Encounters with Western media theory: Asian perspectives

Abstract

The academic discourse on the West and the East is not new, and it has been commonly believed that non-Western countries must learn from the West in order to develop their own societies. Here, comprehending the notion of the West is considered significant, as it offers a model of comparison. While it is not necessary for the perspectives and process to be radical, it should be convincing to grasp Asia as a formation of a changeable force to the West. Of course, media scholars have to avoid limited perspectives emphasizing only intra-Asian dialogues; instead they must analyze Asian perspectives in the globalization context. What non-Western scholars must contemplate are not only paradigms that are unique to Asian society but also general trends and norms that apply to the globe so that they can identify new trends and directions, which provide fundamentals to advance new theories and norms in global media studies. This certainly contributes to a broadening of media theory and comprehension in a way that takes account of the practices of non-Western countries outside the Anglo-American sphere.

Keywords

Asian media culture discourse globalization media theory non-Western media theory regionalization the West versus the East

allows us to compare to what extent different societies resemble, or differ from, one another. Non-Western societies [mainly known as the East] can accordingly be said to be ‘close to’ or ‘far away from of’ or ‘catching up with’ the West. (p. 186)

Hall (1996) argues that the label of Western refers to a type of society that is developed, industrialized, urbanized, capitalist, and modern. The West is certainly a mirror for the East which embodies the ideal of modernization forever, and the image of the West constructs the ideal model for the non-Western regions (Iyotani, 2002, cited in Takahashi, 2007: 330). Of course, when the Easterners learn from the West, they implicitly thought that the West is developed, good, and desirable, while the East is under-developed, bad, and undesirable. This simplistic contradiction of the West and the East arguably provides a certain kind of knowledge about a subject and certain attitude, which ‘functions as an ideology’ (Hall, 1996: 186).

The field of media and communication studies is no exception. As Katz et al. (2003) emphasize with five major schools in communication research – The Columbia School, The Frankfurt School, The Chicago School, The Toronto School, and British Cultural Studies – mainly alongside thematic lines, media and communication studies has had a typical Western, and particularly Anglo-American voice since its inception (Katz et al., 2003; Waisbord, 2015). Media theories have developed in ‘English language books on the basis of evidence derived from a tiny handful of countries’, and ‘these are nearly always rich Western societies’ (Curran and Park, 2000: 2). As expected, ‘the analytical focus and theories have been Western, and specially U.S. theories. The Western-centric character of media studies is not surprising’ (Waisbord, 2015: 179).

As such, the meaning of Westernization in media studies naturally implies a continuing process whereby non-Western societies adopt and develop Western media and culture in their own context. As a few Western countries, in particular, the United States, have continued to dominate contemporary global capitalism, media studies in many non-Western countries has relied on research and teaching rooted in Western ideological traditions. Asian national media and culture as part of the East were conceived as a peripheral market to consume Western content (Ju and Sakurai, 2007); the contour has gradually changed as Asian media and culture have started to expand their national capacity throughout the region, followed by the globe starting in the late 1990s and the early 21st century.

While there are several forms of Westernization in media studies, one of the most significant elements is the systematic ‘schooling of foreign students to U.S. or U.S.-style media practices, with their built-in assumption that private, advertiser-supported media should dominate’ (Schiller, 1996: 102). Many foreign PhD students have learnt commercial Western media systems in the West, in particular, in the United States, and later introduced American philosophical traditions to their own countries. In many PhD programs in the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia, foreign students from China, India, Korea, and Japan consist of the largest body of students. An increasing number of students from Asia earn their PhD degrees in these Western countries, in which English is lingua franca, and therefore, the primacy of English limits their openness toward different approaches to scholarly writing and discussion during their studies and the post-PhD era.¹

Whether going back to their mother countries or staying in the West, foreign students from the East are introduced to diverse canonical texts in media and communication studies that take the West as a taken-for-granted site for making sweeping theoretical claims. Those who receive PhD degrees in the Western sphere and return back to their mother countries act as the missionaries of Western media theories, which consequently changes the norms of non-Western countries’ media education. As Sreberny-Mohammadi (1997) argued, ‘cultural imperialism is not maintaining its rule merely through the export of cultural products, but through institutionalization of [Western] ways of life, organizational structures, values and interpersonal relations, language’ (p. 51).

