )998). By contrast, not only has Televisa been unsuccessful in
joining up subscribers to its Ga!avision service in Spain, but it failed to acquire a
Like "globalization,"
The communication
most significant in
telecommunication
convergence present
in perspective: it is nc
sustaining them whit
That is, aswell as
the structure of the
telecommunication I
basedcultural indust
with national and re
content production'
features of the Latin
and Globo are the p
globalized. As is app'
DTH ventures in Lc
divide between hard
and management), c
distribution). This )
television business
postbroadcast indt:
continuous transm~
to subscribers.
Such immense t.
for how we under
implications for Ian
Castells, Morley al
binding" propertie~
Table 2.1
Ownership
of Latin
Amt:rican
DTH
consortia
DTH SkyLatinAmerica
News Corporation
Grupo Televisa (Mexico)
Organiza~oesGlobo (Brazil)
Tele-Communications
Inc (US)
30
30
30
10
formed
in 1995-96
(percentages)
of
GalaxyLatinAmerica(DirtcTV)
:::::
HughesElectronicsCorporation
Multivisi6n (Mexico)
TV Abril
Grupo
Cisneros
(Brazil)(Venezuela)
60
10
20
10
flows,
"nerve
rather
centers"
tha
in t
rem
o' ons as pnme
. exc
have emerged. Th(
bases of Televisa a
center for televis'101
26
;
GEOLINGUISTIC
REGION
AS GLOBAL
SPACE
share in any of the private broadcast channels which were created at the beginning
of the 1990s (Martinez, 1996). However, it has been able to join Spanish broadcasting and telecommunica1:ionsentities in the less successfulof the two DTH
ventures in Spain (peralta, 1997).
Convergence :md the challenge to geolinguistic
Dlonopolies
!
;
Like "globalization," one of the great buzz-words of the 1990s is "convergence."
The communications satellite, in both symbolic and practical terms, is one of the
most significant instances of this epoch-making fusion of broadcasting,
telecommunications, and data transmission. Much of the discourse about
convergence presents it as a technological phenomenon, but that needs to be kept
in perspective: it is not the te(;hnologies as such, but the commercial infrastructure
sustaining them which is so <:onsequential(McAnany, 1984: 188-9).
That is, aswell as at the te<:hnologicallevel,convergence is also occurring within
the structure of the commvlnication and information industries themselves, as
telecommunication companies take up strategic holdings in more entertainmentbasedcultural industries suchas subscription television,and enter into joint ventures
with national and regional cclmpaniesto do so. Vertically-integrated structures for
content production and distribution formerly were amongst the more distinctive
features of the Latin American model of corporate organization, of which Televisa
and Globo are the paradigm cases,but now this mode of integration is becoming
globalized. As is apparent in tif1ecaseof both the Murdoch and the Hughes' Galaxy
DTH ventures in Latin America, these integrated structures can cross the former
divide between hardware or "carriage" (in that case,satellite design, manufacture,
and management), and software or "content" (television program production and
distribution). This kind of convergence has also transformed the international
television business from an import-export trade in programs as products, to a
postbroadcast industry whi,ch provides not so much particular products but
continuous transmission of services,whether delivered via cable or delivered direct
to subscribers.
Such immense technological and structural transformation has consequences
for how we understand communications theoretically; and this includes the
implications for language and culture. Following the Spanish geographer Manuel
Castells, Morley and Robin:, argue that what Harold Innis called the "spacebinding" properties of communications media now are redefming space in terms
of flows, rather than of plac(~sas such, although with key economic and cultural
"nerve centers" in the network of flows (1995: 26-9). We can think of geolinguistic
regions asprime examples of suchvirtual restructured spaces,in which new centers
have emerged. These includt: not just Mexico City and Rio de Janeiro, the home
bases of Televisa and Globo, but also Miami. More than a strategically-located
center for television producrion and distribution to serve both Americas, Miami
27
.
-__I.;
;:.:;
_.~~.=
0.c.e 0.-
b'" "-,.
THE NEW COMMUNICATIONS
LANDSCAPE
has assumed a mythical place in the Latin American "collective imagination"
(Monsivais, 1994: 124), a virtual "capital of Latin America" (Whitefield, 1997).
