Searching for Control: Is Google a part of the rising electronic dominance by the West?

WE are constantly reminded that we live in an ‘information age’, that our world is decentralised and globalised. We are reminded of the power of the media as a tool for democratisation, creating a platform for the voices of many and challenging the assumed authority of the state and corporations. This is the dominant narrative of our time: from the classroom to the boardroom, ‘social’ and ‘mass media’ pervade scholarly and common discourse regarding contemporary society.

These forms of media encourage the belief that consumption and choice are the true means of global democratisation. People from different cultures, different nations and different ideologies can communicate through the Internet, sharing and experiencing new ideas. There is no locus of authority; no culture or ideology is prioritised or hegemonic.

But the alleged democracy of mass and social media is the fiction of a modern society that is infatuated with themes of participation, freedom and equality. These ideas are noble, but they tend to disengage global events from their socio-cultural and historical contexts and instead impose the West as a reference point. One example is the media’s proclivity for talking about Facebook and Twitter when discussing the recent uprisings in the Arab world – an attempt at making the events relevant and comprehensible for an indifferent public.

Treating mass media as a corporation reveals the subtle nuances of its social function. We can examine the mass media in terms of neo-colonialism and cultural imperialism. The neo- colonial aspect of mass media suggests that the media profits from the consumption practices of foreign nations, while the culturally imperialist aspect suggests that the media profits by shaping the consumption practices of these countries. We can understand these phenomena in terms of ‘electronic’ or ‘media imperialism’.

Colonialism Redefined

The subtlety of electronic imperialism stems from the assumed benignity of mass media. Consumption is understood as a purely individual choice. If we dislike a television program, we switch it off. If we dislike an advertisement, we ignore it. But media consumption is at the very centre of our culture; its role is too significant to be ignored. The status of mass media as an integral component of everyday leisure, work and social communication (for example, water cooler conversations) sustains its structural import in contemporary society. Social media only accelerated these trends, and while such media cannot wholly replace ‘real’ social relations, it becomes a talking point and a form of networking and therefore influences how we interrelate.

Satiating the desires and inclinations of the public is at the core of mass media. The corporate structure at the foundation of most television and Internet networks determines the profit-geared function of mass media’s message. The synthesis of information-as-entertainment and its need for widespread dissemination, equipped with the financial capital of these media firms, produces social capital as the media guides society around its goals. Fulfilling these goals requires the exploitation of the consumption habits of modern citizens.

But while mass media is a Western phenomenon, its reach extends across national borders into communities and cultures around the world. While local entertainment and information programs exist in the ‘global south’, a disproportionate volume of films, television programs and websites originate in the ‘global north’ – namely, the United States and Europe. The prosperity of the ‘north’ ensures a prolific entertainment and information industry.

Furthermore, while television sets and computers are mostly produced in developing nations, they are primarily distributed in the West where the very rules for their assembly also originated. Tom McPhail, who developed electronic colonialism theory, draws on Marshall McLuhan’s concept of ‘medium as message’ and theorises on the power of technology in shaping the values and beliefs of foreign cultures.

The protocols, rules and systems of modern Western technology lead to the intellectual restructuring of those societies that must abide by these ‘laws’. Electronic
imperialism echoes the orientalising of traditional colonialism. In order to procure access to ‘being’ in a sociological sense – which includes potential, satisfaction, wealth, status, hope and knowledge – the instruments of modernity (like television) must be acquired and submitted to.

The logic of electronic media is propagated through these means. Corpora
tions disseminate information through
consumerist broadcasting – advertisements, brands, public relations, irri
tating viral campaigns, obnoxious bill-
boards, sometimes even megaphones! – producing the doxa or ‘common sense’ of our age. The values of consumerism become the subsuming logic of modernity, governing how we behave and think.

Consider, for instance, Slumdog Millionaire – itself an example of an Orientalist portrayal distributed to the portrayed culture. Local Indian citizens crowd around television sets that illuminate the darkness of the slums, anticipating the protagonist Jamal’s victory on Who Wants to Be A Millionaire. Mass media is seen as connecting people regardless of geography, class or status. Everyone is equal. Everyone is involved. This narrative is entrenched in modern society: advertisements for mobile phones and other communication technologies often highlight and employ motifs of ‘connection’ and ‘togetherness’, which become metaphors for happiness and satisfaction.

Another function of mass media in this ‘new imperialism’ is its construction of the Other. The ‘democracy’ of mass media rests on consumer participation through viewership. However, the media also influences how its viewers approach and interpret reality. Mass media therefore both influences and is influenced by the (connected) public. This process is analogous to a ‘synopticon’: we are held under the gaze of authority, yet they are held equally under our own.

However, this synopticon is exclusionary to the Other, which is either an illegitimate participator or entirely absent. In other words, the Other – in this case, the developing world – does not interact with Western mass media except as an object thereof. For instance, think of charity advertisements, the shock! horror! that accompanies every story on the East/South, the trope of the ‘token ethnic’, and so on. These images are then transmitted to the West without any active engagement in the very image that is produced. This parallels the imperialist project of Orientalism, whereby the Other is defined (and is forced to define itself) in the terms produced by the imperialist centre – in this case, the ‘global north’.

The New Phase of Imperialism

Electronic colonialism has a significant impact on the ‘global south’. Persistent violence, social stratification, political destabilisation and institutionalised poverty can be partially (but importantly) attributed to the effects of electronic imperialism. A comparison of the Middle East/North Africa and Japan, seen as anti-West and pro-West respectively, exemplifies these factors.

The Arab world is primarily perceived as unstable and violent, a portrayal that is facilitated by the mass media. Major television networks perpetuate this image through their disproportionate coverage of these regions. Events that capture the interest of their viewership will invariably be shown, and these events usually mould to preconceptions of the region. Thus, Islamic violence makes it onto the news, feeding off Western paranoia and the voyeuristic fetishism of violence in Other worlds; meanwhile, protests against governments also make it onto the news, again framed and executed in terms of Western symbology.

While there is nobility in the actions of the protesters, Western electronic imperialism constrains their overall success. Western media focus on signs written in English, and on interviewees who can invoke the empathy of a public whose mentality is generally incongruous with Middle Eastern thought. This empowers some, but disempowers others. Furthermore, a reliance on Western news media can itself often lead to violence. For example, terrorism’s goals include not only the direct consequences of violence but also the indirect consequences of global exposure, as if they were performers on a stage. This vicious cycle of exposure and violence reinforces instability in these regions.
On the other hand, Japan is a nation of relative peace and prosperity. While Japan is not part of the ‘Western world’, it is often seen as ‘faux-Western’. Its politics, economics and society align with most of the Western world, and yet historically it is viewed as an ‘Eastern nation’. Despite this, Japan’s position as an almost honorary member of the West is enabled by mass media representations of Japan as hypermodern, wealthy and quirky.

These representations include kawaii aesthetics such as the big-eyed, flustered, generic anime characters, or the grotesque aesthetics of horror and ‘mature’ anime. These images keep Japan at a distance from the West, while simultaneously encouraging the commercial perpetuation of this stereotype via merchandise and repetition, in order to access the social capital which comes with ‘Western’ status. This boosts Japans own ‘colonial’ power in the Asian region, due to its position in global media.

Electronic colonialism works in a variety of ways, with a variety of different effects. The core of electronic colonialism is the propagation of Western values and ideals through the symbolism of technology, and the transmission of information through the hegemonic Western media as an extrapolation of neoliberal corporate power. Electronic colonialism, subtle as it is, robs cultural conceptions of their own identity and leads to political, social and economic destabilisation.