Culture imperialism and political imperialism reflect in media imperialism.

CULTURAL IMPERIALISM
The cultural imperialism thesis holds that dominant societies are able to impose their culture on that of subordinate societies as a means of establishing and perpetuating control. This is seen as part of the historical development of a wider economic and political imperialism illustrated particularly in the relationship between developed and underdeveloped nations. More specifically, cultural imperialism refers to the spread of cultural values, ideas and practices which reflect and reproduce the superiority of the dominant culture (Christianity, Shakespeare and McDonalds are but three examples). At the same time it describes the devaluation and destruction of indigenous culture (for instance, polygamy or witchcraft). Media imperialism refers to the way in which the mass media is able to organise and purvey cultural imperialism. The concept has been especially popular among Marxists, who lay stress on the determining role of political economy and more precisely, ownership of the worlds media by major capitalist interests in understanding the world media order and culture. It has been particularly associated with the rising power of the USA during the twentieth century and its ability to shape systems of information and entertainment for ultimately ideological purposes, a process sometimes labelled Americanisation. The USA is the biggest domestic producer and the largest exporter of televisionprogrammes, while many of the major international media corporations are American (for example, Time Warner and Fox). Thus, many societies in Africa, Asia, Latin America and other parts of the world experience a diet of television drawn overwhelmingly from North America, and indeed Europe. OSullivan et al. use the example of television schedules in Fiji composed almost entirely of European and American programmes, including various sports, the British comedy Porridge and the American programmes WKRP in Cincinnati and Hollywood Wives (OSullivan et al. 1998). One of the primary motives in such cases is financial as American corporations sell media products to buyers in developing world countries way below the cost of producing domestic programmes. The problem is compounded by the fact that media products and processes are perceived as flowing in one direction only, with American audiences being unused to anything but Americanprogrammes. The cultural imperialism thesis holds that in the context of a world information order, multinational corporations (MNCs) own the mass media and are therefore able to control technology such as satellites, the flow and distribution of images and information and textualcontent itself. For example, major newsagencies such as Reuters form parts of large MNCs which control the technology of news production, the distribution of news programmes (tending to be exported from developed societies to developing societies), and the content of news texts (Gurevitch 1991). The result is that television news sets an ideological agenda that favours the advanced capitalist societies. Cultural imperialism, then, is closely bound up with economic imperialism. This kind of approach would also point to the mass medias ability to develop new markets byadvertising the imperative of consumption; the rapid worldwide spread of MTV, with its representation of a glamorous, exciting and implicitly American way of life, is seen as a prime illustration of this. Satellite technology has

exacerbated the situation as media products an example here would be the availability and popularity of American basketball in the Caribbean are able to ignore borders and, in the process, threaten existing national identities. Attempts in a number of countries to regulate the import of American material have been thwarted by media corporations and the American government. The labelling of this homogenisation as Coca-Cola culture is not incidental. Proponents of the cultural and media imperialism thesis see the result of these economic and cultural processes as dissemination of dominant capitalist ideology throughout the world. For example, in their seminal text How to Read Donald Duck, Dorfman and Mattelart (1975) point to the racial stereotyping of other nationalities and the promotion of capitalism and consumerism in Disney comics. Television, then, has the capacity to veil the exploitative reality of economic relations (via, say, advertising) and compensate for the miseries of everyday life with the provision of so-called prozac television such as Dallas. It can legitimate the superiority of western culture (Upstairs, Downstairs) and the inferiority of the other via racist representations (e.g. Warner Bros and Disney cartoons). In this model, audiences cannot fail to be affected. Both first and third world populations come to see the world through a western gaze, with the former becoming armchair conquistadores (Shohat and Stam 1994). Theorists of a Gramscian bent have rejected what they see as this mechanistic and determinist account, arguing that cultures are able to resist forces of imperialism. In other words, culture should be seen as an arena of political struggle or cultural politics rather than imposition. This allows for, among other things, consideration of different and competing representations for instance, of Africans on British television and of the capability of governments and others to reject western media products. However, the analysis is still couched in terms of a fundamental organising relationship between two societies or formations within those societies.