But while respatialization, understood in this way asa dimension of globalization
facilitated by convergence,seemsto be overflowing geographical barriers to create
global markets, the barriers of language and culture seem more resistant. They
have substance as "market forct:s," or as Collins observes:
Although new communication technologies have reduced the costs of
transmitting and distribUtillg information over distance (space binding),
distinct information markets remain; here the most important differentiating factors are those of language and culture.
(Collins, 1994: 386)
Thus, while paradigmatic of global respatialization, the transcontinental niches
which the Spanish- and Portuguese-speaking television markets have carved out
for themselves are also emblematic of the reassertion of linguistic and cultural
difference which is taking plac.e in the face of globalization. Even within those
geolinguistic regions, there is further linguistic and cultural differentiation. Just as
in Asia, where Sony first elaborated its strategy of "global localization", and
Murdoch's Star TV tailored its offerings to the major linguistic groups rather than
seeka pan-Asian audience, som'~of the US-based cable channels in Latin America
have found it necessaryto adapt and differentiate their servicesto the local market.
;
I
1
I
f !
This is a significant trend because it shows how the drive for global economies of
scale,a force towards homogenization, is attenuated by the heterogenising factors
of language and culture, althou!~hasMorley and Robins note, "the local" is usually
not more specific than national, regional, or even pan-regional differences (1995:
117).
The technical properties of the new digital compression on the current
generation of satellites not only allow the satellitesto transmit many more channels
than ever before, whether frOD)the US, Europe, or elsewhere, but facilitate the
provision of multiple audio tracks. This means that one image, say a Hollywood
fl1m on HBO Ole, or a Discovery channel travelogue, can be made available to
cable operators and DTH subscribersdubbed into Spanish or Portuguese,as well
as in the original version. CleaJiy for the Latin American market, the provision of
at least dual audio tracks is elemental, but there are now much more culturallysensitive bases for differentiation, such as musical taste cultures. Viacom's MTV
not only has a separate service for Latin America, and within that, one for Brazil,
but has created special programming feeds for Mexico at one end of the Spanishspeaking zone, and Argentina at the other. Based in the mythical spaceof Miami,
so as to be seen to be above naltional partisanship, the core international material
! Ii!: il
!ii i ]!
i!!
Ii i!i
Ii ! '.!
is augmented with distinct Mexican and Argentinian segmentsfor those respective
feeds. As well as increasing its total subscribers in the region, this strategy has also
attracted local advertisers, in addition to the global ones that one expectsto fmd
everywhere on MTV (Goldner. 1997). MTV Latin America representsthe kind of
GI
challenge which'
of the region nm
Thus, the CO)
American compa
It is not only the I
accessDTH rece]
have gained thei
million Spanish
immense oppom
while to dub prog
that the prospect
gives US produce
the fIrst instance,
The developn
to aninternation
Latin America is :
region only requj
needed for Euro]
Rio surrender tho
Spanish and Por
capital flows intc
Cisneros Group "
(Sutter, 1997/98:
As well as CE
venture HBO 0
Discovery,and otl
in Spanish and/c
1996, 90 percent
than programs) iI
the US (Media Rt
that the export 0
Televisa and Mul
the Murdoch Sk)
90 percent of the
regional nations ,
networks in the U
also showsthat tht
much movement
as the study predi
,. major form of au
Given that tht
only have taken
, -;C PanAmSat' but al
,~(provision of servi !
:'11
II
1 Ii
.I.
i';,
ifl,!
28
tllIi
! II ,i
'I'
1,1
1
GEOLINGUISTIC
REI~ION
AS GLOBAL
SPACE
m"
challenge which Televisa, Globo, and tl1e other major producers and distributors
').
ion
ate
of the region now face on their home :¥ound in the era of convergence.
