International Communication-NWICO

The great debate of New World Information and
Communication Order (NWICO)

With the end of cold war conflict of ideologies and Third World position of collective bargaining sharply eroded, the post cold war information and communication order by and large is negation of what was pleaded in the numerous formulations of previous concept of the New World Information and Communication Order (NWICO). The flow of information news and information form developed to developing countries has intensified and world is witnessing a new scenario in which small and weaker cultures are finding if difficulty of ward off the information and cultural onslaught that has been unleashed through new channels of communications. With advances in communication technologies and advent of information revolution, the one-way flow of information has tremendously intensified.

In the wake of MacBride Commission Report (1980), strong differences arose on “balance versus free flow” of international news and information. The free flow doctrine was essentially a part of the liberal, free market discourse that championed the rights of media proprietors to sell wherever and whatever they wished. As most of the world’s media resource and media-related capital, then as now, were concentrated in the West, it was the media proprietors in the Western countries, their governments and national business communities that had most to gain.42

There were differences between notions of "press freedom" or "free flow". Western countries were not sensitive towards imbalance in the flow of information and news and the kind of distorted images it was generating.

The NWICO ideals were collective right to communicate, the rights of sovereign entities to protect their cultures, and the concept of a plurality of information sources. The essential criterion of information freedom resides in the plurality of sources and in the free access to these sources and to all kinds of opinion. The conflict between North and South over the dissemination of news is more intractable than any other contemporary debate over the unfair distribution of earth resources. The flow of news is vital because it is dominant channel that help people to form perceptions and images of world. The news intrudes into the very culture societies. The Western concepts that governed selection and dissemination of news had resulted into creation of negative images of developing countries. Images of Western audiences have become conditioned to a view of the Third World which is founded upon selective, wrong or ill-judged information and which can be characterized as "exploitive, patronizing, and distorted." Moreover, because of the vast market for news and increasing commercialization of news media, it remained difficult to provide a balanced view of the Third World. Almost all major global news organizations are controlled by a few Western nations; the third world perspectives and alternative visions are almost missing.43

Information users in the developed countries interpret, process, and act upon this information, redistributing it in turn to the client states, along with more information about their own activities, cultures, and politics. Thus, the Third World nations come to be viewed through the eyes of the information interpreters of the developed nations, whose organizations control both the finances and infrastructures of the distribution system, while the developing nations never quite receive the latest information, nor the latitude of interpreting it to their own advantage. As well, in terms of pure volume of information produced and consumed, the developing nations lag far behind.44

Struggles over communication policy have emerged as central in the post war system of international power and the communications industries as among the largest stakeholders in the public choice model. However, the problem is that these international information processes are in integral part of the dependency relations that determine the economic, political, and cultural organization of the current international order. In conjunction with the economic expansion of Western capitalism, Western techniques, symbols and social patterns were exported to the colonized territories.45

Thus, as Hamid Mowlana states, ``communication study is largely the outcome of global and national forces that have propelled the communication process to the centre of domestic and international attention and concern.''46

At the beginning of the 1980s as the information revolution began to unfold, many Third World nations realized the need to design and implement national information policies. MacBride Commission also stressed the need to develop comprehensive national communication policies linked to overall social, cultural and economic development. It was also the period when neoliberalism started to dominate US and UK policies- domestic and foreign as well. The new era set in and the predominance of neoliberalism negated the gains of Third World what ever they were. This resulted into the process, by which the existing policy and institutional framework for international communication has developed, only facilitated the corporate dominance in the creation of global civil society, and the surplus of communicative rights enjoyed by corporate speakers. The corporate mass media play a vital role in creating and channeling consumer demand to fulfill corporate marketing needs and objectives.''47

In the 1970s movement of Third World nations to establish a New World Information and communication Order (NWICO) in conjunction with a New World Economic Order, got wide support. It was widely accepted that there is need to rectify the imbalances built into the global political economy after four centuries of imperialism. The movement was squashed for a variety of reasons, not the least of which was adamant opposition from corporate media and the U.S. and British governments. Indeed, the United States and Britain both withdrew from UNESCO in the mid-1980s in large part to express their dissatisfaction with that group's alleged desire to interfere with the operations of the global commercial media corporations. The aftermath of the NWICO defeat has seen the thoroughgoing demolition of anti-imperialist sentiments in the third world. In their place is the doctrine of neoliberalism, which calls for the fullest possible integration of national economies into global market system.48

The scholarly study of the political economy of communication entails two main dimensions. First, it addresses the nature of the relationship of media and communication systems to the broader structure of society. In other words, it examines how media (and communication) systems and content reinforce, challenge, or influence existing class and social relations. Second, the political economy of communication looks specifically at how ownership, support mechanisms (e.g. advertising), and government policies influence media behavior and content. This line of inquiry emphasizes structural factors and the labor process in the production, distribution, and consumption of communication.49

"The Third World has accused the West of cultural domination through its control of the major news- collecting resources of the world, through the unstinted flow of its cultural products across the world, and through the financial power of its advertising agencies, its international newspaper chains, its newsprint companies, and its hold over the electro-magnetic spectrum on which broadcasting, navigation, meteorology and much else depend. The seeping effect of this vast machinery has transferred the social fabric of Third World countries as it has repressed its traditional cultures"50

The news imperialism

Anthony Smith (1980) argued that "news imperialism" obtained from bias in content as well as economic factors. Due to marketing practices, the methods of news collection, and the structure of news itself, audiences in both the producing and consuming states received a biased picture of world. Our mental media picture of the world is compounded of our Western interests within it and is supportive therefore of those interests. The struggle to escape from our bad image of the Third World is an essential stage in its struggle for independence."51

NWICO assumption that information plenty is concomitant to and predetermined of economic prosperity remains at least arguable. Smith's Geopolitics, focused almost exclusively upon the imbalance evidenced in the news media. The choice of focus is far from arbitrary, since Smith viewed this area as the most contentious. "The conflict between North and South over the dissemination of news is more intractable than any other contemporary debate over the unfair distribution of earth resources, for it intrudes into the very culture of Western societies."52

The neoliberal era had resolved the conflict by incorporating the “elites” of Third World into new global multinational corporate culture. The new corporate interests of information age have incorporated the ever expanding additional purchasing power segment of the developing societies-the thriving middle class-that is becoming increasingly dependent on the somewhat 'magical power' of the new and ever changing information technologies. The new information instruments that have emerged have been adopted by affluent societies and again partially shared with the affluent sections of the developing societies and thus a “partnership of interests” has been created. The information and communication technologies, the neoliberal globalization and the controlled information revolution has played vital role in creating this “community of interests” in the “corporate global village” that is governing class today in the new world order. As a logical result, it accelerated the lop-sided social development, which has the potential of generating a news kind of social unrest. The world order that emerged as aftermath of information revolution helped the process of increasing power to the indigenous elites in the third world countries that was ready to collaborate with the multinational. The elites are Western oriented and now major challenge before dominant world order to perpetuate the power of Westernized indigenous elites. Citing the case of the Philippine press, Smith contended that western liberal schemes, such as, bilateral grants, training, or skill-transfer programmes resulted in "transplanted journalism", and the formation of elites who were in effect "internal émigrés", divorced from their own cultures. The existing information order is "a product of and has itself extended the historical relationships between the 'active' and the 'passive' nations.53

The images of nations are primarily created by means of the news. That is how the North comes to know the South and the interests that control news are also in control of the images. Smith contended, the exporting nations reinforce their own cultural images in the client nations through many other "physical and cultural" exports. Films, tourism, and consumer products such as automobiles are possible examples. As well, journalists from those nations and abroad report frequently on activities in the developed nations. With the emergence of global media, the flow of news is controlled by few big news organization and they are in control of news flows in all directions. However, because of the way in which news is constructed and marketed, emphasizing the most violent or dramatic images, the media present a selective or distorted image of the less developed nations.54

Disaster-oriented journalism

In interpreting Third World events for domestic audiences, Western journalists apply their own standards of propriety. The very concept of event to qualify to be newsworthy has to be “interesting” and “eye-catching” has resulted into what is termed as ‘disaster-oriented journalism’. The process of information gathering and dissemination that is involved in practice results into selection of only or mostly negative events and thus create only negative images. And, here lies the crux of media bias: "It is what the agencies and Western journalism does inadvertently which is the trouble. We think of the price of motor cars as necessarily rising through no one's fault; we think of the price of petrol rising as a direct result of the 'greed' of a few Arabs."55

It is widely known that almost over 90 percent of global flow of news (the "hard news"-the events of the day and the first report generally became trend setter in rest of coverage of the event) is controlled by Western news agencies. These agencies control even domestic distribution of news in developing countries through exchange arrangements with domestic news agencies. The Reuters of Britain, United Press International (UPI), Reuters, Associated Press (AP) of USA, and Agence France-Presse (AFP) of France and DPA of Germany are major players in global news market that now control domestic markets in context of international news. These news agencies are the primary producers and controllers of news.56

The issues of cultural domination and the concept of national sovereignty got new meaning in the wake of collapse of Soviet model and world becoming unipolar and with the intensification of neoliberal globalization. In addition to being material "have-nots", inhabitants of the ‘periphery’ nations have become "know-nots" when it comes to possession of important decision-making knowledge, since raw data is increasingly processed into knowledge in the ‘centre’.57 With the end of Cold War, the Third World of the 1990s finds itself with only one ideological pole toward which to turn, and with the United States as the major viable source of economic assistance. It would seem that the basic NWICO assumption that information plenty is concomitant to and predetermined of economic prosperity remains at least arguable, if not dead.58

The Western/American domination over information and images has on the one hand let the western cultural domination of the world and at the same time it generated strong reaction and the burns of backlash are also being felt as domination does not allow “dissent’ and alternative visions or the gap between the dissent and alternative visions is not compatible any longer and the democratic institutions are failing to work as outlet of people anger and frustrations. The ‘rejection’ in the absence of ‘democratic outlet’ is heading in different directions. The resistance of negative dimensions of the new order is increasingly getting manifested in negative forms in the absence of any genuine ideological alternative. The most dominant form of negative rejection is religious fundamentalism that has become focal point in the wake of 9/11.The religious fundamentalism may not be creation of new order but is drawing a lot of strength from the new situation.

