Cultural Imperialism

Printed Page 469

Ever since Hollywood gained an edge in film production and distribution, U.S. movies have dominated the box office in Europe, Asia, and the rest of the world. Worldwide grosses are in turn more important to Hollywood than ever.

The increasing dominance of American popular culture around the world has sparked heated debate in international circles. On the one hand, people in other countries seem to relish the themes of innovation and rebellion expressed in American media products, and the global spread of access to media (particularly the ease of digital documentation via mobile devices) have made it harder for political leaders to secretly repress dissident groups. On the other hand, American styles in fashion and food, as well as media fare, dominate the global market—a situation known as cultural imperialism. Today, numerous international observers contend that consumers in countries inundated by American-made movies, music, television, and images have even less control than American consumers. Even the Internet has a distinctively American orientation. The United States got a head start in deploying the Internet as a mass medium and has been the dominant force ever since. Although the Internet is worldwide and in many languages, the majority of the Web’s content is still in English, the United States controls the top domains like .com and .org (without the requirement to have a nation-identifying domain name, such as .jp for Japan or .fr for France), and leading global sites like Google, Facebook, Amazon, YouTube, and Wikipedia are all American in design.

Defenders of American popular culture’s dominance argue that a universal culture creates a global village and fosters communication and collaboration across national boundaries. Critics, however, point out that two-thirds of the world’s population cannot afford most of the products advertised on American, Japanese, and European television. Yet they see, hear, and read about consumer abundance and middle-class values through TV and other media, including magazines and the Internet. Critics worry that the obvious disparities in economic well-being and the frustration that must surely come with not having the money to buy advertised products may lead to social unrest.