Thus, the comparative advantage of language difference which the Latin
American companies once enjoyed as a kind of natural monopoly is under threat.
ley
It is not only the new satellite technolo~~esof digital compression and conditionalaccessDTH reception which have brou,~htthis about: severalof the global channels
have gained their experience in the US with the potential audience of over 26
million Spanish speakers there, and the move into Latin America represents
immense opportunities for them to exJ>loit.At the very least, it is well worth their
while to dub programs which have been produced in English. It could even be said
that the prospect of the 300 million or more Spanish speakersof Latin America
givesUS producers an incentive to devl~lopprogramming for the Latino market in
the first instance, with Latin America, and Spain, as aftermarkets.
The development of the CBS Telenoticias news channel from a US domestic
to an international service is a good case in point. A CBS executive observes that
Latin America is more attractive than I~urope for suchventures becausethe whole
region only requires channels in two Languages,as against the several languages
needed for Europe (Francis and Fernandez, 1997: 38-40). As Mexico City and
Rio surrender their traditional monopoly as centers of dubbing from English to
Spanish and Portuguese to Los Angeles and Miami (Wilkinson, 1995: 22), US
capital flows into new channels: one US investment group has joined with the
Cisneros Group "to create a pan-lbero..American media network" based in Miami
(Sutter, 1997/98: 34).
As well as CBS and MTv; there t, Turner's CNN, the Time-Warner/Sony
venture HBO Ole, Murdoch's Fox Latin America, Spelling's TeleUno, ESPN,
Discovery,and other US-based global channelsproviding satellite and cable services
in Spanish and/or Portuguese to LatiJl America, so it is not surprising that as of
1996, 90 percent of television services (that is, satellite and cable si~als rather
than programs) imported into the Iberoamerican region were found to be from
the US (Media Researchand ConsultaJlcy Spain, 1997: 14). The same study found
that the export of such services from the region mainly (70 percent) came from
Televisa and Multivision in Mexico, especially by virtue of their involvement with
the Murdoch Sky and Hughes Gal3X)TDTH ventures respectively. Even though
90 percent of the services exported from Iberoamerican countries went to other
regional nations of the same languagl~ (the rest mainly to the Spanish-speaking
networkS in ,the US), evidence of the geo}inguistic cohesion of the region's trade, it
also shows that the US serviceshave bet:n able to crossthe language barrier without
much movement back in the other dirI~ction. This trend is likely to consolidate if,
as the study predicts, the trade in services rather than programs soon becomes the
major form of audiovisual exchange (1997: 17-18).
Given that the US-based and other global corporations such as Hughes not
only have taken over the technological vanguard in the region once held by
PanAmSat, but also faced up to the content issue by extending themselvesinto the
provision of servicesin the regionallaJ:lguages,if postbroadcast servicesdo come
ties
Jut
ral
)se
: as
nd
Ian
ica
;et.
;of
ors
illy
95:
~nt
lels
the
IOd
to
{ell
I of
Ilyrv
zil,
shlIli,
ial
ive
lso
nd
I of
29
THE
to
eclipse
programs
advantage
as
once
undermined.
at
the
core
as
to
LANDSCAPE
television
trade,
major
grl~atly
such
encan
..
the
th(~
depend
are
Am
of
by
will
present
tIn
.
La
COMMUNICATIONS
enjoyed
This
which
most
NEW
on
keep
countnes.
]
Latin
the
level
DTH
n
th
e me
then
of
out
of
urn
term,
di
much
American
of
the
comparative
companies
cost
of
the
the
reach
..It
subscriber
of
IS
lik
e
th
be
th
e
su
in
.b
b scn
(1973).
.
h
f
R
Canclini,
N
Development,
er
G
Goldner,
XlJ'
'T' D.
(1997).
h
rupo
J.e
evISa
..
(199
servIces
~I
re.mam
cosmopohtan
mass
and
has
1960s
was
overtaken
for
a
which
paper
phase
be
in
an
which
to
out
to
era
of
of
loyal
1999:
the
to
while
the
market
for
L.
S.
New
their
Klee,
It
Shape
C.
the
the
late
th
.
d
elT
.
1970s,
a
vantages
fact
e
that
the
same
a
of
capitalism,
can
the
set
in
a
m
elT
respective
As
at
Joins
corporate
of
later
dominance
cultural
overcome
of
in
its
.d
no
guarantee
196).
not
be
of
the
competitors,
ill
II:
A.