Threat to cultural identities

The threat to cultural identities is finding manifestations in various forms and in Islamic world dominantly in religious fundamentalist form and hardened attitudes in certain circles in the West. “That tells me that they see our culture as alluring but poisonous — the Ayatollah Khomeini used the word in Farsi that I am told — I do not speak Farsi — that translates as "West toxification," literally like they are being poisoned by the West. Apparently there is a big "Baywatch" cult in Iran, and can't you just see the Mullah saying, "We want to watch it too?" The only way to stop this temptation is to destroy the source, the West. I don't think you can have a dialogue with people like that.”59

Ideally speaking, new efforts might consist of developing better ways of exporting information from the rich nations of the North and West, to the poor ones of the South and East, and of importing knowledge of developing countries through development education activities.60 But it is not so. In the wake of emergence of new order as key product of information revolution, the intense public relations campaign of North American researchers, economists, and sociologists - supporters of free informatics, the free flow of information, private corporate enterprise, and the status quo - demonstrates the attempt to legitimize as a universally valid doctrine what is obviously an economic and ideological offensive. What makes the reordering of information flows all the more urgent today is that they have become, in just a few years, the common denominator of economic, political, cultural, and social activity at global level? The indispensable need for fundamental change is not solely due to the value assigned to information as a factor in development. The control exercised by a few elites over communications channels, and the storage, processing, and distribution of date and messages make these mechanisms one of the principal components of the dominant system.61

Due to marketing practices, the methods of news collection, and the structure of news itself, audiences in both the producing and consuming states received a biased picture of world. Our mental media picture of the world is compounded of our Western interests within it and is supportive therefore of those interests. The struggle to escape from our bad image of the Third World is an essential stage in its struggle for independence."62

On the one hand West insistence on free flow doctrine has been created massive imbalance in the flow of news and information but on the other hand governmental dominance of news and information in most to the developing countries; too often has been the handmaiden of dictatorships, oligopolies and generally repressive regimes. Very few developing countries had free press to name. This provided substance to the argument of “free flow of news and information.” Many Third World leaders have a strong bias against free enterprise as the basis for maintaining the communication process that under girds their national destiny.63 The developing countries perturbed of what commercial media have done to the flow of news and information both within the United States and, to some degree, in their own nations. In the U.S. the broadcast and print media have increasingly turned viewers and readers into a product to be delivered to the real audience -- the sponsors. As a result, the mass media’s primary objective has changed: its goal no longer is to inform or enlighten or even to entertain, but rather to reach and hold the largest possible audience, regardless of the damage done to other journalistic objectives.64

During the past three decades, it has been suggested that an imbalance in information production and distribution might underlie uneven world economic development. Fraught with ideology, the debate about a New World Information and Communications Order (NWICO), tended to focus upon media ownership and upon the contending concepts of information as commodity and information as social good, upon the freedom of information as an individual versus a collective right.65

This discussion paper summarizes the debate, and suggests that the collapse of the Soviet Union might provide an opportunity to overcome past political differences and to get down to the real business of assisting developing nations. The NWICO debate flourished, or perhaps one might more aptly say, raged, throughout much of the 1970s and 1980s in the halls of the United Nations, and particularly within UNESCO. NWICO proponents and opponents alike accepted the premise of a link between economic progress and the availability of information.66

Liberal theorists maintained that national cultures and sovereignty were not threatened by information concentration, while structuralists and socialist analysts argued that they were. In particular, the NWICO proponents, mostly drawn from the ranks of non-aligned nations, claimed that Western ownership and control of both the news media and their distribution channels constituted a form of cultural dominance whose covert goal was capitalist economic expansion.67 The NWICO movement began as a protest over the concentration of print and broadcast media ownership among de facto cartels, and developed into an argument about the cultural dominance of poor nations by wealthy ones. However, even before the Soviet collapse, some NWICO proponents were beginning to suggest that the issue of news imbalance was a red herring, and that supplying developing nations with current banking and business information was more crucial.68 The Third World has accused the West of cultural domination through its control of the major news- collecting resources of the world, through the unstinted flow of its cultural products across the world, and through the financial power of its advertising agencies, its international newspaper chains, its newsprint companies, and its hold over the electro-magnetic spectrum on which broadcasting, navigation, meteorology and much else depend.69

What this depressing experience appears to have taught the leaders of the Third World is that independence, political, economic and cultural, is the crucial prerequisite for all forms of satisfactory growth and change. Without independence in information and culture the gains of political and economic independence are rapidly eroded. But as new technologies of communication inevitably spread deeper and deeper into the new societies it becomes ever harder to maintain local cultural autonomy. The paradoxes of dependence multiply and a political backlash results, of kind, which we are witnessing, today in international debate over the flow of news.70

As a result of the colonial past, the industrialized world is not only trying to impose its particular value-system and way of life upon other civilizations, it is also dominating and channelizing the flow of information from the developing countries to the outside world which reduces their chances to present their own views in an authentic way. The sophisticated infrastructure of information in the industrialized world prevents the development of alternative infrastructures in the Third World, which was perceived to be contrary to the principle of freedom of information.71

It was in this backdrop, UNESCO appointed a commission in 1976 to study communication problems under the leadership of Sean MacBride. The commission completed its work in time for the General Conference in Belgrade, October 1980. The report titled "Many Voices, One World" (UNESCO, 1980), supported the principles of free reporting of news, but it also encouraged state regulation of the media and suggested that UNESCO give priority to “the elaboration of international norms” in its communication programme.

The Belgrade Assembly merely referred the MacBride Commission report to its member governments, without endorsing any of its conclusions. However, the assembly went on to produce its own shocks to the West. The Group of 77, a bloc of more than 100 developing countries, had come with a detailed description of a “New World Information Order.” After strenuous negotiations, the sections that were most offensive to the West were removed. These included “the right of peoples to comprehensive and true information,” “the right of each nation” to inform the world about its affairs, and “the right of each nation to protect its cultural and social identity against the false or distorted information which may cause harm.”72


Free versus balanced flow

The MacBride Report had been welcomed by the U.S. press with rage, panic and considerable bias. Joseph A. Mehan of UNESCO charges that “with amazing uniformity, U S. newspapers have accused UNESCO of encouraging censorship, state control of the press, licensing of journalists by the state, and, in general, of being the archenemy of freedom of the press.” The New York Times featured an editorial titled “UNESCO as Censor.” Time magazine issued a full-page editorial statement on “The Global First Amendment War.” Hundreds of newspapers carried stories similar to Editor and Publisher’s “Press Groups Denounce UNESCO Plan on Media.” On the other hand many Third World leaders see a chance for simple justice. 75 The New York Times featured an editorial titled “UNESCO as Censor.” Time magazine issued a full-page editorial statement on “The Global First Amendment War.” Hundreds of newspapers carried stories similar to Editor and Publisher’s “Press Groups Denounce UNESCO Plan on Media.” During the past year and a half there has flowed a small but steady stream of reports full of anger, fear and righteous indignation. For, in these actions the press sees mortal threats to its freedom -- while many Third World leaders see a chance for simple justice.73

This argument, played out in fora such as the Non-Aligned Movement and UNESCO conferences drew support from the Soviet Union, and hostility from Western administrations. It was partly due to fears of the growing "politicization" of UNESCO that the United States and Great Britain withdrew from that organization in the mid 1980s. Because many of these writers argued in particular against de facto media cartels, because of political problems within UNESCO itself, and because of the East-West rivalries of the times, the NWICO debate came to be treated as a confrontation between capitalist West and the Third World backed by Soviet communism. Opponents charged that the NWICO proposals were part of a larger communist agenda. The debate of "balanced flow of information" versus "free flow of information" was focus of the confrontation.74

And the heat was still on when the Western camp put forward its own agenda. In May 1981, some 100 representatives of print and broadcast organizations from the U.S. and 20 other nations met in the French Alps, where they adopted the “Declaration of Talloires,” calling on UNESCO to “abandon attempts to regulate news content and formulate rules for the press.” In June, Elliott Abrams, assistant secretary of state for international organization affairs, charged that UNESCO had “lent itself to a massive assault on the free flow of information” and challenged General Secretary M’Bow that if he did not remain “neutral” and avoid confrontation on the issue, he faced a battle with the U.S. “This is a war UNESCO cannot win,” Abrams declared.75

The insistence on absolute freedom or a “free flow” of information was seen by the developing nations as the freedom of the fox in the chicken coop. By a free press, in the West, you mean a press owned by a few people who have a commercial monopoly, really a monopoly of the conscience of mankind. They are “the good people” and they “know what is right.” A free press means, for you, that the owner of the press is free to prevent whom he wants from being heard. You don’t have a free press at all. You have a press imprisoned by commercial interests. A. J. Liebling also said it: “Freedom of the press is reserved for those who own one.” 76

After the fall of Berlin Wall the UNESCO stance changed and so the attitudes of dominant Western powers. In new situation neither UNESCO nor the Third World was in position to offer any resistance to the New (extension of the old) World Order. The then US State Secretary James Baker announced that the United States would continue to observe the UNESCO. The main complaint for withdrawn was "politicization" of UNESCO but in new era the organization suffered political bias but that of the West. UNESCO remained excessively politicized. It seems clear, therefore, that the "politicization" of UNESCO was merely part of a broader phenomenon.

It has become a truism that present information flows are marked by serious inadequacy and imbalance and that most countries are passive recipients of the information disseminated by translational corporations controlled by the developed world and most of them in the United States. The new communication technologies have only serve to widen the gap between those who have access to information and the means of using it and influencing others, and those who do not have these capabilities. In a situation where access to information id dependent solely on wealth and income, no change in this current flow of information seems likely in the future.77

During the past three decades, it has been suggested that an imbalance in information production and distribution might underlie uneven world economic development. Fraught with ideology, the debate about a New World Information and Communications Order (NWICO), tended to focus upon media ownership and upon the contending concepts of information as commodity and information as social good, upon the freedom of information as an individual versus a collective right.78 The collapse of the Soviet Union might provide an opportunity to overcome past political differences and to get down to the real business of assisting developing nations. The NWICO debate flourished, or perhaps one might more aptly say, raged, throughout much of the 1970s and 1980s in the halls of the United Nations, and particularly within UNESCO. NWICO proponents and opponents alike accepted the premise of a link between economic progress and the availability of information. However, liberal theorists maintained that national cultures and sovereignty were not threatened by information concentration, while structuralists and socialist analysts argued that they were. In particular, the NWICO proponents, mostly drawn from the ranks of non-aligned nations, claimed that Western ownership and control of both the news media and their distribution channels constituted a form of cultural dominance whose covert goal was capitalist economic expansion.79

Death of an idea

With the death of the concept of NWICO the power of technology and those who control it became more severe from third world perspective. In the New Order the technology became the power and new technology acquired the status of untrained power. The new information technologies are unbalancing relationships in societies- globally strengthening some societies and rendering others weaker.80

The intensification of one-way flow of news and information (images of world) tends to support a global process of cultural synchronization rather than autonomous diversity. Information techniques facilitate the emergence of an oligopolized leisure market that defines and produces cultural services. This leads to a rapid loss of self-defined mechanism through which people cope with their environment: the core of cultural development.81

Joseph Nye argues that at this stage in history, it looks like as if globalization is Americanization, because the Americans are the dominant economy and so forth. But it helps to take history back a little bit and realize that cultures are not static. They are continually changing and the idea that it is all homogenizing is simply mistaken. So I don't see a world in which India is going to be like New York. In fact, New York is actually becoming more like India, which is good for New York. But I do think that it is a great mistake to take such a narrow slice of historical time as to think that globalization is Americanization. It is not.82

Samir Amin put is differently: socialization in the modern world is founded upon the expansion of capitalist market relations, which gradually master all aspects of social life and suppress, or at least largely dominate, all other forms of solidarity (national, familial, communal). This form of socialization “by the market,” even if has enabled a stupendous acceleration in the development of productive forces, has equally aggravated their destructive characteristics. It tends to reduce human being s to the status of “people” without identity other than that of being passive “consumers” in economic life and equally passive “spectators” (no longer citizens) in political life. 83