The academic world is changing, however. Starting in the early 21st century, two major sources have contributed to the growth of non-Western-based theories. On the one hand, several media scholars have developed a handful of non-Western focused theoretical frameworks, including de-Westernizing media studies (Curran and Park, 2000), re-centering globalization (Iwabuchi, 2002), non-Western modernities (Shome, 2017), regionalization (Jin and Lee, 2012; Otmazgin, 2013), hybridization (Kraidy, 2005), post-colonialism (Ching, 2010; Erni and Chua, 2005), and the Global South (Ma, 2000). As the Global South emphasizes case studies of any individual countries in non-Western regions, some of them modify and challenge existing theories in explaining the emergence of non-Western media systems, like soft power with the ‘Korean Wave’ (Jin, 2016; Nye and Kim, 2013), ‘Bollywood movies’ (Athique, 2019), ‘contra-cultural flow’ with either Al Jazeera or Chinese media (Thussu, 2018; Wu, 2013), and ‘intra-cultural flow’ with the case of Hong Kong and Japan (Fung, 2007). These paradigms are not clearly exclusive as some of them like hybridization and post-colonialism overlap. Interestingly enough, these scholars are originally non-Western citizens who were born in Asia and the Middle East other than a handful of scholars like James Curran, and they all received their degrees in the West, although Otmazgin earned his degree in Japan. Regardless of their current positions in either the West or the East, they have greatly advanced non-Western focused media theories.

On the other hand, several academic works play a key role in developing non-Western media and cultural studies, challenging Western-driven scholarship. For example, Inter-Asia Cultural Studies (IACS), focusing on cultural studies in Asia, which was founded in 2000, aims to ‘provides a forum for scholars working in cultural studies in Asia’, while responding to ‘the re-centering of cultural studies outside the Anglo-American axis and participates in cultural politics at a local level, but with an international agenda’ (see the journal’s aims and scope). It has been managed by an editorial collective that is spread across several Asian countries and beyond. This undertaking is driven by the principle that cultural studies of Asia should not only have voices emanating from Asia in general but be based in Asia as well (Dirlik, 2005). Alongside other area journals, including Pacific Affairs, the IACS always emphasizes the citations of local materials, even in their vernacular languages.

Several scholars, including Levander and Mignolo (2011), however, argue that the IACS has its limits, and it, cannot clearly explain the power relations with the West as it focuses on inter-cultural flows within the region. They claim that the scope should be extended to the Global South discourse, which emphasizes necessary conflicts and tensions between the Global North and the Global South. For them, ‘the Global South is an entity that has been invented in the struggle and conflicts between imperial global domination and emancipatory and decolonial forces that do not acquiesce with global designs’, and ‘the Global South is the location where new visions of the future are emerging and where the global political and decolonial society is at work’ (Levander and Mignolo, 2011: 3).

This does not mean that everyone is able to or willing to develop non-Western-based theoretical frameworks, including the Global South discourse, differentiating them from Western-driven theories. Rather, the majority of media scholars who are originated in the East mainly apply Western theories in their works. Although some develop new theories in their mother languages, media scholars in the West do not acknowledge the emergence of new theories due to language barriers. After examining the emergence of Chinese media, therefore, Eric Ma (2000) even claims that the development of new theories in the Asian context is not needed:

I doubt very much that Asia needs completely new media theories. Justifying the claims for new Asian media theories by essentializing and exoticizing the Asian experience in fact puts forward an unjustifiable claim that Asia is unique and isolated from the development of transnational capitalism. What we need, I believe, is to modify and adapt existing theories to suit the [Asian] context. (p. 32)

However, the emergence of Asian media and popular culture developed in the early 21st century has been much bigger than imagined and remarkable as Bollywood movies from India, anime from Japan, and popular music from Korea have penetrated both neighboring countries and Western countries. For example, China has certainly advanced its digital culture and technologies, including online gaming and social media (e.g. Baidu and TikTok), to become one of the largest digital and cultural markets. As the recent popularity of BTS – a seven-member boy idol group in Korean popular music (K-pop) – and Parasite’s win at the 2020 Oscars prove, Korean popular culture has especially become globally popular in recent years. The nascent growth of these Asian popular and digital cultures asks media scholars to reconsider the field of media studies and rethink about the possibility of non-Western-driven media theories. It is not a simple task for non-Western media scholars to create new media theories, but it is crucial to enhance existing non-Western-based theories or develop new theoretical approaches. Here, I may offer some practical solutions, which emphasize (1) collaborative work, (2) spreadability of locally originated work, (3) interdisciplinarity, (4) historical process, and (5) the creation of local paradigms within the global context.