Media imperialism is a theory based upon an over-concentration of mass media from larger nations as a significant variable in negatively affecting smaller nations, in which the national identity of smaller nations is lessened or lost due to media homogeneity inherent in mass media from the larger countries. Media influence or media effects are used in media studies, psychology, communication theory and sociology to refer to the theories about the ways in which mass media affect how their audiences think and behave. Connecting the world to individuals and reproducing the self-image of society, critiques in the early-to-mid 20th century suggested that media weaken or delimit the individual's capacity to act autonomously sometimes being ascribed an influence reminiscent of the telescreens of the dystopian novel 1984. "Mid 20th-century empirical studies, however, Current theories cultural and personal beliefs, as per the propaganda model. Mass media content created for newsworthy events and those stories that are not told all have Television broadcasting has a large amount of control over the content society watches and the times in which it is viewed. This is a distinguishing feature of traditional media which New media have challenged by altering the

participation habits of the public. The internet creates a space for more diverse political opinions, social and cultural viewpoints and a heightened level of consumer participation. There have been suggestions that allowing consumers to produce information through the internet will lead to an overload of information.

Multinationals are modern day imperialism

Multinational Companies: Are they devils in disguise?
In Against:The main advantage of MNCs is reducing of unemployment. India is a developing country. MNCs helping India to become developed country. They are helping us to connect with whole world, which is highly necessary for developing countries in present generation. Some MNCs are including in social activities. They are introducing new products of cost effective. The employees of these companies are having high salary. Economy of pakistan increases.

In Favor:Pakistan has many intelligent people. But the intelligence is not used by India, and using for the development of the other countries. Many talented people are settling in foreign countries to work for MNCs. The stress of MNC employees is more compared to others. There are many cases of mental health problems in these employees. The pay scale of Indian employees of these companies is less compared to foreign employees of the same companies. Employees of these companies are working like robots, and not spending their valuable time with their family. Some young people are attracted by the high salary and moulding their career wrongly for luxury life. In these companies there is least scope of using creativity. Mostly, employees are just following instructions of their superiors. By MNCs, local companies are having losses. Conclusion:Multinational companies are not disadvantage to our country. pakistan need MNCs to become developed country. But employees of these companies should not take responsibility for overloaded work just for high salary. So that, there can have fulfilment of passion and also fulfilment of personal life.

Newspaper are the most respected medium

Henry Watteson was editor of the Louisville Courier Journal after the Civil War and made that paper one of the most respected through his powerful editorials. He was an imposing man with white hair, Kentucky Colonel's goatee, and a ferocious temper. After a hard day's work at the office, he liked to spend his evenings in his combined hobbies: vervent political arguments and fervent absorbing of good Kentucky bourbon. At the end of each day, Mr. Watteson would go to the bookkeeper's office at the paper, open up the till and take our a fistful of money to finance his evening's eating, drinking and arguing. One evening he went to take the money and there was a plaintive note from the bookkeeper. The bookkeeper, in very apologetic language, said, "Mr. Watteson, of course you are entitled to any amount of money that you would like. But please,

