This weeks readings made me think of the connection between International Communication and the change of the world order on the International Arena.
If we go back in time and look at how the world was structured we had different empires/nation-states that were the main actor on the international arena. These states fostered its individuals, groups, government, corporations etc. We can specifically look at the time when many European countries started to colonize the world and the launch of the telegraph got a significant role, especially regarding power and control. One example that also was mentioned in Hanson’s reading was the importance to control these new colonized territories. That was done through mass-communication, the message was often to get these colonies to feel that they belonged to the nation-state that they had been colonized by. The telegraph also paved the way for the importance of news, which played an important role for the people stationed abroad. Since I would like to focus on the change of the world order from the early years when communication started to play an important role till today when I would state that communication is key in many sectors of the society, within nation-states and world.
As we could see nation-states used communication for power and control, and the nation-state could be seen as the main and only actor on the international arena at that time. If we look at the world today we have a number of actors on the international field, constantly competing for power, influence and economic gains. Although I would not say that the nation-state is the main actor today. Due to communication the power has shifted, when we started to give power to the corporations they quickly grew out of the nation-states boarders. Today these multi-national corporations could be viewed as one of our most powerful actors internationally. If we take a closer look we will find not only nation-states and corporations but also international institutions such as the United Nation and the World Bank, and then we have the Non-Governmental-Organizations. Another actor, which importance we should not forget is the single individual. The individual has now got power-relations with the other actors, the thoughts and demand from the individual play a crucial role today. The word Civil Society are seen more often and we, the people have now got the power to share and spread information to people within other nation-states. We are now able to put pressure not only of our own government but also other governments worldwide, demand for Corporate Social Responsibility and Human Rights for all. These are just a few things that individuals worldwide engage in every day. If it is a youtube video on the ongoing violence in Congo or a twittering post about being kept hostage at the Discovery Channel office. Whatever it is we are constantly affected by the information shared by individuals. Today information feeds us from all angles of the society and the world, from the single individual to the multi-national corporations.
Was it better before when communication were handled by one actor, can we really handle everything that gets thrown at us and make the right decision not only for ourselves but also the world as a whole?
I would end this post by saying: "Have no fixed beliefs, and find your own light." - Buddha
It is definitely important to look at the evolution of international communication and its impact on community and on power control and influence. I like your approach. It's interesting to see how these concepts have shifted and evolved throughout history amongst various international actors -- especially in respect to the types of communication technologies used and how they were used.
ReplyDeleteAround the invention of the telegraph, as you said, the main players were colonial powers. During this time these powers used communication tools to maintain control and to influence their colony populations. Presently, there are increased numbers and types of actors in the international arena. Non-governmental actors, international corporations and institutions, and individuals all have access to modern communication technologies and therefore an increased say in the world. It is not only governments who can harness these tools for their own control and influence; all of the actors in modern times have the ability to get their messages out to a wider audience.
In relation to these ideas, I find your comment that mentions how mass-communication was used to encourage colony members to “feel that they belonged to the nation-state that they had been colonized by” particularly thought provoking. As our Hanson reading stated, citizens in the colonizing countries themselves also had a similar reaction to new technologies centuries earlier with the mass circulation of messages duplicated by the printing press (Hanson, 2008, p.16). I find it interesting to look at how today society is coming together in modern virtual communities in the same way. People find comfort in connecting with others who watch the same news channel as they do (such as Fox News or CNN), those who play the same games or are members of the same groups on Facebook, and those who follow the same Twitter feeds.
I’m not sure what the answer is to your question about the ability of society to make the right decision for not just ourselves but for the world as a whole. I do think though that the ability for society to have their wants, needs, and opinions heard will bring the world towards a better place. What the dynamics will be in the future now that communication technologies have advanced so rapidly has yet to be seen.