Undoubtedly intercultural interaction has been there for a long time but this age is witnessing an intense one-way information bombardment, which is creating a unique situation with all kind of complexities. Mahatma Gandhi said, “I do not want my house to be walled in on all sides and my windows to be stuffed. I want the culture of all lands to be blown about my house as freely as possible. But I refuse to be blown off my feet by any.” The intense one-way flow is virtually seems to be acquiring “blowing dimensions”. The media messages have become so complex by sheer quantity and quality that to comprehend their meaning has become beyond intellectual skills of man in street. The other challenge comes from globalization, which means the development of worldwide networks of interdependence, or sometimes, in shorthand, it has been called the "shrinkage of distance” which is largely facilitating massive and intense one-way information flow. The degree of interpretability of texts and the finite limits to consumer autonomy are still highly significant. Resistance by audience autonomy is frequently romanticized excess, and is, at most, some form of indirect autonomy over consumption, but never production.84
The free-flow doctrine simply "legitimates and reinforces the capability of a few dominant economies to impose their cultural definitions and perspectives on the rest of the world"85

The context of news and information is at least as important as content, since it allows the media to dilute and discredit information while still appearing to present it a fair manner. This is particularly problematic in media coverage of insurgency, war, and revolution since it means the public can be swayed to the needs of ‘national interests’ and policy. The justification for the Gulf War began with 'balance of power' in the region, then moved on to protecting national interests and the access to oil, and finally settled on protecting “democracy, our friends, and stopping a new Hitler and liberation of Iraq people from a ruthless despot”. And, the American and global media played merrily along. This is particularly problematic when coverage concerns insurgencies and the like, since the nuances of the language tend to lend legitimacy to which ever side is more beneficial to the West and demonizing the other side.

International Communication-Delhi University South Campus

Reading material international communication
Global Struggle for Communication
Since the first systems of mass media and telecommunications emerged, their control and structure have been political issues. It has been well understood that the control over the means of communication is an integral aspect of political and economic power. Perhaps the most striking feature of our current age is the increase in prominence -- for economics, politics, and culture -- of technologically advanced systems of communication and information, that are often global in scope. Moreover, the global communication system is in the midst of a dramatic transformation that is reorganizing industries and revamping modes of regulation. Yet precisely at the historic moment that the social implications of communication appear at their greatest, the subject of how communication systems are controlled and organized and for what purposes is effectively being removed from the range of legitimate political debate, as communication is turned over to the market for profitable exploitation. (Robert W. McChesney. May, 1996 for summer issue of Monthly Review)


The Communication Revolution

Two trends mark the communication revolution. First, there has been a rapid corporate concentration within media industries, along with a strong drive toward globalization. Although film, books and recorded music have been global industries dominated by a handful of corporations for much of the century, media markets otherwise have been primarily national in scope. A global oligopolistic market that covers the spectrum of media is now crystallizing with very high barriers to entry. National markets remain and they are indispensable for understanding any particular national situation, but they are becoming secondary in importance. (Robert W. McChesney. May, 1996 for summer issue of Monthly Review)

Considerable fuel for the growth of global commercial media will be provided by the large increase in global advertising, much of which results from transnational firms' expanding marketing plans. Global advertising is dominated by the 200 or so largest corporations and is conducted largely by a handful of global advertising agencies based in New York, London, Paris and Tokyo.

The present and future growth of global media firms is being shaped by the widespread commercialization, deregulation, and privatization of domestic television systems. Until the 1980s most nations maintained these as nonprofit, non-advertising supported entities, which limited the capacity for a global media market to emerge. The current explosion in satellite digital television provides the basis for inexpensive global commercial broadcasting, and it will probably become a monopoly or duopoly in most parts of the world, based upon recent experience. This will not be a global market where everyone in the world will consume identical media products; it will be more sophisticated than that. But if the media products are differentiated by region, they nevertheless will be linked to global media concerns and determined by profitability. In short, the present course is one where much of the world's entertainment and journalism will be provided by a handful of enormous firms, with invariably pro-profit and pro-global market political positions on the central social issues of our times. The implications for political democracy, by any rudimentary standard, are troubling.

The second key trend is the development of digital communication and related technological breakthroughs such as wireless mobile communication that make communication much less expensive and more accessible. On one hand, digitalization encourages global communication as worldwide transmission can be nearly instantaneous and relatively inexpensive. It also encourages conglomeration and vertical integration because as all forms of communication turn to digital format, media products become more easily transferable between genres. On the other hand, digital communication can undermine the ability of communication to be controlled in a traditionally hierarchal manner, as it holds the potential of making it easy to produce and distribute high quality material. The most dramatic development along these lines has been the Internet. When one merely considers the social potential of these new technologies, and not the political economic context in which they are being developed, the prospects are breathtaking. (Robert W. McChesney. May, 1996 for summer issue of Monthly Review)


Digital communication also provides the basis for an eventual convergence of the media, telecommunication (meaning telephony primarily) and computer industries. As all communication and information, including data and voice communication, shift to digital format, there is no reason why telephone companies cannot eventually provide television programming over their wires and why cable companies cannot handle telephone traffic over theirs. At some point televisions can become personal computers and vice versa. Computer firms will provide the software necessary to make digital communication accessible and profitable.

This has two very important consequences. First, the combining the media, telecommunications and computer industries makes the resultant sector the largest and fastest growing component of the global economy. Based on market capitalization, three of the four largest firms and 13 of the largest 50 firms in the world fall in this sector. In the 1970s most of the world's telecommunication systems were nonprofit and state-owned monopolies. Today they are being privatized in perhaps the largest liquidation of public property in the history of capitalism. Most of the new for-profit telecommunication companies will be partially owned or formally affiliated with one of the three or four emerging global telecommunication networks.

The second consequence of convergence is a new air of uncertainty about the future of the media, telecommunication and computer industries. If the Internet or some digital computer network like it comes to eventually dominate, what happens to traditional media and telephone companies? Some technological determinists have taken the Internet to mean the end of corporate for-profit communication, because people will be able to bypass the corporate sector and communicate globally with each other directly. Although the Internet clearly has opened up important space for progressive and democratic communication, the notion that the Internet will permit humanity to leapfrog over capitalism and corporate communication seems dubious unless public policy forcefully restricts the present capitalist colonization of cyberspace.

With the rise of global media systems and a global media and communication market, one might logically expect that communication policymaking would enter global policymaking deliberations. In fact, the trend has been in the opposite direction. In the 1970s Third World nations used UNESCO as a forum to champion a drive for a New World Information and Communication Order (NWICO), that would attempt to address the global commercialization of communication as well as the extraordinary and growing imbalance in communication resources between the rich and poor nations. The United States, urged on by powerful media interests, attacked UNESCO for even broaching the NWICO and withdrew from the organization. Since then UNESCO has formally backed down and made clear its desire not to tamper with the global media market in any substantive manner. Most poor countries have been pressured by the IMF and global capital markets to reject state or public involvement with media and communication, and to privatize their media and telecommunication systems. This is seen as indispensable to the integration of nations into the global market political economy. The public broadcasting systems in the rich countries have been advised to alter their mandates to conform to the global market and to become commercially viable. With the increasing significance of the global communication market for capital accumulation, the main global arena for the consideration of communication issues is now the World Trade Organization. The WTO battles to protect corporate intellectual property copyright in emerging economies and it has established the complete privatization and liberalization of global telecommunication as among its foremost goals for the 1990s.

In sum, the debate over communications policy is restricted to elites and those with serious financial stakes in the outcome. It does not reflect well on the caliber of U.S. participatory democracy, but it is capitalist democracy at its best. The politicians of both parties promised the public that the Telecommunications Act would provide a spurt in big-paying jobs and intense market competition in communications, a "digital free-for-all" as one liberal Democrat put it. An even cursory reading of the business press at the same time would reveal that those who benefited from the law knew these claims to be half-truths or outright lies. These are oligopolistic industries that strongly discourage all but the most judiciously planned competition. It is more likely that deregulation will lead to merger activity, increased concentration, and continued "downsizing."

Under careful examination, the market is a highly flawed regulatory mechanism. In markets, one's income and wealth determine one's power. Viewed in this manner, the market is more a plutocratic mechanism than a democratic one. In communication this means that the emerging system is tailored to the needs of business and the affluent. Nor do markets "give the people what they want" as much as they "give the people what they want within the range of what is most profitable to produce and/or in the political interests of the producers."

Much of the ideological strength of markets as a regulatory mechanism for media comes from the metaphor of the "marketplace of ideas." The image conjured by this term is one where as long as there is no government interference, all varieties of ideas will blossom under democracy's sun with the truth growing tallest. The market is assumed to be a neutral and value-free regulatory mechanism. In fact, for the reasons mentioned above, a commercial "marketplace" of ideas has a strong bias toward rewarding ideas supportive of the status quo and marginalizing socially dissident views. Markets tend to reproduce social inequality economically, politically and ideologically. The metaphor serves to mystify the actual corporate domination of our communication system and therefore provides the commercial interests with a valuable shield from rightful public criticism and participation in the policymaking process.

Cyber Laws

U;kf;d izfØ;k esa ehfM;k dh Hkwfedk
• lqHkk"k /kwfy;k

vkt thou ds gj {ks= esa ehfM;k vge Hkwfedk vnk dj jgk gSA dkQh gn rd jktuhfrd la?k"kZ vkSj foe’kZ ehfM;k ds ek/;e ls gh gks jgk gSA ns’k ds lkekftd vkSj lkaLd`frd thou esa Hkh ehfM;k dk gLr{ksi fnuksfnu rst gksrk tk jgk gSA ehfM;k us Hkz"Vkpkj vkSj vijk/k ds vusd ekeyksa dh dybZ [kksyh ysfdu ges’kk ;g eglwl fd;k tkrk jgk gS fd bu ekeyksa esa ehfM;k ftruk c<+p<+dj fgLlk ys jgk gS mlds vuqlkj U;kf;d izfØ;k ugha
loksZPp U;k;ky; us gky gh esa vius ,d QSlys esa dgk gS fd Vsyhfotu baVjO;w dks vnkyr esa ,d lcwr ds :Ik esa is’k fd;k tk ldrk gSA vc rd vnkyr esa ogh lcwr is’k fd, tk ldrs Fks ftUgsa dksbZ U;kf;d ntkZ gkfly gksA vnkyr ds bl QSlys ls ehfM;k vkSj U;kf;d izfØ;k ds chp ,d ,slh dM+h dk l`tu gqvk gS ftlls fdlh vkijkf/kd ekeys esa lcwr tqVkus dk vk/kkj foLr`r gks x;k gSA vnkyr ds bl QSlys ls U;kf;d izfØ;k esa ehfM;k dh Hkwfedk dks dkuwuh ekU;rk fey xbZ gSA fu'p; gh vnkyr dk ;g QSlyk U;kf;d izfØ;k dk ,d vge iM+ko gS vkSj vk/kqfud lekt esa lwpuk vkSj ehfM;k Hkh c<+rh Hkwfedk dks U;k; izfØ;k ls lac) djus esa egRoiw.kZ Hkwfedk vnk djsxkA fdlh Hkz"Vkpkj ;k vijk/k ds ekeys dh ehfM;k tks rLohj is'k djrk gS mlds lkFk U;kf;d izfØ;k dk rkyesy fcBkus esa Hkh bl QSlys dh Hkwfedk gksxhA ehfM;k vkSj U;kf;d izfØ;k ds chp Hkh cM+h [kkbZ ls yksxksa ds fo'okl ij udkjkRed izHkko iM+rk gS vkSj bl QSlys ls bl [kkbZ ij ,d NksVs ls iqy dk fuekZ.k gqvk gSA