To begin with, advancing collective and collaborative work – organizing regional academic communities – among non-Western originated scholars is essential. In addition to the existing academic community, like the Asian Media Information and Communication Centre (AMIC) conference, small movements, including the formation of the Critical Media and Cultural Studies group on Facebook, organized by Jade Ju Oak Kim who was also trained in the United States, in July 2019, are complimentary. Since this Facebook page started, many Asian scholars have joined to share their ideas and studies, which show great potential to becoming one of the leading non-Western media studies groups. Through this kind of process, local-based scholars mainly using vernacular languages and Western-based scholars who are coming from Asia have opportunities to collaborate their work. They are able to understand local peculiarities and global standards, which demand them to develop new theoretical approaches.

It is also critical to have academic conferences and workshops themed on Asia, either organized by regionally located media scholars or by scholars located in the West. Through these academic venues, they can publish journal special issues or edited volumes, which would play a key role in advancing non-Western media and cultural theories. They work to not only gather media scholars but also develop new themes, directions, and theories. Unluckily, major association and conferences, such as International Communication Association (ICA) and National Communication Association (NCA), play roles in developing Western-based theoretical frames as they used to be held in the West. The leaders of these associations and conferences are mainly Westerners. Although these associations have critical views and approaches, it is very rare for them to advance non-Western-driven academic works. Under this circumstance, organizing smaller conferences, including pre-conferences – like a pre-conference titled ‘Digital Cultures of South Asia: Inequalities, Infrastructures, Informatization’ at the 2020 ICA – within these large conferences and workshops will create major spaces to develop local-based approaches and theories.

Meanwhile, local-based academic journals should play a key role in gathering local and regional voices. Several journals, focusing on regional case studies and their identities, like Inter-Asia Cultural Studies, Asian Journal of Communication, Chinese Journal of Communication, and Asian Communication Research, have been academic venues for Asia-Pacific media studies. However, they are still marginal, although we seemingly have a plethora of academic journals on diverse spheres of media, and therefore, we will know too little about media and communication of the East (Shome, 2017).

Second, it is ideal for scholars who mainly use English as their major publication language to read and cite academic materials written in vernacular languages. There are many good publications written in Korean, Japanese, and Chinese; however, many scholars who are originally from these countries, but teaching in the West do not read and cite these works, which is one of the major reasons why local-based academic works cannot go beyond their own linguistic limits. In this regard, one media professor who was trained in the United States and is now teaching in Korea asked me to cite academic publications written in Korean so that many people around the world understand distinctive phenomena. There have been some movements. For example, Pacific Affairs asks the authors to use books and articles published in Asian languages in their papers. What we have to keep in mind is that some Western concepts ‘fail to capture an adequate sense of people’s social and communicative time-space in their everyday life’ in non-Western regions (Takahashi, 2007), which is the reason for reading and citing locally produced academic materials. (p. 333)

Third, the significance of the convergence of media studies and area studies like Korean studies, Japanese studies, Chinese studies, and East Asian studies should be emphasized, as they share common experience, practice, and culture. As Kim (2000) points out with the case of Korean Studies,

since the first full-scale encounter with Western civilization at the end of the nineteenth century, Korea has experienced major social and cultural transformations induced by the collapse of the royal dynasty, the emergency of a modern nation-state, the colonization by an alien power, the devastation of civil war, and the zealous drive toward economic development. The most notable development that emerged in the academic world in the past hundred years of Korea’s modernization may be the gradual advancement of compartmentalization and specialization. The emergence of new fields of study in the modern period has fundamentally changed the traditional paradigms of scholarship. (p. 5)

However, compartmentalization in academic disciplines is not welcomed anymore. In recent years, there have been an increasing number of media scholars who have attended the Association of Asian Studies conference, as scholars in both fields gradually admit each other’s approaches instead of rejecting them. Interdisciplinary approaches substantially help scholars work together to build new thematic and theoretical paradigms. When they collectively work, they benefit each other in finding critical mass and local agendas. Media studies itself is interdisciplinary; however, it needs to extend its scope to admit new academic fields as its partners.

