+1 862 207 3288 Order Description
Please read each question carefully. Write with clarity and brevity. Write in concrete, specific terms. Give examples from the course texts wherever this would help to
substantiate your points. When quoting from the course texts, be sure to indicate the name of the author and page number in parentheses (as in-text citations). The
exam covers the first five articles assigned to you (Boyd-Barrett, Appadurai, Kraidy, Kellner, Castells). While particular questions emphasize certain readings more
than others, you are encouraged to draw from whichever of the five readings is best suited to answering a particular question. You must draw upon all five readings
in the exam overall.
While Boyd-Barrett shows that some versions of cultural and/or media imperialism theory continue to be relevant in understanding media flows, Arjun Appadurai
proposes an alternative way of understanding media flows and their implications. He speaks about complex global flows of networks of people, technologies,
finances, media and ideas that quite often do not mesh with each other, creating much greater unpredictability in global relations and cultural forms than that
suggested by cultural and media imperialism theory. State at the outset which of the approaches is more convincing for you, media/cultural imperialism (a la Boyd-
Barrett) or globalization (a la Appadurai). Defend your position with very specific reasoning and examples.
Douglas Kellner proposes in his article that a dialectical approach to globalization would allow us to see both the good and the bad that results from it, both the
constraints and the possibilities it introduces. I think Appadurai would agree that globalization is a deeply contradictory process. On the other hand, Castells mainly
celebrates the new possibilities opened up by the networked society in terms of a global public sphere. State at the outset which of the arguments is more
convincing for you, that globalization is a deeply contradictory process creating both good and bad, or that globalization provides great emancipatory potential in
the form of a networked society and a new global public sphere. Defend your position with very specific reasoning and examples.
Marwan Kraidy focuses in on hybridity in his article, arguing that hybridity theory has to be sharpened in order to take into account the power differences that still
exist in society, that even though a lot of intermingling of cultures takes place, it takes place on an uneven playing field. In other words, not all cultural hybridities
are the same. Using specific examples, and drawing from any of the other readings as appropriate, either defend or attack Kraidy�s argument. Do you agree with
him that cultures intermingle in ways that are influenced by inequalities in power that still exist, or do you think that hybrid forms of culture are evidence of mutual
influence and greater cultural harmony?
here are the 5 articles:
1) theorizing globalization by Douglas Kellner
2) hybridity in cultural globalization by Marwan M. Kraidy
3) disjuncture and difference in the global cultural economy by Arjun Appadurai
4)cyberspace, globalizationand empire by Oliver Boyd-Barrett
5) the new public sphere: global civil society, communication networks, and global governance by Manuel Castells
please use ONLY THESE ARTICLES
AND ANSWER EACH QUESTION SEPARATE FROM OTHERS
PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET AN AMAZING DISCOUNT 🙂