gkykafd loksZPp U;k;ky; us ;g QSlyk xqtjkr ds lwjr 'kgj esa gR;k ds ,d ekeys esa Vsyhfotu baVjO;w dks lcwr ds :i esa is'k fd, ij fn;k gS ysfdu bl QSlys dh dbZ rjg ls O;k[;k dh tk ldrh gS vkSj vkus okys le; esa bu O;k[;kvksa ls U;k; O;oLFkk vkSj U;k; izfØ;k ij O;kid izHkko iM+ ldrk gSA Hkz"Vkpkj vkSj vijk/k ds ekeyks esa Vsyhfotu baVjO;w ds vykok Hkh ehfM;k vusd lzksrksa ls vusd rjg dh tkudkfj;ka eqgS;k djkrk gSA vnkyr ds bl QSlys dk rkfdZd ifj.kke D;k ;g ugha gks ldrk fd fdlh [kkl ifjfLFkfr esa baVjO;w ds vykok Hkh vU; rjg ls dh xbZ tkudkjh dks Hkh lcwr ds :i esa Lohdkj fd;k tk ldsA ,slk rks ugha gks ldrk gS ehfM;k dh tkap&iM+rky dks vkf/kdkfjd ¼iqfyl½ dh tkap ds led{k j[kk tk lds ysfdu vkf/kdkfjd tkap tgka ,d [kkl rjg ds rF;ksa vkSj lcwrksa dks bdV~Bk djrh gS ogha ehfM;k dh tkap&iM+rky Hkh ,d vyx rjg ds rF;ksa vkSj lcwrksa dks bdV~Bk dj lekpkj dk Lo:i iznku djrh gSA igys ekeys esa tgka tkap&iM+rky dk dsUnz dkuwu gksrk gS ogha nwljh rjg Hkh tkap esa lp dh rg rd igqapuk edln gksrk gSA loksZPp U;k;ky; dk ;g QSlyk vkus okys le; esa vusd O;k[;kvksa ds dkj.k vkf/kdkfjd vkSj ehfM;k dh tkap&iM+rky ds chp ubZ dfM+;ksa dk l`tu dj ldrk gSA loksZPPk U;k;ky; ds bl QSlys dk vxj Vsyhfotu baVjO;w ds vykok ehfM;k }kjk nh tkus okyh vusd rjg dh tkudkfj;ksa rd foLrkj gks tk, rks fu'p; gh vkf/kdkfjd tkap dks egRoiw.kZ iwjd enn feysxh vkSj U;kf;d izfØ;k dks izHkko'kkyh cukus esa Hkh bldh ,d Hkwfedk dk ekxZ iz'kLr gks ldrk gSA blds vykok Hkz"Vkpkj vkSj vkijkf/kd ekeyksa ds vkjksfir vusd voljksa ij tkap dks izHkkfor djus ds fy, ehfM;k dk bLrseky djrs jgs gSaA ehfM;k baVjO;w ds ek/;e ls tkap dh fn'kk eksM+us ds Hkh iz;kl fd, tkrs jgs gSaA vkt dk ehfM;k cktkj dh gksM+ ds dkj.k vusd rjg ds nckoksa esa jgrk gS vkSj vusd voljksa ij ,slh tkudkfj;ka nsa nsrk gS ftlls tkap ij udkjkRed izHkko iM+rk gSA loksZPp U;k;ky; ds bl QSlys ds ckn vkjksfir bl :i esa ehfM;k dk bLrseky ugha dj ik,axs D;ksafd ehfM;k ls os tks Hkh dgsaxs dc mls vnkyr esa lcwr ds rkSj ij is'k fd;k tk ldrk gSA

loksZPp U;k;ky; ds bl QSlys ls ehfM;k }kjk xqipqi rjhds ls dSejksa dk bLrseky djus dh i=dkfjrk ¼fLVax vkijs'ku½ dks Hkh rkdr feysxh vksj Hkz"Vkpkj ds ekeyks esa bl rjg ds inkZQk'k ls vkjksfi;ksa dks ltk nsus dk ekxZ ljy gks ldsxkA fLVax vkijs'ku dh i=dkfjrk dks ysdj vusd uSfrd loky mB jgs gSa ysfdu bl lcds ckotwn ;g ekuk tkrk gS fd O;kid lkoZtfud fgr esa fLVax vkijs'ku dh i=dkfjrk gksuh gh pkfg, vkSj ubZ izkS|ksfxdh ds dkj.k ;g [kksth i=dkfjrk dk gh foLrkj Hkj gSA vnkyr ds bl QSlys ls bl rjg dh [kksth i=dkfjrk dks Hkh ubZ rkdr feysxhA [kksth i=dkfjrk dk fl)kar gh ;gh jgk gS fd blds ek/;e ls Hkz"Vkpkj esa fyIr cM+s lj tc rd dye u gksa rc rd ;g v/kwjh gSA rkRdkfyd :i fodkl dk;ksZa ds Bsdsa esa dqN lkalnks }kjk fj'or ekaxus ds ekeys ij bl QSlys dk lh/kk vlj iM+sxk ftls ,d Vsyhfotu pSuy us dSejs esa dSn dj fn;k FkkA esjB ds dfork uke dh ,d izk/;kfidk ds ekeys ij Hkh bl QSlys dk izHkko iM+sxk ftlesa johUnz iz/kku us ,d Vsyhfotu baVjO;w esa gR;k dk vijk/k dcwy dj fy;k FkkA vc johUnz iz/kku ds bl Vsyhfotu baVjO;w dks vnkyr esa lcwr ds :i esa is'k fd;k tk ldsxkA fu'p; gh johUnz iz/kku esa ftl edln ls Hkh ;g Vsyhfotu baVjO;w fn;k gks de ls de mldk ;g edln rks ugha jgk gksxk fd ;g baVjO;w vnkyr esa lcwr dk :i /kkj.k djsA

loksZPp U;k;ky; dk ;g QSlyk xqtjkr ds lwjr esa ,d gR;k ds ekeys ls tqM+h U;kf;d izfØ;k dk lanHkZ esa vk;kA bl ekeys esa gR;k esa vk;ksftr lkftncsx vkflQcsx fetkZ }kjk ,d Vsyhfotu baVjO;w esa viuk vijk/k dcwyk vkSj ckn esa fupyh vnkyr esa bl baVjO;w dks lcwr ekurs gq, ohfM;ksxzkQj dks vnkyr esa xokgh ds fy, cqyk;kA ohfM;ksxzkQj dks xokg ds :i esa vnkyr esa is'k gksus ds vkns'k dsk fetkZ us xqtjkr mPp U;k;ky; esa pqukSrh nh vkSj dgk fd laln ij geys ds eqdnes esa Hkh loksZPp U;k;ky; us eksgEen vQtky ds Vsyhfotu baVjO;w dks lcwr ds :i esa Lohdkj djus ls badkj dj fn;k FkkA vQtky us vius baVjO;w esa vijk/k dcwy fd;k Fkk vkSj ,l , vkj fxykuh dks funksZ"k crk;k FkkA xqtjkr U;k;ky; us Li"V fd;k fd laln ij geys ds ekeys esa loksZPp U;k;ky; us Vsyhfotu baVjO;w dks bl vk/kkj ij lcwr ds :i esa Lohdkj ugha fd;k Fkk fd ;g baVjO;w iqfyl us djok;k Fkk vkSj iqfyl dh mifLFkfr esa gh ;g baVjO;w fn;k x;k FkkA xqtjkr mPp U;k;ky; us Li"V fd;k fd bl ekeys esa loksZPp U;k;ky; us ,slk dksbZ fl)kar izfrikfnr ugha fd;k Fkk ftlds vk/kkj ij ;g dgk tk lds fd Vsyhfotu baVjO;w dks lcwr ds rkSj ij is'k ugha fd;k tk ldrkA loksZPp U;k;ky; dks feTkkZ dh ;kfpdk dks vLohdkj djrs gq, Li"V rksj ij dgk fd vkjksfir }kjk Vsyhfotu dks fn, x, baVjO;w dks fupyh vnkyr esa lquokbZ ds mi;qDr pj.k esa lcwr ds :Ik esa Lohdkj fd;k tk ldrk gSA loksZPp U;k;ky; ds bl QSlys ls dkuwu esa ,d u;k vk;ke tqM+ x;k gS vkSj vc vijkf/kd ekeyksa esa lcwr dk vk/kkj fOkLr`r gks x;k gSA vnkyr ds bl QSlys ds nwjxkeh ifj.kke gksaxsA blls u dsoy U;kf;d izfØ;k esa ehfM;k dh Hkwfedk dks ekU;rk fey xbZ gSA cfYd ;g fu'p; gh vkijkf/kd ekeyks esa U;k;k izfØ;k dks lqxfBr djus vkSj izHkkoh cukus esa Hkh egRoiw.kZ Hkwfedk vnk djsxkA vkt tc ehfM;k dh rkdr dk foLrkj gqvk gS vkSj vusd voljksa ij Vsyhfotu pSuyksa us Hkz"Vpkj dk inkZQk'k fd;k gS vkSj tSfldk yky tSls ekeyks esa U;k; izfØ;k dks cgky djus esa Hkh egRoiw.kZ vnk dh gSA Hkz"Vkpkj vkSj vkijkf/kd ekeyks esa ehfM;k dh Hkwfedk dks bl QSlys ls ,d u, rjg dh dkuwuh Lohd`fr fey xbZ gS vkSj bl rjg dh i=dkfjrk dks bl rjg dk dkuwuh ntkZ feyus ls vc bls Lo;a Hkh dkuwuh nkao&isp dk lkeuk djuk iM+sxkA Vsyhfotu baVjO;w dks tc vnkyr esa lcwr ds :i esa is'k fd;k tk,xk rks fu'p; gh bl n`f"V ls Hkh bls ij[kk tk,xk fd ;g fdlh ncko ;k ,slh fdlh ifjfLFkfr esa rks ugha fn;k x;k gS ftlls baVjO;w esa tks Hkh dgk x;k gS og dkuwu dh dlkSVh ij [kjk u mrjsA blls bl rjg dh i=dkfjrk dks tgka rkdr nsxk ogha bls Hkh dgha u dgha fdlh u fdlh :i ls U;kf;d izfØ;k ds izkIr vf/kd tokcnsg gksuk iM+sxkA

blh chp ,d vU; ekeys esa fnYyh mPp U;k;ky; us ,d daiuh dks ,d xqeuke bZesy ds vk/kkj ij eqdnek nk;j djus dh vuqefr nh vkSj ckn esa baVjusV esa bLrseky gksus ckdh lapkj izkS|ksfxdh ds ek/;e ls ;g Hkh irk py x;k fd fdl dEI;wVj ls fdl O;fDr us ;g bZesy Hkstk FkkA lkr o"kZ igys cuk, x, lwpuk izkS|ksfxdh dkuwu esa bZesy dh ,d dkuwuh nLrkost dk ntkZ fn;k x;k gSA vnkyrksa ds bu QSlyksa ls Li"V gksrk gS fd ehfM;k vkSj ubZ izkS|ksfxdh ls vk jgs cnyko dkuwuh izfØ;k dks izHkkfor gh ugha dj jgs gSa cfYd dkuwuh izfØ;k Hkh bUgsa u, rjg ls ekU;rk ns jgh gSA blls fu'p; gh U;kf;d izfØ;k dks vljnkj cukus esa enn feysxh vkSj bls lwpuk vkSj izkS|ksfxdh ds bl ;qx ds vuq:i
loksZPp U;k;ky; dk QSlyk ,d egRoiw.kZ 'kq:vkr Hkj gS ysfdu blls ,d ,slh izfØ;k 'kq: gqbZ gS tks vkusokys le; esa ehfM;k vkSj ubZ izkS|ksfxdh vkSj U;k; izfØ;k ds chp vusd ubZ dfM+;ksa dk l`tu djus dh laHkkoukvksa ls Hkjh gSA