leave a note on how much you take out so we can make our books right the next morning." The next morning, the bookkeeper, knowing Mr. Watteson's temper, opened the cash drawer with trepidation and was relieved to see a note from Mr. Watteson. He opened the not. The note said, "I took it all." The modern owners of our news media seem to have taken their lesson from Mr. Watteson. Today a small number of multinational corporations control most of our media, including printed and broadcast news. They are taking it all, but what they mean by "all" makes Mr. Watteson look quaint. The major owners of our media mean three things by "all": First, each is trying to collect as many outlets as possible in any one media. For example, of our 1600 daily newspapers, about a dozen corporations now control more than half of all national daily circulation. Of our 11,000 magazines with individual titles, a half dozen corporations have most of the revenues. Of our four television networks and 900 commercial stations, three corporations have most of the audience and revenues. There are at least 2500 book publishing houses, but a half dozen corporations have most of the sales in the book industry. Three major studios have most of the movie business. The new owners have something else in mind when they drive to take it all. They're also trying to buy control or market domination not just in one medium, but in all the media. The aim is to control the entire process, from an original manuscript or news series to its use in as many forms as possible. A magazine article owned by the company becomes a book owned by the company. That becomes a television program owned by the company, which becomes a movie owned by the company. It's shown in theaters owned by the company and the movie sound track is issued on a record label owned by the company and the vocalist on the cover of one of the company magazines. It does not take an angel from heaven to tell us that the company will be less enthusiastic about outside ideas for productions that it does not own. And more and more we will be dealing with closed circuits to control access to most of the public. Lastly, "all" seems to mean all the profit that can be quickly and ruthlessly taken from their media properties. Since the growth of concentration of ownership, average newspaper pre-tax annual profits, always generous, have risen sharply and now range between 20% and 40% annually. Affiliated television stations now make an average of between 30% and 50% annually. Since cable became dominated by newspapers, broadcasters and movie company owners and was deregulated, thanks to their combined lobbying, cable fees around the country have risen radically, approximately 30% to 50% more than the costs of production. Almost weekly we read of another great media merger. Time/Warner forms the largest media conglomerate in the world. Rupert Merdoch adds another major segment to his global empire. They all gobble up each new medium as it gets popular, like cable and videocassettes. When you look at it all, including corporations dominant in more than one medium, you see an extraordinary race toward monopoly or monopoly-like control which gets more rapid all the time. In 1982, 50 corporations had half or more of all the business in all the major media in the United States. Today, that number is less than 25 and shrinking. Perhaps that's why our theme asks two main questions: First, who owns our media?

To name a few names: In daily papers, the leading ones are Gannett, which owns USA Today and 88 other daily papers, for about 6 million total daily circulation. International Thompson, with 116 papers,; Knight-Ridder, Newhouse and about 8 others. The chief owners of magazines in the general news are dominated by Time/Warner, which controls more than 40% of the country's magazine business. Other major owners are Rupert Murdoch, Hearst Newhouse, although not all the issue general news. Newsweek, which does carry news, is owned by the Washington Post Company. In broadcasting, despite some loss of audience, the three networks ABC, CBS and NBC still have most of the television audience and business. In books, some of the major owners are Gulf & Western, which owns Simon and Shuster, Time/Warner, Reader's Digest Association, Bertlesmann, a German firm, Maxwell, a British firm, Hachette, a French firm, and Thompson, a Canadian firm. That gives some idea of the major owners of the news and of books, which, which are an important source of knowledge about public affairs. Our second question is: How well do they serve the public? Well, as with life in general, there's good news and bad news. The good news about American reporting is that in some technical matters it is the best news in the world. It's journalists are the most highly educated in the world and far better educated than any earlier generation of American Journalists. We sometimes make the mistake of comparing our average with other countries' elite. But our average in terms of preparation and care of journalists is better than the average anyplace else. They operate under higher professional ethics than journalists elsewhere and higher than at any time in the past. They lie less than journalists elsewhere, fictionalize less, and on the whole take seriously their individual duty to provide the public with accurate information. Collectively they issue daily an extraordinary volume of daily news items. But if things are so good, why are they so bad? Or at least, as trouble-some as I believe they are? The problem lies, I think, mainly with the institutions and the conventions of standard American journalism. Most reporters in the standard media can say correctly, "No editor ever tells me to lie." And I think that is correct. There are exceptions, but I think they're rare. But most reporters are told every day what to write about. There are 50,000 print journalists in this country and 50,000 broadcast reporters. Each day, each week, each month, they are pointed toward particular tasks, particular stories, particular personalities, particular government activities, particular foreign scenes, and particular series in some depth. In the resulting mass of stories there are often articles of importance and sometimes distinction. There is a daily volume of routine, factual and important local and national information. The problem lies in something beyond the mass of useful items. Each day editors necessarily select some stories for emphasis and some for de emphasis, some for the wastebasket. Certain kinds of stories, certain public figures, certain social data, certain analysts of social and political events are regularly on the network evening news and the front page, while other stories, or other spokespersons and analysts are mentioned obscurely, if at all. This kind of selection is a legitimate and necessary part of the news process. But when we look at the selection process over time, how often is the result a serious departure from the realities of our social, economic and political life?

