Read This: Globalisation and the Media - Boat People and where the real truth lies?

Globalisation is a word that holds many different meanings for different groups. It is a word that is used constantly to define the ideas and values that a particular group holds and preaches. Although there are many types of flows falling under the concept of globalisation, there is one that sparks to mind that provokes a continuous debate in Australia; this is the physical flow that globalisation creates. The physical flow is the movement of people across national boundaries. This arm of globalisation has created a heated political debate in which the government, a group of influential national leaders uses the theory of globalisation and the physical flow of people to create power, giving them an excuse to define their decisions about illegal immigrants. This frenzied political debate is one many Australians are familiar with as the media surrounds the matter making it a prominent issue as the government continues to use political propaganda to gain support for their party.

To support my understanding of the government’s involvement in upholding national sovereignty by slandering those who illegally cross national boundaries in order to preserve national support, Peter Van Onselsen explains,

‘… the political debate is centred on boat people, partly because it plays into people’s (inaccurate) fears about hordes of arrivals from underdeveloped countries who threaten our way of life, and partly because opinion polls continue to show that most Australians oppose illegal immigrants’. (cited in Evers 2010, p.1)

Therefore according to Van Onselsen there are two folds to this physical flow as a result of globalisation. The first one being that this physical flow threatens our local values and the protection of our national sovereignty. This fear is expanded through media influence, capturing the sights and discussions that are aired into our homes. The second is that the government feeds off such fears and exploits our concerns into opinion polls and votes, again using the media as a device to gain our support. ‘Globalisation crosses boundaries of government and business, media and social movements and politics at all levels’. (Nederveen Pieterse 2004, p.7) It is a concept that can fuel anger, cause division and be a maker for political control. What this physical flow is doing to our country is sparked by high media involvement. In April 2009 a boat named ‘SIEV 36’ carrying 49 asylum seekers exploded off the north coast of Australia. ‘Media and public debate about Australia’s responsibility to individuals seeking asylum by boat was instantaneous’. (Mc Kay Thomas Blood 2011, p.1) The boat people is a prime example of the nature of the physical flow movement that is occurring in the 21^st century. As citizens we sit back and watch helplessly what the media has captured and want us to see.

 

Talk back radio shows are a hit for expressing our views about such political issues. Just recently in June, top rating Adelaide host Bob Francis came under scrutiny after he aired his views. After a caller suggested that the federal government had a responsibility to help people “survive” Francis responded, ‘bugger the boat people… As far as I’m concerned, I hope they bloody drown out there on their way over here. In my opinion they are not welcome here’. (Media Spy 2012, p.1) As a result of this media outburst Francis incurred a lot of criticism and ‘widespread condemnation’. Not only was it by fellow media representatives but also Ministers, like Chris Bowen Federal Immigration Minister and state opposition leader Isobel Redmond. It cannot be ignored that these ministers may have latched onto such a comment and condemned it for their personal appearances for the Australian community. A food for thought for when you are voting in the upcoming election. It cannot be ignored that to approve of such comments would lead to widespread opposition of the party as the media continue to envisage fear in our national sovereignty through the use of boat people. Just recently the Sunday Night show, a show that I’m sure most would be familiar with reported a story on people arriving by boat from Sri Lanka. They represented these people as ‘scandalous criminals’ (Sunday Night 2012) and questioned their stories of living brutal and fearful lives. According to the Refugee Council however, boat people are not illegal immigrants but are practicing their right to ‘enter a country for the purpose of seeking asylum’. (Refugee Council 2010) The media and the government forgot to mention that in their recent releases and before researching this issue further I was not aware of this right!