Pakistan: Failing State

;q) ds foLrkj ds lhfer gksrs fodYi

lqHkk"k /kwfy;k

vesfjdk iz”kklu es vc ;g /kkj.k izcy gksrh tk jgh gS fd tc rd if”peh ikfdLrku esa rkfycku vkSj vydk;nk ds xqd jgk gSA vesfjdh iz”kklu es if”peh ikfdLrku esa lSfud dkjZokg;ksa ij xaHkhjrk ls fopkj fd;k tk jgk gS vkSj lekpkj gSa fd vesfjdk ds fo”ks"k lSfud nLrs xqIr #Ik ls igys ls Hkh ikfdLrku esa rSukr fd, tk pqds gSaA dkQh le; ls eq”kjZQ dh ljdkj ij vesfjdk dk ncko csy jgs FksA

vesfjdk iz”kklu es tc eq”kjZQ vkSj csuthj Hkqêks dk jktuhfrd xBtksM dk jkLrk rS;kj fd;k rks ;g mEehn dh xbZ Fkh fd blls lSfud lRrk dks yksdrkaf=d psgjk iznku dj ikfdLrku esa ,d ,slh jktuhfrd lRrk iSnk dh tk ldsxh tks bLykeh mxzokn vkSj vkradokn ds f[kykQ izHkko”kkyh
csuthj Hkqêks dh gR;k ds mijkar ikfdLrku esa jk"Vªh; ,drk dh jktuhfr ds ctk, Vdjko dh jktuhfr mHkjh gS vksj csuthj ds OkkLrfod mRrjkf?kdkjh tjnkjh vkSj uokt ”kjhQ us eq”kjZQ ds f[kykQ vfHk;ku NsM fn;k gS vkSj eq”kjZQ ij csuthj dh gR;k dk lh/kk vkjksi yxkdj Vdjko dh ,d ,slh jktuhfr dk jkLrk viuk;k gS ftlesa eq”kjZQ dh LkSfud lRrk vkSj LakHkkfor fuokZfpr lRrk ds chp rkyesay dk {sk= cgqr lhfer gks x;k gSA

bl I`k"BHkwfe esa ikfdLrku esa jktuhfrd LFkkf;Ro ds vklkj vkSj Hkh de gks x, gSaA Qjojh es gksus okys pquko dks ysdj tks jktuhfr mHkj jgh gS mlls Hkh Li"V ladsr ;gh gSa fd pquko ds ckn Hkh ikfdLrku esa LFkkf;Ro ugha vkus tk jgk gS cfYd blds foijhr Vdjko dh jktuhfr ds xgjs gksus ds gh izcy vklkj gSaA
ikfdLrku ds bl mHkjrs jktuhfr ifjn`”; es vusd [krjs fufgr gSa AikfdLrku vQxkfuLrku HkwHkkx esa bLykeh mxzokn dk izHkko vkSj rkdr c
vesfjdk ij 9@11 ds vkradoknh geyks ds mijkar fpUrk dk lcls cMk fo"k; ;gh jgk gS fd dgha vkradokfn;ksa ds gkFk esa egkfouk”k ds gfFk;kj u vk tk,aA ikfdLrku ds ekStwnk gkykr dks ns[krs gq, ;g eqn~nk ,d ckj fQj xjek jgk gS A eq”kjZQ ljdkj dks fiNys ikap o"kksZ esa vesfjdk dh Hkkjh enn ds dkj.k ,d rks vQxku ;q) jgk gS vkSj nwljk ikfdLrku esa bLykeh mxzokn ij vadq”k yxkuk jgk gSA eq”kjZQ ”kq# ls gh ;g nyhy nsrs jgs gSa fd ekStwnk nkSj esa lSfud lRrk ds fodYi dsoy bLykeh rkdrs gha gSA vkt ftl rjg ikfdLrku dh jktuhfr dk lRrkdsUnz detksj iM x;k gS ml ns[krs gq, ikfdLrku ds ukfHkdh; gfFk;kj ds lqjf{kr gkFkksa esa cus jgus dks yssdj Hkh u, loky mB jgs gSaA vesfjdk esa gh dqN gydksa esa ;g Hkh ekax mBh gS fd ikfdLrku es ukfHkdh; gfFk;kjksa dh fuxjkuh ds fy, vesfjdk vkSj fczVsu dk ,d la;qDr ra= fodflr fd;k tk,A vesfjdk ds jk"Vªifr ds pquko dk gj mEehnokj ikfdLrku ds f[kykQ lSfud dkjZokbZ dh odkyr dj jgk gSA ;g Hkh [kcj gS fd vesfjdk us igys gh vQxkfuLrku es ,sls fo”ks"k nLrs rSukr dj j[ks gSa tks fdlh [kkl fLFkfr es lSfud dkjZokbZ ds tfj, ikfdLrku ds ukfHkdh; gfFk;kjkas dks vius fu;a=.k es ys ysaxsAikfdLrku ds lSfud izfr"Bku us ikfdLrkuh tehu ij vesfjdk dh lSfud dkjZokbZ vkSj ukfHkdh; gfFk;kjksa ds lqjf{kr gkFkksa esa gksus ds elyksa ij dMk #[k viuk;k gS vkSj dgk gS fd ikfdLrku vius cwrs ij ;g lc djus es leFkZ gSA ikfdLRkku ds lRrk izfr"Bku ess ges”kk ls gh lsuk dh dsUnzh; Hkwfedk jgh gS vkSj ikfdLrku dh tehu ij lSfud dkjZokbZ vkSj ukfHkdh; gfFk;kjks dh lqj{kk dks ysdj ;g Hkh laHkkouk iSnk gksrh gS fd dgha vesfjdk vkSj ikfdLrku ds chp ds xBtksM es njkjsa iSnk u gks tk,aA

vanj[kkus eq”kjZQ [kses es vesfjdk ds vf/kdkf/kd gLr{ksi dks ysdj f[kUurk dk Hkko gSA ikfdLrku ds lSfud dkekaMjksa dh rSukrh ls ysdj ikfdLrku ds pquko rd ds reke eqn~nks ij vesfjdk ikfdLrku ds ekeyks es n[ky nsrk jgk gSA vkt ;g loky mBuk Hkh LokHkkfod gS fd D;k ikfdLrku ekStwnk ifjfLFkfr;ksa es ml pquko ds fy, rS;kj Fkk tks vesfjdk ds ncko ls djok;k tk jgk gS\ loky ;g Hkh mB jgs gSa fd ekStwnk ifjfLFkfr;ksa esa pquko ls ftl rjg ds lRrk lehdj.k mHkjsxs D;k os ikfdLrku esa yksdra= dk ekxZ iz”kLr djus esa lgk;d gksaxs\ ikfdLrku dk detksj yksdra= tc Hkh ns”k dks laHkkyus es foQy jgk lsuk us lRrk dh ckxMksj laHkkyhA

eq”kjZQ us viuh vkRedFkk esa fy[kk gS fd 9@11 vkradoknh geyksa ds mijkar vesfjdk dks lgk;d fons”k ea=h fjpMZ vkfeZVsx us mUgsa psrkouh nh Fkh fd ßos viuh lsuk vkSj lqj{kk ,tsafl;ksa dh bPNk njfdukj djsa vkSj lSfud #Ik ls vesfjdk dk lkFk nsa vkSj vxys ikap o"kksZ esa 10 vjc Mkyj dh enn ys ;k fQj vesfjdk ikfdLrku ij ,slh ceckjh djsxk fd mls ik"k.k ;qx esa /kdsy nsxkßA

vc vQxkfuLRkku dks ysdj vesfjdk vkSj ikfdLrku ds chp ftl rjg ds fjLrs mHkj jgs gSaA mlesa vus[k [krjs fufgr gSaAvkt if”peh ns”kksa esa ;g /kkj.kk izcy gks jgh gS fd ikfdLrku nqfu;k esa lcls [krjukd ns”k gS vkSj foQy jk"Vª Hkh fn”kk esa c< jgk gSA ikfdLrku ykSVus ls igys ch- ch- lh- dks ,d baVjO;w esa csuthj Hkqêksa us ;g rd dgk Fkk fd ß ikfdLrku bl oDr nqfu;k ds lcls [krjukd ns”kksa esa ls ,d gSAß vQxku ;q) dk Hkfo"; ikfdLrku ls fdl gn rd tqMk gS bldk bl ckr ls vankt yxk;k tk ldrk gS fd bl oDr vQxkfuLrku esa vesfjdk vkSj ukVks dh lsukvksa dh reke rjg dh t#jrks dh 75 izfr”kr vkiwfrZ ikfdLrku ds jkLrs gksrh gSA

bl I`k"BHkwfe esa ikfdLrku dh ekStwnk fLFkfr cgqr uktqd gS vkSj vfLrRo esa vkus ls ysdj vc rd ds bfrgkl es ikfdLrku lcls cMs ladV ds nkSj ls xqtj jgk gSA ikfdLrku dk foQy gksuk vkSj ,d cMs lSfud Vdjko dk v[kkMk cuuk iwjs nf{k.k ,f”k;k ds fy, gh ugha iwjh fo”o jktuhfr dk ,d [krjukd eksM gksxkA vkt vk”kk dh reke fdj.ksa fouk”k ds va/kdkj es foyqIr gksrh utj vkrh gSaA ekStwnk ifjfLFkfr dk gj fodYi blh fn”kk dh vkSj vxzlj gksrk izrhr gksrk gSA

Some Concepts

Five Key Concepts
1. All media messages are "constructed."
2. Each medium has different characteristics, strengths, and a unique "language" of construction.
3. Different people interpret the same media message in different ways.
4. Media messages are produced for particular purposes, including profit, persuasion, education, and artistic expression.
5. Media have embedded values and points of view.

