The causes and consequences of globalisation

 

Our global sphere is one often epitomised by innovative ideas and endless flows of instantaneous information. However accessibility contradicts what may initially elude to be a universally interconnected global village. The term globalisation can be interpreted quite literally, accounting for the widespread use of various media communication technologies across the globe. Otherwise, it can be taken seriously… with an open mind.

Too often globalisation is discussed objectively pertaining only to resources. However, what constitutes a “world” is when people, language and experiences are all socially implemented together to construct a reality. By becoming consciously aware of the space that we and others inhabit we are all in some way contributing to globisation.  

A prime example exists amongst the division between first world minorities and third world majorities. By minorities I mean population opposed to consolidated power, otherwise the roles would be reversed.  

The picture above is taken from a 2011 article that details how Apple employees based in China, who work on practically slave wages, were required to sign contracts whereby declaring their intentions not to commit suicide based upon horrendous working conditions. Furthermore, the contract reads that if they are to commit suicide their families should seek only minimum compensation against the company.  

Such is the struggle that globalision poses that it has become increasingly ‘difficult to separate the consequences and causes of globalisation’ (Rantanen, T 2005, pp. 7). However it is more gruelling to justify why millions should suffer as the causalities of consequence far outweigh the benefits if any in my opinion. If globalisation has taught us anything it’s that those in positions of power exercise the capacity to instrumentally enforce empirical rule upon others, although unfortunately ‘dealing with the issue of cultural dominance is not the same as accounting for economic dominance’ (Topic 1. Introduction: The Flows of Globalisation).

References

DAILY MAIL REPORTER 2011, ‘You are NOT allowed to commit suicide: Workers in Chinese iPad factories forced to sign pledges’, DAILY MAIL REPORTER, 1 May, retrieved 25 June 2012, <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1382396/Workers-Chinese-Apple-factories-forced-sign-pledges-commit-suicide.html>

Rantanen, T 2005, ‘Theorizing media globalization’, The media and globalization, Sage, London, pp. 1–18.

‘Topic 1. Introduction: The Flows of Globalisation’, Deakin ALC215 Study Guide.

Global-‘I’-nation

Within this contemporary digital age it is difficult to disparage how we as an audience, and consumers alike, are becoming increasingly dictated by and dependent upon new technologies. As users and abusers of everything electronic we are commonly treated and targeted as a commodity, whose culpability lies within our very own comfortable conformity. Our reactive acceptance and quick adoption of life’s latest gizmos and gadgets continues to shape our attitudes and subsequent actions towards new media as the only (illogical) answer seems to lie within further consumption.

The repetitive flows of production and distribution of various media, particularly the Internet and its open realm of social networking, marks a transitional shift whereby we are becoming increasingly aware of our own ‘growing global interconnectedness’ (Nederveen Pieterse, J 2004, pp. 16). These social platforms provide people with both an opinion but also an opportunity to ‘friend’ almost anyone in the world, gradually extending a multi-faced global family connected through online profiling.

This process of Westernisation cements its permanence amongst what can be referred to as ‘Generation-I’ (Keene, N & Noone, R 2012) – everyday users of accessories such as the I-Pad or I-Phone (and yes the Internet) whom validate their social credentials as technological savvy individuals. Applications or ‘apps’ as they are so commonly abbreviated have also recently inspired new language flows as abbreviations such as ‘lol’ (lots of laughter?) and ‘fml’ (forgot my lunch!) have become a part of everyday communication used interchangeably in face to face interactions.

 

References

Keene, N & Noone, R 2012, ‘The rudest generation: I-Gen’, The Daily Telegraph, January 12, retrieved 19 July 2012, http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/lifestyle/the-rudest-generation-i-gen/story-e6frf00i-1226242088666

Nederveen Pieterse, J 2004, ‘Globalisation: consensus and controversies’, globalisation and culture: global melange, Rowan & Littlefield, Lanham, pp. 7-21.