I put this to my readers: What are the real concerns that the media has forgotten to put across to its listeners? As Andy Lamey explains and I couldn’t agree more, ‘regardless of the perceived threats to national security or to the social fabric, regardless of international or domestic legal requirements, and regardless of the costs involved’, (Lamey 2012, p.2) Australian Parliament should discover the real answer to the boat “problem”. ‘Two words, media and globalisation seem to be repeated over and over again. The two go together like a horse and carriage’. (Rantanen 2005, p.1) In this instance the physical movement of boat people to our shores as a result of globalisation and the government’s response through the use of the mediatised world also go hand in hand. ‘Let us assume, for a moment, that there was no sense of panic about “waves” of “illegal” arrivals and no federal election around the corner’. (Lamey 2012, p.2) What would the government then do to get our support? The continuous amount of propaganda that is plastered around our cities, on our TV screens and screamed through our radios would inevitably be useless and the media would thus not control the outcome of the election and the response to the boat people arriving on our shores. We would have time to think about why these people are coming into our country, rather than placing an inevitable fear that they would overrun our nation and destroy our identity. Again in the words of Lamey, ‘Australia could indeed do much better than to pursue once again a path that prioritises national security concerns and panders to the fears of those who expect to be swamped by a wave of dark skinned non-Christians without appropriate visas’. (Lamey 2012, p.4)

Under all the political squabbling, you can see the real effect that globalisation has on the movement of vulnerable people escaping the devastation in their own country. It is worthy to note that the political debate is centred only on boat people and not the large amount of individuals that come in via aeroplane, illegal or legal. These people still inhabit our land just like the boat people are wishing to do. Why doesn’t the Prime Minister explain the protection of our national sovereignty then? The centre around boat people is a political struggle for power. Globalisation has created this movement and boat people are a perfect example that globalisation cannot have a fixed meaning because inevitably some people win and some people lose from its construction. In this context constant media coverage has allowed politicians to exhaust this method by promoting their policies. Without the media coverage policies would be essentially useless in the power struggle without the plastering and preaching that politicians do so repetitively.

References:

Lamey, A 2012, Reconciling rights and sovereignty, Inside Story, 26 September 2012, http://inside.org.au/reconciling-rights-and-sovereignty/print/ .

McKay, F, Thomas, S, Blood, R 2011, ‘Any one of these boat people could be a terrorist for all we know!’, Journalism, vol. 12, no.5.

Media Spy 2012, FIVEaa’s Francis off air after ‘boat people’ tirade, Media Spy, retrieved 28 September 2012, http://www.mediaspy.org/2012/06/09/fiveaas-francis-off-air-after-boat-people-tirade/ .

Nederveen Pieterse, J 2004, ‘Globalisation: consensus and controversies’, Globalisation and culture: global melange, Rowan & Littlefield, Lanham, Md.

Image:

Progressiveslol, 2012, Get your tin foil hats on. We are going to conspiracy town, OzPolitic, retrieved 28 September 2012, http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1341438407/36.

 

Rantenen, T. (2005) The Media and Globalisation, Sage, London.

Refugee Council of Australia 2010, ‘Myths and facts about refugees and asylum seekers’, retrieved 28 September 2012, http://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/docs/news&events/rw/2010/4%20.-%20Myths%20and%20facts%20about%20refugees%20and%20asylum%20seekers%202010.pdf.

Sunday Night 2012, ‘The asylum seeker journey by boat’, Channel seven, August 19, retrieved 28 September 2012, http://au.news.yahoo.com/sunday-night/#fop.

 

Private life - No One wants one anymore.

Blogs – where do I begin? As this is my last, I tried to grapple with the understanding of what it means to me. I would definitely say I wouldn’t use a blog as my personal diary; that would just be weird and indeed very uninteresting for the rest of those who read it. Wouldn’t it? Unfortunately as I see it teenage girls are doing it, bringing their personal lives into the public sphere, thus literally intertwining public and private circles. To me this doesn’t seem right. Bell’s second understanding of weblogs is more up my alley. He defines them as ‘places to gather and share information and internet links’. (Bell, 2007, p.96) Although my thoughts have been put into my blog this semester, I haven’t personally gone down the road of making it a diary about my personal life. I instead believe I have gathered information based on readings and then put my thoughts based on these readings in my posts. To me it seems a worry that adolescent girls are using blogs to publicise their private nature, in which Bell states that this is a re-occurring theme, using a blog like a diary. I am only 21 but when I had a diary it was a physical book, hidden away. If girls in the 21^st century cannot take time away from the internet and delve into their own thoughts without the need for others to see it, comment on it, then how are they ever going to understand themselves?