Six Questions to Ask about Any Media Message

1. Who made - and who sponsored - this message, and for what purpose?
2. Who is the target audience, and how is the message specifically tailored to them?
3. What are the different techniques used to inform, persuade, entertain, and attract attention?
4. What messages are communicated (and/or implied) about certain people, places, events, behaviours, lifestyles, etc.?
5. How current, accurate, and credible is the information in this message?
6. What is left out of this message that might be important to know?

New Age ,New Contradictions

New Age and New Contradictions
Subhash Dhuliya

The information revolution has taken place at such a fast pace that it has become difficult to fully and comprehensively interpret its implications. The technological advance camouflaged in the total package of globalization has acquired such an imposing and rampaging form that the developing countries have been left with little space and time to tailor it to meet their specific national development and information needs.

A critical examination of the information revolution shows that it has not brought about any fundamental changes in the international political, economic and social structure. At the most the information society can be seen as a logical consequence of previous historical phases. What is being termed as information revolution, may in its content seem to be equally non-revolutionary as its predecessor, the industrial revolution. what did not change were the power relationships between winners and losers, between rulers and ruled. these only acquired new names. Different techniques came into play but access to their management was not radically altered. changes were expected and have taken place. The sources of power did shift with the transformation of first, an agrarian society into an industrial one, which then gave way to the information society. The source of power changed form land ownership to capital ownership and from capital ownership to information ownership; but what fundamental difference does this make when, after every shift, there is a new elite (usually evolving from the old one)? In the information society, the basic resource is information and information technology is the life-blood of many other technologies, and in fact often the carrying mechanism through which other technological developments become operational. The question that needs to be examined is what impact communication technologies will have on global economy, the distribution of political power, the growing gap between the rich and the poor and the relationship between multinational companies and national sovereign governments.

The information revolution has incorporated the ever expanding additional purchasing power segment of the developing societies-the thriving middle class-that is becoming increasingly dependent on the somewhat 'magical power' of the new and ever changing information technologies. But, the broad direction of development remains unaltered in terms of political, economic and social class relationships. The new information instruments that have emerged have been adopted by affluent societies and again affluent sections of the developing societies. The information revolution has accelerated the lop-sided social development, which has the potential of generating a news kind of social unrest.

The very size of the multinationals, combined with their fierce drive for markets and technology, unleashes intense competitive forces on a global scale that make for continual upheaval and instability. The multinationals are the basic instruments used by capitalism to break down national economies and to build a global capitalist system. In the process national economies and social classes are being destabilized and tom apart by the global competitive forces at work.

The dominant economic premise of the information revolution is massive expansion of the services sector, increases in the productivity of labour and capital to facilitate the expansion of additional purchasing power segment of the developing society and creating and expanding the markets. As reflected in its present direction of development, it does not hold much promise for the missions who are outside the market system. Thus, the information age contains an inherent tendency to generate political and social upheavals. This tendency could only get stronger if the present trend continues to dominate human life. This trend is amply reflected in the process of globalization, which began in the 1980s with the explicit objective of establishing a neo-liberal market system that facilitated the emergence of a powerful global media dominated by the West.


Commercialisation of Entertainment

Simultaneously, there was drastic restructuring of national media industries and emergence of a commercial media market with t dominant consumerist till. The global media played a central role in the corporate takeover of the national economies of the developing countries. The global media dominated by commercial considerations has all along been seeking to expand its market through more and more entertainment, at the expense of the public sphere. National media and communications systems have traditionally enabled people to have better communication among themselves, but the commercial exploitation of the mass media and technology have certainly had adverse consequences. Many people feel powerless and victimized as they compare their own condition with the "good life" portrayed through the media. It even kept on developing in the direction of detailing the very concept of entertainment at the cost of depth and seriousness. Healthy entertainment was swiftly converted into a vulgar one.

Although there has been a rapid increase in television channels over the years but the way market strategists project it there has been apparently an insatiable demand for more entertainment programming than for diversified and alternative channels. It was legitimately expected from a revolution of this kind that it would provide socially relevant information and entertainment to people at large. But what we are witnessing today is the same old status quoist stuff being disseminated with an intensity which mankind has not known before. In this kind of market situation, people are led to believe that they have plenty of choice. Everything is available in the media market at the push of a button. Because of free play of the market forces, there is a flood of products. The media market has become more like a consumer goods market. The supremacy of the consumer in the modern media market is somewhat of a myth. In fact packaging and forms of media programming have been massively expanding while the content has been shrinking substantially. In the final analysis, it is not so much the consumers as the producers who decide what the market is 'requires'. Technical options have increased the manipulative capabilities of producers.

The second great technological development, which will supposedly transform our lives, is the communication satellite. The boom in communication satellites has facilitated the media consumer to access large number of television channels. Most of these channels are beaming western media programmes, which are obviously heavily loaded with western values and ideology. As a consequence even the indigenous channels, governed by commercial considerations, joined the bandwagon and started to package their media programming on the lines of their western counterparts. But what has changed-there is more sport, more films and more pop music. There has been a slight increase in news and this whole process of the readers, listeners and viewers transformating into consumers reflects the underlying power game. And, the worst part is that all of them are ruled by an elite, which is eager to become a part of the emerging transnational power system. The dominant trends of the day reflects that the ruling elite in these countries value their own or their countries; adoption by corporate business more that their independence -- a position difficult to sustain for much longer a period.

Market research in free market situations has often reinforced the existing choices and preferences and in the process discouraged new concepts which is true for the consumer goods market and more so for the media market. In recent years, even in our country, this kind of bandwagon effect can be noticed in media programming. There were certain kinds of media programmes, which attracted a sizable chunk of the audience and were followed by same kind of programming in various other television channels. Market research tends to perpetuate the status quo and is adverse to change, as it does not offer alternatives.



Role of Global Media

The global media is playing an important role in creating an informational ideological environment that helps sustain the political, economic, and moral basis for marketing goods and for having a profit-driven social order. The drastic changes that took place during the last two decades have strengthened the trend. These events include the collapse of the Soviet model of controlled and command economy, which was interpreted as the triumph of the neo-liberal path of development. The New World Order turning unipolar further strengthened and accelerated the process of globalization and information revolution played a vital role in it.

Technology Dominates Information

The information revolution created massive networks of information which in their basic nature and character are highly centralized and excessively being used to control and manage the post-cold war world order. Again, because of the centralized nature of the information revolution, it came to be dominated by the new technologies and the role of information component declined which is relatively more social by its very nature.

Since information constitutes an important base for offering political and economic power, the powerful in society, who do not want to see their power eroded, will do everything they can to control and manage the flow of information. The new information technologies have drastically enhanced this power of developed countries and the ruling elite in the developing countries. But at the same time the ruling elite is not prepared to lose its national identity. As a result its incorporation in the multinational power structure is still in the formative stage and the futuristic scenario is quite uncertain.

For the ruling elite of the developing countries it is imperative to maintain its national identity to retain its governing power and in this context even the controlling power of information may prove inadequate after being used repeatedly. Certain amount of resistance has been noticed in establishing various international regimes particularly in the economic sphere. This was amply manifested at the recent meeting of the World Trade Organization despite the fact that the developed world in the post-cold war order has acquired much greater and decisive say in various matters of international concern.

The kind of reality the developing countries are facing is one of growing dilemmas, which include greater demands for economic and political representation and redistribution. External pressures for free market access has put the developing countries' ruling elite in an uncertain and precarious position. The direction of development of the process of globalization can drift towards another kind of international economic crisis such as that faced by the Asian Tigers and thus may become a destabilizing factor for the post-cold war international order. With the rose of information age the need for mass labour is sharply declining. In the era of automation, computers and simple robotic machines enable corporations and businesses to expel millions of labourers from the manufacturing, processing and services industries. Even government bureaucracies are bound to be downsized as data processing machines take over much of their work. With the decline of labour intensive industries and agricultural system, employment opportunities are shrinking for those who left the land for the cities. On the one hand is a vast ever expanding pool of people who are impoverished and marginalized and on the other hand on increased dissemination of information power is also creating new social segments within the growing middle class whose constituents are feeling ignored when facing reality in relation to the dream world presented to them thorough various kinds of media and information images.

At this juncture, it is difficult to understand how ordinary people's reception of events is affected or to predict what effects the new media will have on the audiences who directly comprise the new social segments of the expanding middle class and through multi-step communication process, reach the marginalised in an extremely mediated manner. It would be irrational to assume that people who spend hours a day before e a television or internet set or that the corporations that control most aspects of our mediated lives and spend billions of dollars on programmes, advertising, voice and data transfer to assure consumer piety are not engaged in some form of communication. It would be equally irrational to argue that these focussed one way flows of corporate information and images are constituent elements of dialogue. Are there any more effective instruments in the existing communication order the developing countries?

Implosive Explosion

Global disorder and instability are clearly major concerns of the business and governing classes. The post-cold war world order has played a central role in the creation of this increasingly unstable and disorderly world. The emergence of the so-called global economy clearly amounts to hegemony of the West. The information revolution is leading the concentration of wealth that is in turn leading to misery and marginalization for the ever-increasing numbers of the world's population.

The drastic changes in the recent past in the information sector are an integral part of the changes taking place in the political and economic spheres. In this background the information revolution by its very nature is not an explosion but rather an implosion which has occurred within the parameters of the multinational power structure which came into existence during the cold war period and has greatly influence the emerging new order. The implosive nature of the information revolution resulted in widening of the gap between the information-rich and information-poor at various levels-internationally and nationally. The way this transition has been projected also means that mankind has entered an entirely new era. It obviously means a break from the previous society. But then its basic content has proved to be an extension of the industrial society. In fact, it has strengthened the industrial society by substantially increasing the productivity of not only labour but also that of capital.

Emergence of "New Markets"

This massive enhancement in productivity has facilitated additional generation of resources which were the key factors in the expansion of the middle classes-the additional purchasing power segment of the society. This means emergence of expanded markets for industrial goods as well as information products. The information revolution has not changed the basic structure of production and distribution of various types of products and continues to cherish the values of the industrial age.

Despite advances in communication technologies and massive outpouring of information in various forms it failed to facilitate a wider distribution of information. Distribution is paradoxically restricted to those who already have more than their fair share of information. Now even questions are being raised as to what extent even the information-rich are informed or are they more misinformed? Are they intellectually skilled enough, to decipher the hidden meanings that are being communicated through intense bombardments of various types of information? Information is becoming highly specialized and complex. It implies that despite the huge volume of information available to people more people know less. The resource information is far more difficult to exploit than land and capital. It requires highly developed intellectual and managerial skills that are unevenly distributed in the society.

The information revolution has undoubtedly set in but the question arises how and in which direction is it going to bring about change? The information revolution equates technical progress with the qualitative improvement of human life. This leap from quantitative growth to qualitative growth is used to sanction unrestrained technical development for the purpose of material expansion. Information becomes a source of power only if the necessary infrastructure for its production, processing, storing, retrieval and transportation is accessible. Assuming that people are informed about the exploitative nature of the governance, yet they did not act, and their information did not become a source of power, because they lacked material and strategic means to transform their dissent into a political and social stream powerful enough to change the course of the developments. The latest information revolution has the potential to change the direction of its development and despite its highly controlled nature it may well become 'uncontrollable' in a given specific objective situation.

