Reader's response final draft

In "Globalisation of Culture Through the Media ", Kraidy (2002) mentions that international media flow has sparked off many debates, where developing nations are accused of taking advantage of the media flow. Developed nations favour the "free flow of information" but developing nations disagree. As the world becomes inter-dependent, Kraidy highlights the analytical shift towards globalisation. The dispute on whether mass media is the cause of globalisation or does it intensifies globalisation arises. He raises that globalisation is perceived to bring about culture homogenisation or hybridisation. Kraidy then concludes that transnational mass media intensifies the hybridity existing in cultures globally.

I agree with Kraidy on the idea of cultural hybridisation and the apparent relationship between mass media and globalisation. However, I believe that the "chicken and egg" analogy he adopts is over-simplified.

In my opinion, it is not a single cause leading to globalisation but a build-up of multiple factors. Pettinger (2012) quotes that such factors include the improved transport and technology. For example, Pettinger (2012) mentions that there has been a rapid growth in air travel, enabling a greater flow of people and goods across borders. The development of containerisation also reduced the cost of inter-modal transport, making trade cheaper and more efficient, thus leading to globalisation.

The improvement in technology is tightly related to mass media. Without the advancement in technology, people will not have access to mass media and mass media would not influenced the world the way it does now. For example, how influential can the Internet or social media platforms be without computers? Therefore, I believe that the "chicken and egg" analogy used by Kraidy is over-simplified, and globalisation is not due to solely the rise of social media.

However, I agree on the phenomenon of cultural hybridisation mentioned by the author Kraidy, and it can be observed in a globalised city like Singapore. For example, Macdonald's is a fast food restaurant people believe was due to cultural imperialism. However, I disagree as Macdonald's do provide different menus in different countries in attempt to include the local culture. Macdonald's offer curry sauce in Singapore. In addition, teriyaki burger and Ebi-fillet-o burgers are offered exclusively in Asia. This shows that there is no longer the imperialism of one culture but a hybrid of the different cultures.

In conclusion, most of the ideas raised by Mr. Krabbs are valid, except for some which he over-simplified.