Perspective of Media in International Relations

Author: Zhang Guizhen
Publisher:
Publishing Date: 2000-08-01
Features: The emergence of the third-generation model of communication and development within the framework of the "New International System." The characteristics of contemporary international communication are: first, the transformative changes brought by communication technology to society and its growing potential; second, developed countries exploiting their economic and technological advantages under the guise of "free flow of information" to form "media imperialism" and "communication hegemony." The goal for developing countries should be to establish a new order in international information communication, strive for national discourse and communication rights. On this basis, communication technology can be harnessed to guide public participation, thereby fostering national development. Research during this period emphasized the significant role of the media in national development but placed greater emphasis on a balanced communication environment. The shortcomings of studies on the relationship between media and national development lie in the insufficient recognition of the complexity of the media's role. Whether labeled as a "multiplier" or a "driver," the media's role is simplified. The effectiveness of media functions depends on various factors, in addition to an equal international communication environment and internal conditions of public participation, such as:
1. Social Integration Level: Reflecting the degree of ideological unity among a nation's citizens, higher social integration generally correlates with weaker media influence. Conversely, greater integration leads to stronger media influence. The potential of international communication may be offset by integrating forces in politics, religion, and traditional culture.
2. Media Systems: Generally, reasonable media systems facilitate the media's role in promoting societal development. The standard of "reasonableness" lies in whether development policies and the media form a virtuous cycle, benefiting the public. Systems include "unification," "liberalism," and "dependent communication."
3. Cultural Literacy of National or Regional Audiences: The ability of the media to contribute to national development largely depends on the audience's level of acceptance, or cultural literacy. The higher the cultural level and broader knowledge, the more sensitive individuals become to media information, more engaged in society, and more reliant on the media. Conversely, the opposite is true.
4. National or Regional Economic Conditions: Economic factors constrain the survival and development of communication institutions as well as the dissemination of media. The former affects the intensity, depth, and breadth of development policies, while the latter influences interaction between media and audiences and the effectiveness of development policies. Audience media ownership, frequency of exposure to newspapers, radio, television, etc., are related to socioeconomic development levels.
5. Media Technology: Advanced technology endows mass media with vivid, rich, extensive, timely, and penetrating cultural forms, becoming the best medium for political mobilization, news reporting, cultural education, entertainment, and commercial advertising. Toffler predicted that with the acceleration of information transmission, humanity has gradually entered an era of integration. New media technologies bring significant changes, but they are not the decisive factor in societal development. Humans are the active factor. Developing countries must achieve a "peripheral breakthrough," recognizing both the positive and negative impacts of media technology. Development and underdevelopment cannot be attributed solely to the media; their effects depend on the environment, i.e., the interplay of political, economic, and cultural factors. The influence of media in national development and international relations primarily includes integration, diffusion, and driving forces. The dynamic between fragmentation and integration reflects the laws of social contradictions. While mass media can accelerate these dynamics, they cannot replace them. The role of media in society and its impact on international relations and audiences must be explained within actual social contexts, in the interactive relationship between "reader-text."
The third-generation paradigm of communication and development theory has always been weak in researching the complexity of media's external relations. With the deepening debate over the new international information communication order and the continuous emergence of new media technologies, questions arise about how to perceive the role and functions of media, how media segmentation increases differences despite promoting integration, and other issues, all of which require further study.
The path forward, as Schramm put it, lies not in how we use communication but in what we use it for, and who owns and controls the tools and institutions of communication.
Section 6: The Impact of Network Communication
In the 1990s, with continuous technological advancements, the Internet (Internet) rapidly spread globally, gaining prominence. The Internet is an information network. Compared to traditional media, it has significant differences in communication methods, earning it the moniker the "fourth media" after newspapers, radio, and television. When discussing international communication and international relations, the Internet is inevitably mentioned—not only because it has profoundly impacted mass communication but also because it has equally exerted undeniable influence on international relations.
The openness and freedom of cyberspace have brought unprecedented proximity between different cultural forms, enabling large-scale absorption and borrowing. The free exchange of diverse ideas and concepts has greatly promoted cultural development across different ethnicities and regions while also giving rise to new cultural forms.
Beyond these positive impacts, the negative effects of network communication on international relations cannot be underestimated. Some argue that the impact of the information superhighway on culture is particularly strong. While it has brought many positive effects, it has also plunged culture into in many aspects.
First, the invasion of colonial culture. Since the information superhighway primarily uses English as a universal language, to navigate it, one must first overcome the English barrier. The decline in the status of one's own language and submission to English dominance will inevitably lead to the loss of cultural discourse rights for nations and ethnic groups, resulting in "language loss." Additionally, due to the globalization of information dissemination, it is easy for developed countries to engage in cultural aggression against underdeveloped nations, further threatening the survival of ethnic cultures.
When ideas and concepts from one culture enter another, they generally require linguistic translation—the transfer of certain ideas from one language to another. This translation process acts as a filter and detoxifier for the receiving culture. Some elements of a national culture depend on language for survival. Language translation filters these cultural traditions, while others are integrated, transformed, and reshaped during the process. After translation, cultural influence is significantly weakened. In other words, in the era of mass communication, the impact of one culture on another is indirect, whereas in the network, English culture (American culture) directly confronts other ethnic groups, with its influence being immediate. For this reason, many express deep concern about the dominance of English culture online, fearing it will lead to a massive impact on their own cultures. If measures are not taken now to promote and spread national culture, then in the competitive international environment of the network, preserving and disseminating one's own ethnic culture will be at a disadvantage (in reality, even developed capitalist countries like the UK and France are at a disadvantage). Thus, if we do not take steps to change the current situation, and the suppression of other languages by English continues, then when the network becomes fully, it may also mark the global dominance of English culture.
Second, apart from language issues, conflicts between cultural traditions and customs also arise in the development of network communication. While promoting the exchange of different cultural traditions, network communication has also led to cultural conflicts on a global scale. Different countries and ethnic groups have distinct cultural traditions and customs. When these different cultural traditions come into proximity and interact, it is essentially a process of cultural fusion and exclusion. The fundamental cause of network cultural conflicts is the heterogeneity of cultures, creating barriers and conflicts in cultural exchange. The direct cause of network cultural conflicts is the disparity in national cultural strength due to economic and political power, as well as the suppression and penetration of dominant cultures into weaker cultures. The strength of a nation's cultural power is determined by its political and economic power. For a society, its political and economic structure forms the power structure, while culture is rooted in this structure. Samuel Huntington once asserted with conviction: "Trade may not follow the flag, but culture almost always follows power." In other words, when stronger political and economic nations engage in cultural exchange with other ethnic groups, they often consciously impose their own culture above others, attempting to influence the other culture and embed their own value systems.
Additionally, anyone can publish their opinions on any topic online without considering others' views or the constraints of real society.