Where does the money come into the news industry.

The future of newspapers has been widely debated as the industry has faced down soaring newsprint prices, slumping ad sales, the loss of much classified advertising and precipitous drops in circulation. In recent years the number of newspapers slated for closure, bankruptcy or severe cutbacks has risenespecially in the United States, where the industry has shed a fifth of its journalists since 2001.[1] Revenue has plunged while competition from internet media has squeezed older print publishers. The newspaper industry has always been cyclical, and the industry has weathered previous troughs. But while television's arrival in the 1950s presaged the decline of newspapers' importance as most people's source of daily news, the explosion of the internet in the 1990s and the first decade of the 21st century increased the panoply of media choices available to the average reader while further cutting into newspapers' hegemony as the source of news. Both television and the Internet bring news to the consumer faster and in a more visual style than newspapers, which are constrained by their physical form and the need to be physically manufactured and distributed. The competing mediums also offer advertisers the opportunity to use moving images and sound. And the internet's search function allows advertisers to tailor their pitch to readers who have revealed what information they're seeking an enormous advantage. The Internet has also gone a step further than television in eroding the advertising income of newspapers, as unlike broadcast media it proves a convenient vehicle for classified advertising, particularly in categories such as jobs, vehicles, and real estate. Free services like Craigslist have decimated the classified advertising departments of many newspapers, some of which depended on classifieds for 70% of their ad revenue. At the same time, newspapers have been pinched by consolidation of large department stores, which once accounted for substantial advertising sums.

As their revenues have been squeezed, newspapers have also been increasingly assailed by other media taking away not only their readers, but their principal sources of profit. Many of these 'new media' are not saddled with expensive union contracts, printing presses, delivery fleets and overhead built over decades. Many of these competitors are simply 'aggregators' of news, often derived from print sources, but without print media's capital-intensive overhead.[34] Some estimates put the percentage of online news derived from newspapers at 80%.[35] Many newspapers also suffer from the broad trend toward fragmentation of all media in which small numbers of large media outlets attempting to serve substantial portions of the population are replaced by an abundance of smaller and more specialized organizations, often aiming only to serve specific interest groups. So-called narrowcasting has splintered audiences into smaller and smaller slivers. But newspapers have not been alone in this: the rise of cable television and satellite television at the expense of network television in countries such as the United States and United Kingdom is another example of this fragmentation.

The film industry in pakistan can be revived.

PANAJI: A special task force formed by Pakistan to revive its film industry will be visiting Mumbai to learn from Bollywood, a senior Pakistani senate committee chairman said here Saturday. Speaking to reporters in Panaji, Nilofar Bakhtiar, chairman of a senate committee on culture and tourism, said she would be lining up meetings for the 16-member task force with top Bollywood personalities. We recently formed a task force to revive Pakistani cinema in which we have leading filmmakers as members. If they come to India, it would have good impact on our industry and future relations of both the countries, said Bakhtiar, who is leading a delegation of Pakistani officials and filmmakers to the South Asian Film Festival (SAFF), which is underway in Goa. Indian cinema is extremely advanced and we want Indian filmmakers to work with us. We also want training opportunities for our actors and directors in India, Bakhtiar said. It took us a long time and tremendous pressure to allow Indian cinema to be aired in Pakistan. We would like India to reciprocate, she said, adding that Indian TV channels were open to the Pakistani public and were tremendously popular there. In the recent past, musicians and actors from Pakistan have crossed over to India seeking opportunities. Recent examples are Ali Zafars Tere Bin (Laden) and Mona Lizas Kajraare.

The radio is the most popular medium.