References:

Bell, B 2007, ‘Private writing in public spaces: girls’ blogs and shifting boundaries’, Growing up online: young people and digital technologies 2007, Palgrave Macmillan, New York, N.Y.

Mirror Mirror On The Wall, Give Me A Pout That I Can Shout To All!

 

When we look in the mirror what do we see? A reflection of oneself. In the 21^st century a mirror is not the only way we project our self and now our mediatised world has captured our image, plastering it for the world to see. This goes beyond entertainment and yes Big Brother, The Shire (which I feel embarrassed to refer to in my blog) and the likes of Bondi Rescue all capture an identity that is now exposed to the wider community. Such shows have ‘allowed the development of a surplus economy related to personalities and a different structure through which the famed construct their public image’. (Marshall, 2010, p.498) Today this is referred to as the “SPECULAR ECONOMY” where individuals are becoming more conscious about how they represent themselves in order for others to perceive them in a way that they want. But let’s bring this discussion a little closer to home.

Heard of the word – “SELFIE?” Nowadays its normal to give a pout in the bathroom mirror, then post it on Facebook or Instagram, tag yourself where you are and ask for ‘likes’. ‘We are constantly placing ourselves as with the simple technology of the mirror, into the picture and onto the screen’. (Marshall, 2010, p.499) By making ourselves mediatised we are putting ourselves in a position to be noticed and strive for power. This self-constructed spectacle is viewed by millions around the world, a scary thought that we do forget. The dangers of this mediatised world – stalkers, and there are many out there! Although it is practically impossible to estimate how many there are, you only have to Google the issue and many statistics will pop up thus recognising that it is a problem. But with the bad comes the good – we all know how Justin Bieber became the name of thousands of screaming girls!

References:

Marshall, P.D 2010, ‘The Specular Economy’, Society, vol. 47, no. 16, pp.498-92.

Images are from the website Tumblr (how Ironic!) www.tumblr.com.

 

INTERESTING TITLE!

I picked a reading for this week, based solely on what the reading was called. ‘My life with computers on a remote island’ caught my attention but for all the wrong reasons. I was expecting some story about a person who could live their life in isolation with a computer and still completely live a satisfactory existence. The picture above is a sarcastic way of looking at it. I was wrong. Instead Bethalia Gaidan talks about computers and the internet as some sort of device that her community has been deprived of. She complains that she has to ‘teach herself’ how new software programs and hardware work, yet don’t we all? I recently purchased a new computer, there I also had to purchase Microsoft and then I had to figure the programs out for myself. I am 21 years old and I still have trouble and sometimes frustrated when using Microsoft word and Microsoft excel. She also complains that she would like computers to be more reliable because it is very expensive for ‘us’ in remote areas to get our computers fixed. Have you ever tried to get your laptop fixed at a price you are happy with?

Her complaints and story seems to be out of touch with the environment today. Although we live in a mediatised technological world, we cannot simply pick out remote areas and see them as less fortunate than those who come from the city.

The old saying goes – ‘don’t judge a book by its cover’ – I certainly did.  

References:

Gaidan, B 2007, ‘My life with computers on a remote island’, in LE Dyson, M Hendriks & S Grant (eds), Information technology and Indigenous people, Information Science Publishing, Hershey, Pa., pp. 58–60.

Image: Masood, N 2008, Do you suffer from Internet Addiction Disorder? Nadia Masood travel. food. photography., retrieved 21  August 2012, http://nadiamasood.com/do-you-suffer-from-internet-addiction-disorder.  

“Fantasising the homeland” – where would you call home?

When we think about our identity, our sense of belonging and cultural values where do you associate yourself? When we get behind our athletes at the recent Olympic Games we immediately call them ours because they wear the green and gold, but who do they really identify themselves as? This national culture has slowly disintegrated in an evolving technological and deterritorialised space. ‘Much has been written about how electronic media have transformed our understanding of temporality, spatiality, and a sense of who we are as individuals’. (Sun, 2002, p.115) The global atmosphere as Wanning Sun puts it is memoryless, losing the inability to translate historical stories to our younger generations.