The faster development of information technology has made centralized control over decentralized activities simpler than ever before, thus allowing more latitude for deviant political behaviour. Moreover, the link between information technology and democratization is guided by unwarranted expectations able it what machines per se can do. This is based on the assumption that more machines make lives of the people qualitatively different. The information techniques employed in today's societies are instruments to perpetuate the existing mode of production. They offer the support necessary to cost-effective division of labour, a fragmentation of the production process, integrated control of all facets of production and optimum use of the management structure of centralized decentralization of the large industrial corporations.

New Business Culture

In the cultural sphere, again, the direction of development of the information revolution suggests that it tends to support a global process of synchronization rather than autonomous diversity. As the messages do not originate in a vacuum but from a well-defined political, economic and cultural position, the process of communication and its content acquire normative dimensions. The value-loaded messages tell how the world "is" and how it "ought" to be "civilized". Today the information revolution is selling dreams as if the new information technologies offer a magic wand, which can solve all the problems, that mankind is facing. The information revolution has also set in a process of synchronization at political, economic, social and cultural levels.

Information techniques facilitate the emergence of a cheap entertainment market that defines and produces cultural products and services. This leads to a rapid lost of traditional self-defined mechanism through which people have been enriching themselves and has always been central to cultural development.

In the wake of the information revolution and new dimensions the process of globalization has acquired in the post-cold war world order, a new business culture has emerged which is the latest version of colonialism and the latest fad to reach the middle class of the developing countries. The new business culture has been devised and formulated in the West and exported without any regard to its appropriateness to the developing countries in which it is being taken up with great zeal. The imagination of the youth of the developing countries is particularly caught by the new business culture. They have been seized by fresh hope to get passage to open magic doors and entry into multinational sector, which is perceived to be a world of wealth, security and work for life-the dream the business culture has been able to market. Certain sections of the ever expanding middle classes in the developing countries are certainly being incorporated into the new business culture but the major chunk are denied entry and this is bound to become another source of unrest in another social sector.

The Image and Reality

At times, the information revolution creates images as if its creators and managers are ignorant of the consequences of their own actions and are not in a position to objectively assess the force of the undercurrents and are just allowing themselves to be swayed by the currents. At times, technological developments seem to be overtaking the ruling elite’s capacity to foresee the political, economic and socio-cultural implications of the application of new technologies. It is extremely important to properly assess these implications before accepting any technology in any specific environment. Their use is never neutral. It is influenced by many political or financial considerations. It is therefore important to know who takes decisions and how as far as application of new technologies are concerned. In the post-cold war world, most of the developing countries suffered substantial erosion of their power to take independent decision, which also facilitated lop-sided application of new technologies.

In recent years technologies in the information sector have been rampaging the market and political leadership was found groping in the dark. In the aftermath of the information revolution the decision making process has become more centralized and common people exercise little influence over decision making contrary to claims that it will facilitate greater participation of people in governance. Even if the general public exercises any influence, it is difficult to assess the efficacy of such intervention. The pattern in information saturated societies is less and less participation of people in most of the democratic exercises.

If anything, the communication revolution is turning out to be an exercise in consolidating the military, economic and political powers of the elite. In particular it is of the greatest importance to a hundred or so transnational corporations. Rapid collection and transmission data made the global expansion of the transnational corporations. Rapid collection and transmission data made the global expansion of the transnational conglomerates possible in the first place. In that sense it has changed the global economy, global politics and the global military strategy.

Some of the third world countries have their own communication systems, which were perceived as an obstacle to the expansion of the transnational corporations. But the odds are in favour of transnational as they have almost a monopoly on what is in the sky. Another reason for the strength of the transnational corporations is the weakness of many nation-states. They are either too small or economically weak, or they find it difficult to harness regional economic power.

With the end of cold war and collapse of controlled model of economies, the developed capitalist countries and international financial institutions were able to force the developing countries to open up their weak economies to the global economic system dominated by the multinationals. The multinationals are taking advantage by using more flexible and less visible forms of accumulation to exploit human and material resources of the developing countries. To obtain these resources and commodities, the spheres of commerce and finance are increasingly used by transnational capital.

The global triumph of neo-liberalism in 1989 was synchronous with rapid acceleration of the globalization process in all spheres and coincided with new quests for markets. The developing countries that are in “take off” stage and the so-called “neo-industrialized countries” have become extremely important for the transnational capital and are putting in all efforts to create a market for its goods and commodities.

In this context, an efficient network of communication came into existence to transform the emerging middle class groups and organizations into the market, In the process the diverse societies have been exposed to the ideology of neo-liberalism.

Corporate Takeover

There is no doubt that the information revolution has increased the power of the multinational power structure and its ability to control public consciousness. But at the same time a parallel stream is developing which is closer to reality, which is developing mistrust towards media. The technological revolution in computers and mass communication has also enabled many small groups to project an alternative pint of view, which in a way is challenging the dominant ideology of contemporary world. Media can maintain its credibility as a guardian of public consciousness only to he extent it is a channel of manifestation of public dissent. In recent times this important sector of media has shown a decline and a large number of information outpouring tend to ignore basic problems of people and imposed an artificial agenda which has put the credibility of the media in question.

The information revolution thus hardly constitutes a concrete reality for most developing countries because they cannot take full advantage of the range of possibilities offered by it owing to lack of resources. They have to rely on the developed countries both for the technology and the resources needed to purchase it which are not going to be made easily available as the key driving force of the process of globalization is market driven-a system in which profit reigns supreme.

What is on the Horizon

Knowledge, more than ever before, is power. The one country that can best lead the information revolution will be more powerful than any other will. For the foreseeable future, that country is the United States. America has parent strength in military power and economic production. Yet its more subtle comparative advantage is its ability to collect, process, act upon, and disseminate information, an edge that will almost certainly grow over the next decade. This advantage stems from Cold War investments and America’s open society, thanks to which it dominates important communications and information processing technologies-space-based surveillance; direct broadcasting, high-speed computers-and has an unparalleled ability to integrate complex information systems.
Joseph S. Nye, Jr. and William A Omens. “America’s Information Edge” published in the Foreign Affairs, March/April 1996.

Soft power, is the ability to get desired outcomes because others want what you want. It is the ability to achieve goals through attraction rather than coercion. It works by convincing others to follow or getting them to agree to norms and institutions that produce the desired behavior. Soft power can rest on the appeal of one’s ideas or culture or the ability to set the agenda through standards and institutions that shape the preferences of others. It depends largely on the persuasiveness of the free information that an actor seeks to transmit. If a state can make its power legitimate in the eyes of other and establish international institutions that encourage others to define their interests in compatible ways, it may not need to expend as many costly traditional economic or military resources.

The quantity of information available in cyberspace means little by itself. The quality of information and distinctions between types of information are probably more important. Information does not just exist; it is created. When one considers the incentives to create information, three different types of information that are sources of power become apparent.

Prophets of a new cyberworld, like modernists before them, often overlook how much the New World overlaps and rests on the traditional world in which power depends on geographically based institutions. In 1998, 100 million people used the Internet. Even if this number reaches billions in 2005, as some experts predict, a large portion of the world’s people will not participate. Moreover, globalization is far from universal. Three quarters of the world’s population does not own a telephone, much less a modern and computer.

__Robert O. Keobane and Joseph S. Nye Jr. “Power and Interdependence in the Information Age” published in the Foreign Affairs.
September/October 1998

People in Washington play lots of games, but none for higher stakes than The Day After. They played a version of it in the depths of the Cold War, hoping the exercise would shake loose some bright ideas for a US response to nuclear attack. They’re playing it again today, but the scenario has changed – now they’re preparing for information war.

The game takes 50 people, in five teams of ten. To ensure a fair and fruitful contest, each team includes a cross-section of official Washington _ CIA spooks, FBI agents, foreign policy experts, Pentagon boffins, geopoliticos from the National Security Council – not the soldiers against the cops against the spies against the geeks against the wonks.

The Day After starts in a Defense Department briefing room. The teams are presented with a series of hypothetical incidents, said to have occurred during the proceding 24 hours. Georgia’s telecom system has gone down. The signals on Amtrak’s New York to Washington line have failed, precipitating a head-on collision. Air traffic control at LAX has collapsed. A bomb has exploded at an army base in Texas. And so forth.

The teams’ fan out to separate rooms with one hour to prepare briefing papers for the president “Not to worry these are isolated incidents, an unfortunate set of coincidences” is one possible conclusion. Another might be have the US under full scale attack.” Or may be just “Round up the usual militia suspects.”

The game resumes a couple of days later. Thing have gone from bad to worse. The powers down in four northeastern states, Denver’s water supply has dried up the US ambassador to Ethiopia has been kidnapped, and terrorists have hijacked American Airlines 747 en routs from Rome. Meanwhile, in Tehran, the mullahs are stepping up their rhetoric against the “Great Satan”. Iranian tanks are on the move towards Saudi Arabia. CNN’s Christiane Amanpour, in a flak jacket, is reporting live outside the US embassy in Addis Ababa. ABC’s Peter Jennings is quizzing George Stephanopoulos on the president’s state of mind.

When suddenly, the satellites over North America all go blind…

__John Carlin. “A Farewell to Arms” published in the Wired, May 1997.


The most distinctive feature of the latest “new world order: is not to be found in the withering away of war but in a widening gap between the conditions of international life in the advanced democratic states versus those in the Third World. Perhaps; the portion of the world within which war is obsolete can be-slowly-enlarged. But outside of that portion, advanced weaponry, nationalist rivalries, and disputed borders suggest an increased danger of pre-emptive and preventive wars among Third World states. Indeed, the very ideas and technologies that proved stabilizing and reassuring to the great powers during the cold war may prove destabilizing and unsetting in the post-cold war Third World.

The debate about the latest “New World order” – the third in this century alone-turns primarily on claims about the obsolescence of war and war-like behavior following the end of the cold war. Some claims in particular dominant recent discussions of the role the United States should play in the post-cold war world.

The first such assumption is that threats are disappearing: “Americans now face no menace from any foreign military power or any hostile ideology.” As military capabilities shrink in importance, “economic and social strengths will in any ways become the primary determinants of world influence.” But the events of the past three years should convince even the most Pollyannaish observers that none of their assumptions are supportable at least, yet.

__Wallace J. Thies. “Rethinking the New World Order”
Published in Orbis, Fall 1994.


World politics is entering a new phase, and intellectuals have not hesitated to proliferate visions of what it will be –the end of history, the return of traditional rivalries between nation states, and the decline of the nation state from the conflicting pulls of tribalism and globalism, among others. Each of these visions catches aspects of the emerging reality. Yet they all miss a crucial, indeed central, aspect of what global politics is likely to be in the coming years.

It is my hypothesis that the fundamental source of conflict in this New World will not be primarily ideological or primarily economic. The great divisions among humankind and the dominating source of conflict will be cultural. Nation states will remain the most powerful actors in world affairs, but the principal conflicts of global politics will occur between nations and groups of different civilizations. The clash of civilizations will dominate global politics. The fault lines between civilizations will be the battle lines of the future.
__Samuel P. Huntington. “The Clash of Civilizations?”
Published in the Foreign Affairs, summer 1993.