Today we continued our Introduction to Media Studies module by looking at The Radio and whether it is populist or elitist. Radio is seen as TVs poorer cousin but it didnt used to be. In the beginning it was the only output and was extremely popular. It is cheaper and you dont have to listen intently- you can dip in and out of radio. The most popular radio programmes are: The Archers Desert Island Discs Radio grew out of telegraphy the long distance transfer of messages as a communication device. (The words tele and graph mean far and write respectively) The Optical Telegraph was invented c. 1830. They were constructed every few miles on hills to communciate with each other using signals. They were inspired by the Indian Smoke Signals and Roman Fire Beacons. The problem is they can stop working due to bad visibility such as fog and you can only communicate 2 words per minute if your lucky. In 1809 German Scientists invented an electrical version with 35 wires in acid representing Latin letters and when shocked the jars would bubble, communicating a message. Then radio transmitters were invented which were used to send binary codes. This gave rise to the creation of morse code. The most famous morse code is [dot.dot.dot.dash.dash.dash.dot.dot.dot] which means S.O.S (Save Our Souls). Then came the laying of the Oceanic Telegraph Cables to India et. This came about to keep the British Empire running fastly tansferring messages abroad. There are always big advances In 1896, the Italians were not interested in Marconis new wireless communication invention. He came to the U.K, specifically Wales, where they built radio masts and sent the first radio message Are you ready?. Then then did the first transatlantic radio transmisson from Wales to Newfoundland. They found this new technology quicker, cheaper and easier to maintain. They soon found uses for it. For example in rescue like on the Titanic. Or in spying where theJapanese monitored Russia warships. Or in Wartime to pass messages such as in WW1.

in technology Radio went commercial is the US and Europe in the 1920 s.during war time. Theres BBC Radio 1,2,3,4,5 Live, 6music, 7, 1xtra, and Asian Network. No commercial radio license was given till 1973. The BBC had a virtual monopoly apart from pirate radio. In 1938 however most people turned away from the BBC and tuned into foreign stations.

Commercial Radio was based on the US model with Snappy DJs and pop music.

In 1967 the BBC wanted to combat this and launched Radio 1 as an antidote to the previous. Britian was in the swinging sixties and Radio 1 was broadcasting it out. They were finally fighting back against pirate radio. Radio 2 took the light programme, Radio 3 look the third programme and Radio 4 became the home service.

Television has created history in recent past.

Television (TV) is a telecommunication medium for transmitting and receiving moving images that can be black-and-white or monochromatic (shades of grey) or multicolored. Images are usually accompanied by sound. "Television" may also refer specifically to a television set, television programming, television transmission. The etymology of the word has a mixed Latin and Greek origin, meaning "far sight": Greek tele ( ), far, and Latin visio, sight (from video, vis- to see, or to view in the first person. Commercially available since the late 1920s, the television set has become commonplace in homes, businesses and institutions, particularly as a vehicle for advertising, a source of entertainment, and news. Since the 1970s the availability of video cassettes, laserdiscs, DVDs and now Blu-ray Discs, have resulted in the television set frequently being used for viewing recorded as well as broadcast material. In recent years Internet television has seen the rise of television available via the Internet, e.g. iPlayer and Hulu. Although other forms such as closed-circuit television (CCTV) are in use, the most common usage of the medium is for broadcast television, which was modeled on the existing radio broadcasting systems developed in the 1920s, and uses high-powered radio-frequency transmitters to broadcast the television signal to individual TV receivers.

The broadcast television system is typically disseminated via radio transmissions on designated channels in the 54890 MHz frequency band.[1] Signals are now often transmitted with stereo and/or surround sound in many countries. Until the 2000s broadcast TV programs were generally transmitted as an analog television signal, but in recent years public broadcasting and commercial broadcasting have been progressively introducing digital television (DTV) broadcasting technology. A standard television set comprises multiple internal electronic circuits, including those for receiving and decoding broadcast signals. A visual display device which lacks a tuner (television) is properly called a video monitor, rather than a television. A television system may use different technical standards such as digital television (DTV) and high-definition television (HDTV). Television systems are also used for surveillance, industrial process control, and guiding of weapons, in places where direct observation is difficult or dangerous. Amateur television (ham TV or ATV) is also used for non-commercial experimentation, pleasure and public service events by amateur radio operators. Ham TV stations were on the air in many cities before commercial TV stations came on the air.