The fear of losing one’s freedom or the ability to gain employment in Australia is ever increasing, and thus contributes to the national consciousness and patriotism that our government continues to promote. In doing this we control other races and cultures such as the Chinese, through slavery and delve to ensure our superiority.

‘…there will be nothing we Chinese will be able to do to wipe away the humiliation and suffering of being an enslaved people.... Wake up! If you do not make a determined effort to strengthen our nation, we will soon be confronted with the death of our people and the destruction of our ancient civilisation’. (Sun, 2002, p.114)

The mediatised and technological world has progressed our international sphere into one of angst, searching for national stories and one’s identity, whilst being caught in the midst of a “motherland fantasy”.

References:

Image: Drake K 2008, Our National Identity, National Identity Task Force, retrieved 14 August 2012, http://canadian-unitarian-council.pbworks.com/w/page/13798009/Our%20National%20Identity.

Sun, W 2002, ‘Fantasizing the homeland, the internet, memory and exilic longings’, Leaving China: media, migration, and transnational imagination, Rowan & Littlefield, Lanham, Md., pp. 113–36.

“Mass Media”: Do we really understand what it means?

When we think of the saying “mass media” I am certain that what pops into most regular minds, is the TV, the radio, and film. Collectively we put these media forms together and denote a negative understanding – “mass” meaning cheap and easy, being everywhere, not individual. When we do this we also assume that if we have mass media then production is accompanied by mass audience as Peter Steven writes. I couldn’t help but delve into Steven’s train of thought and pin point his idea that mass media does not define our audience and its effectiveness.

‘The term mass media fails to describe the ability of media to control and shape the direction of society, the range of content quality and the diversity of audiences’. (QUOTE P.4)

Great example that I’m sure we can all convert our minds to: THE OLYMPICS! The lead up to the games was more exciting than the games themselves this year. I’m not sure – perhaps it is because Australia is going terribly or because our ability to enjoy an event 24/7 shows the negative affect mass media can actually have on its audiences.

The Olympics is a globalised phenomenon -  a chance for mass media to grasp its influences and branch out to the world the domination that it can have. But when push comes to shove really how effective is it? We can simply flick a switch and it can be gone.

http://www.google.com.au/imgres?start=97&num=10&hl=en&biw=1280&bih=703&tbm=isch&tbnid=LNfOrH3iHh2AhM:&imgrefurl=http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/london-2012-summer-olympic-games/2012/jul/27/top-olympic-games-twitter-phelps-lolo-lebron-bolt/&docid=zq_m322E3kqavM&imgurl=http://media.washtimes.com/media/community/viewpoint/entry/2012/07/27/social-media-montage-

MAKING CULTURES

Let’s admit when we ask ourselves and actually think about it how would we define Australia’s culture? Is there one definition for it? Because of our multicultural status occurring because of globalisation there exists cultures within a culture which we cannot define. Agree? The physical movement as discussed in my first blog identifies the movement of not only the person but more importantly what they bring with them: their culture. This is their beliefs, their way of living, their social and moral principles and values in life, all making up their culture.

For some this can cause anxiety, but for others it is seen as a way to understand and embrace new cultures – a learning experience.

How does this relate to the media world? A lot of ways but one that caught my attention was the ways in which these cultures try to adapt to new environments through the use of media technology and try to educate their children through old and new ways of technology.

http://www.google.com.au/imgres?um=1&hl=en&sa=N&biw=1280&bih=703&tbm=isch&tbnid=Qe63fbDhJfVihM:&imgrefurl=http://www.cartoonstock.com/directory/o/office_personnel.asp&docid=nCg-Y5K7gaiwWM&imgurl=http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/ato/lowres/aton1482l.jpg&w=400&h=384&ei=MIMcUPPkOqikiAf_0oDYCw&zoom=1