Socialuxt,
inter-
Media
has
Research
de
ultimately
(19~
10(2/:
de JUS
US
and
Principales
Internacional.
markets.
M
Monsivais,
Ac]knowledgement
C.
(1994
Latin
American
York,
1999.
substantially
likvision:
A
and
Cultural
from
Global
Com"
D.
material
Vzew,
published
Oxford
in
University
the
author's
Press,Oxford
book,
and
B.
(1997).
LaJornada,
New
Richards,
M.
(2nd
B.
(1991).
edn).
Bakewell,
P.
Problems
London:
(1991).
and
Braudel,
F.
Collins,
R.
Crystal,
its
(1993).
El
Estado
Frances,
Promise,
57-66.
History
America."
on
In].
E.oulder,
of
CO:
Civilizations.
"Trading
Mexico"
(1997).
del
Reflections
the
Origin
and
Spread
of
Nationalism
in
New
culture:
the
Knippers
Black
Westview
York:
English
Mundo:
and
EdiciOn
Fernandez,
1'
Latin
America:
of
Its
Books.
Latin
Journal
of
(1996).
a
1997.
R.
TV
Global
International,
Language.
(1996).
(1997).
May
6,
Cambridge:
Madrid:
"Satellites
28-42.
University
Press.
Ediciones.
of
the
border."
Region,
Sousa,
H.
,
57-
7C
(1999).
L;
(1997).
"(
conference
0
Oaxaca,]ul~
Cambridge
Aka!
south
5-8.
~
(1987).
a
the
as
(
l
and
America
Sinclair,].
Canadian
ourna
P.
Schwaller,].
on
language."
}
Schlesinger,
Press.
Penguin
role
(Ed.),
19,377-99.
profile:
G.
,",,
in
LatiIl
}
Sage.
vWUlUtan
Verso.
A
(1994).
D.
Co7rnnunities:
"Colonial
Communication,
"Country
Imagined
FI
M.
Roncagliolo,R.(l99.
eIerences
Anderson,
and
and
Delhi:
~
";
Marc
French
R
Rob
Boundarie.
Peralta,
draws
}
Productores
International
chapter
.
razl
Changin
McClintock,
By
American
which
ustry
Volume
Morley,
This
~
B
.
ill
.cted,
(1984:
victory
industry
those
guIStlc
pre
should
inevitable
a
be
Proceso,
E
.(1984).
di
date"
T
(1996).
..any,
geo
cAnany
may
a
"In
Spanish-Speakit
exploited
M
"
mdustry
surface
have
»'Or
(1991).
Martinez,,~.
tin
will
cultural
regional
Globo
..
.pass.
not
logic
to
and
th
always-already
the
able
national
ers
also
US
and
.
ea
strong
tile
as
d
o
will
as
Televisa
I
IS stage
of
is,
which
et
th
reassertion
advantages
own
mar
influence
analytically,
of
their
in
at
develop
that
but
unique
e
th
are
external
token,
era
k
.
cations
teleologically;
even
the
ecome
di
m.
nation
threat
preted
a
.
th
ut
the
been
th
to
b
that
has
b
regions,
the
this
(199
of
Lusomundo
Beginning
(Ed
Roudec
McAn Aznar.
in
"WI
Curti
London:
appreciation
culture.
(1996).
and
the
reached
more
and
S.
Huntington,
in
development.
have
language
Hall,
166-70).
US
television
learned
own
.more
imperialism
from
phase
their
a
cultural
imports
initial
of
form
(Sinclair,
the
~lready
programmmg,
continue
audiences
them
and
global
distributors
that
just
affiuent
the
program
to
came
more
will
television
proven
e
receIve
and
this
when
by
programs
t.
television
in
has
to
producers
argued
mark,
0
pay
broadcast
1970s,
high-tide
pres(~rve
can
regional
been
and
e
who
for
national
It
t
elites
audiences
the
.
.
1
11
,
Monthly
Garcia
audiences
at
E.
York:
services,
mass
y
I
Galeano,
would
Sreberny-Mohamm
cations."
Via
Satellite,
February;
York
In].
and
Cl
Londol
Straubhaar,].
(199~
review
of
30
-I
the
in