Huntington’s article had provoked a series of responses and these have been published in the fall issue of the Foreign Affairs. The respondents include one Arab Muslim now teaching in the John Hopkins University, Professor Fouad Ajaml: one diplomat of Indian origin born and brought up in Singapore, Mr. Kishore Mahbuban: one Chinese dissident now in Princeton, Prof. Liu Binyan and four Americans. None of them subscribe to Professor Huntington's thesis that conflicts between Civilisations will supplant ideological and other forms of conflict as the dominant global form of conflict and institutions for cooperation will be more likely to develop within Civilisations and conflicts will more often arise between groups in different Civilisations….Civilisations will interact with each other, compete with each and challenge each other, but the probably of their clashing with each other on the lines of two world wars fought among the western nations does not appear to be high, partly because of the existence of nuclear weapons. The developments in Japan, Asian rim and China would indicate that high technology industrialisation may not continue to remain an exclusive western preserve. Nor can one be sure of Western Europe and the United States seeing eye to eye on technology transfer to other rapidly industrialising parts of the world.

__K Subrahmanyam. “Fallacy of civilisational clash”
Published in the economic Times, 3 November 1993.


The dramatic events of the past five years have made that paradigm intellectual history. There is clearly a need for a new model that will help us to order and to understand central developments in world politics. What is the best simple map of the post-Cold?
War world? …A map of the New World “The Clash of Civilizations?” is an effort to lay out elements of a post-Cold War paradigm.



__Samuel P Huntington. “If Not Civilizations, What?
Paradigms of the Post-Cold War World”
Published in the Foreign Affairs, Volume 72 No.5.



Militant Islam not only rejects the principles of the Enlightenment; it considers life in a free society a direct threat to the core values of its faith. As distinct from those who envy the West and seek to emulate its economic success, militant Islam views Western society as decadent and sinful, as an enemy to be fought so as to purify life, protect the family, and be deserving of ascent to heaven.

--Richard Schifter. “Is there a Democracy Gene?”
Published in the Washington Quarterly, Summer l1994.

There are no situations, which are insurmountable, and alternative choices always exist. Capitalist globalization such as is being offered at this time of crisis, as a means of managing it, is not in itself a way of resolving the crisis. Conversely, neither does ‘rejection’ of globalization constitute an adequate response. ‘Rejections’, apparent only by the ways in which they are expressed—the turning back to ethnicity, and religious fundamentalism – become integrated into this brutal globalization and are made use of by it. Delinking is not to be found in these illusory and negative rejections but on the contrary by an active insertion capable of modifying the conditions of globalization

--Samir Amin. “Capitalism in the Age of Globalization”.
Published in 1997.


Globalization has reached a turning point. The future is a contested terrain of very public choices that will shape the world economy of the 21st century. The forces behind global economic change – which exalt deregulation, cater is corporations, undermine social structures, and ignore popular concerns—cannot be sustained. Globalization is leaving perilous instability and rising inequality in its wake. It is hurting too many and helping too few.

--Jay Mazur. “Labour’sNew Internationalism”
Published in the Foreign Affairs January/February 2000.


As they search for growth, multinational corporations will have to compete in the big emerging markets of China, India, Indonesia, and Brazil.

The operative word is emerging. A vast consumer base of hundreds of millions of people is developing rapidly. Despite the uncertainty and the difficulty of doing business in markets that remain opaque to outsiders, Western MNCs will have no choice but to enter them.

--C.K. Prahalad and Kenneth Lieberthal. “The end of Corporate Imperialism”
Published in the Harvard Business Review, July-August 1998.


Who will own the 21st century? Not China, America, Japan or India. The giant multinational corporations will hold the power in the 21st century, if present trends continue. The key for governments is to successfully learn how to work with these companies, in ways that will corporations. When properly approached with comprehensive plain man responds most generously to the needs of a region. And it fits our preferred image, as Americans-whether true or not –of a generous nation, brilliant in economics, but with a heart for people as well.


--Ben Boothe. “Who will own the 21st century?”
Published in the Span October-December, 1997.


Capitalism proved to be far more flexible and adaptable than socialism in adjusting to the new economic conditions created by technological change in the second half of the twentieth century…In conditions of increasing industrial maturity, capitalism tended to evolve into advanced capitalism, while socialism tended to give way to capitalism, both for purely economic reasons.

Francis Fukuyama. "Capitalism & Democracy:
The missing link" published in the Journal of Democracy.
July 1992.

Of one thing we can be certain. The ideologies of the twentieth century will disappear completely. This has been lousy century. It has been filled with dogmas, dogmas that one after another have cost us time, suffering, and much injustice.

Gabriel Garcia Marquez, newspaper interviews.
EL Nuevo Diario of Nicaragua, 23 April 1990

The Third World War has already started-it is a silent war, not for that reason any less sinister. This war is tearing down practically all the Third World. Instead of soldiers dying, there are children dying; instead of millions wounded, there are millions unemployed; instead of the destruction of bridges, there is tearing down of factories, hospitals, schools, and entire economies.

--Brazilian labor leader Lulaas quoted in The
"Trauma of the Third World" authored by Roger
Burbach, Orlando Nunez and Boris Kagarlitsky, 1998.

There has been an invasion. The Indian market is flooded with cosmetics, garments, shoes, chocolates, food items et al. Despite the increasing competition and variety, certain brands have stood their ground. And commanded loyalty. The cosmetics revolution has been the most vibrant, in terms of colour and spread. Each youngster wants to beat the other to use Maybelleine, Chambor or Revlon. But Lakme is doing as well with its new packaging and marketing strategy.

Nandini Goswami. "Some brands do have "em"
published in the Pioneer's USP page recently.

The world is at one of those seminal turning points in history. Communism is dead, socialism is on its way out, and capitalism is not far behind. No one knows just what shape post-capitalist society will take, but there is a good chance that in the process some Third World countries will transform themselves quickly into economic powers.

--Peter F. Drucker. "Is Capitalism Coming to an End?
published in the Span May 1993.

I may have thought that the road to a world of free and happy human beings shorter than it is proving to be but I was not wrong in thinking that such a world is possible, and that it is worth while to live with a view to bringing it nearer.

Bertrand Russell. "The Autobiography of Bertrand Russell".

Epilogue

The information revolution and globalization have already established their roots in the contemporary political, economic, social, and cultural life. There are "invasions". There are "revolutions. And most of the time conveying a different meaning and idea. Diverse and at times conflicting in their impact and consequences. The crux of these quotes sound as if we are also living in the "age of extremes". The obvious question that arises is to what extent these ". The obvious question that arises is to what extent these ". The obvious question that arises is to what extent these "extremes" are conflicting and whether mankind has some kind of inherent capability to carve out some "middle path" and facilitate smooth sailing of the age of information and how it can happen when there are too many questions and very few answers. Only one thing seems to be sure that history is not going to repeat itself this time. The answer to these ever growing questions is shaping in the womb of the future. In the new age no one can claim monopoly over the truth.

REFERENCES

--Amir Samir, (1997). 'Capitalism in the Age of Globalization: The Management of Contemporary Society.'

--Blinder Alans. "Eight Steps to a New Financial Order.' Foreign Affairs. September/October 1999.

--Booth Ben B. 'Who will Own the Next Century?' Span. December-October 1997.

--Burton Daniel F. 'Competitiveness: Here to Stay.' The Washington Quarterly. 1994.

--Carlin John. "A Farewell to Arms, Wired, May 1997.

--Carter Bill and Sanlomir Richard. The Trophy in Eismar's Deal.' New York Times. 6 August 1995

--Chomsky Noam (1998). 'World Orders, Old and Newly.' and Necessary Illusions: Thought Control in Democratic Society. (1989).

--Clarke Arthur. ' New Communication Technologies and the Developing World.' Media Asia. 1981.

--Dexter Lewis Anthony and White David Manning (1968). 'People, Society and Mass Communication.'

--Diamond Larry. The Global Imporative: Building a Democratic World Order'Current History. January 1994.

--Drucker F Peter, 'The of social Transformation.' The Atlantic monthly, November 1994

--Fukuyama Francis. 'Capitalism and Democracy: The Missing Link.' Journal of Democracy. July 1992

--Guley William J and Martin Michael H. 'The Price isn't Right in the Internet.' Fortune. 13 January 1997.

--Hamelink Cees J. (1983). 'Cultural Autonomy in Global Communications.'

--Herman Edward S. and McChesney Roberts. (1997). The Global Media: The New Missionaries of Global Capitalism.'

--Hugill Peter J. (1999) 'Global Communications since 1844: Geopolitics and Technology.'

--Keohane Robert O. and Nye S. Joseph. "Power and interdependence in information Age.' Foreign Affairs. September/October 1998.

--Krugman Paul. 'Is Capitalism Too Productive.' Foreign Affairs September/October 1997.

--Kunczik Michael (1990). 'Images of Nations and International Public Relations.'

--Lone Timothy. 'The Asian Financial crisis: What Have We learned?' Finance & Development. September 1999.

--McManus John H. (1994). 'Market Driven Journalism; Let the Citizen Beware?'

--Mandelbaum Michael. 'The Future of Nationalism.' National Interest. Fall 1999.

--Nelson Robert H. 'Why Capitalism hasn't Won yet? Forbes. November 1991

--Nye Joseph S. and Owens William (1996). 'America's information Edge.' Foreign Affairs. March/April 1996.

--Porter Alan L. and Read William H. (1998). The information Revolution - Current and Future Consequences.'

--Prahalad C K and Lieberthal Kenneth. 'The End of Corporate Imperialism.' Harvard Business Review. July-August 1998.

--Pitroda Sam. 'Development, Democracy, and the village Telephone.' Harvard Business Review. November/December 1993.

--Ray Rabi.'Quo Vadis Globalisation.' Mainstream. March,2000

--Riddle Dorothy I. (1988). 'Information Economy and Development.'

--Rothkoph David J. 'The Disinformation Age.' Foreign Policy. Spring 1999.

--Sen Ranjit. 'World Capitalism and Globalisation.' Economic and Political Weekly. 8 October 1994.

--Soros George. 'Capitalism's Last Chance.' Foreign Policy. Winters 1998-99.

--Thies Wallace J. 'Rethinking the New World Order.' Orbis. Fall 1994.

--Thurow Lester. 'Communitarian US. Individualistic Capitalism’ New Perspective Quarterly, Winter 1992.

--Traber Michael. (1996) 'Myth of Information Revolution.'

--Varis Tapio and Ullamaija Kivikuru (1986). 'Approaches to international Communication.'

-- Venturelli Shalini. 'Cultural Rights and World Trade Agreements in the information Society.' Gazette. Vol.60 No.1. 1999.

-- Weir Fred. 'Experience of Russian "Reforms": Raw Capitalism Threntens Emergence of New Dictatorship.' Mainstream, March 1999.

-- Weber Steven. 'The End of the Business Cycle.' Foreign Affairs. July/August 1997

--Wide Candee. 'The Coming Global Tongue.' The Economist. 21 December 1996.

--Wolburg Joyce M., 'Time: The "Silent" Cultural Value in American Television.' Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly. Autumn 1999.