Fourth, the process of developing new theoretical frameworks in the East should be historical, not sudden, abruptly appearing. Western societies arose at a particular historical period after the Middle Ages and the break-up of feudalism, and therefore, ‘they were the result of a specific set of historical processes – economic, political, social, and cultural’ (Hall, 1996: 186). Unlike Ma’s (2000) claim, emphasizing the unnecessity of the development of Asia-based theories, it is vital to develop non-Western theories reflecting not only the nature of the Global South but also the recent growth of Asian popular culture and digital technologies around the globe. Continuous encounters with Western media theory cannot be avoided for non-Western media scholars under contemporary capitalist society, as a few Western countries dominate global society; however, continuous and historical work to develop non-Western perspectives certainly provides momentum to create a much-needed addition to the underrepresented scholarship on the East, in this case, Asian media literature in the near future.

Last, but not least, attempting to create new theories and practices rooted in the East should not be solely a challenge to introduce Asian culture to the Western literature on media and to construct a unique model of non-Western media by comparison in terms of the dichotomy between the West and the Rest (Hall, 1996; Takahashi, 2007). Non-Western theorization should also work toward the construction of globalizing media and communication studies of an internationalized framework in order to understand the dynamism and complexity of Asian audiences. The integrated theoretical frameworks

should not only be based on various media studies which have been developed within different cultural, social and historical contexts in the West, but also on the interpenetration of Western theories and concepts with those of the rest of the world in the context of globalization. (Takahashi, 2007: 334)

These frameworks themselves must be ‘reflexively contextualized and recreated depending on the cultures or societies which we seek to understand in the context of 21st-century globalization’ (Takahashi, 2007: 334). In many media scholars’ perceptions, de-Westernizing media studies or the Global South often positions ‘as an opposition or difference’ from the West (Shome, 2017); however, this is a narrow-minded approach. Through this process, media scholars find opportunities for a better understanding of non-Western media and culture.

With the rapid growth of non-Western popular culture and digital technologies, the identification of modernity with the West has broken down, which allows ‘for alternative cultural claims on the modern, and reconfiguring the temporalities and spatialities of capitalist modernity’ (Dirlik, 2005: 158). The milieu surrounding media studies will be continuously changing, and it offers great opportunities for non-Western media studies to develop and advance their unique canons, but remain embedded in Western theories. With the emphasis of the perspectives of rich Asian history and culture, media scholars can develop new paradigms running through Asian domains. While it is not necessary for the perspectives and process to be radical, it should be convincing to grasp Asia as a formation of a changeable force to the West. Of course, media scholars have to avoid limited perspectives emphasizing only intra-Asian dialogues, but they must analyze Asian perspectives in the globalization context. What non-Western scholars must contemplate are not only paradigms that are unique to Asian society but also general trends and norms that apply to the globe so that they can identify new trends and directions, which provide fundamentals to advance new theories and norms in global media studies. This certainly contributes to a broadening of media theory and comprehension in a way that takes account of the practices of non-Western countries outside the Anglo-American sphere.

Footnotes

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Dal Yong Jin

Notes

References

Athique

(2019) Soft power, culture and modernity: responses to Bollywood films in Thailand and the Philippines. International Communication Gazette 81(5): 470–489.

Ching

(2010) Inter-Asia cultural studies and the decolonial-turn. Inter-Asia Cultural Studies 11(2): 184–187.

Curran

Park

(2000) Beyond globalization theory. In: Curran

Park

(eds). De-Westernizing Media Studies. New York: Routledge, pp. 1–15.

Dirlik

(2005) Asia Pacific studies in an age of global modernity. Inter-Asia Cultural Studies 6(2): 158–170.

Erni

Chua

(eds) (2005) Asian Media Studies: Politics of Subjectivities. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Fung

(2007) Intra-Asian cultural flow: cultural homologies in Hong Kong and Japanese television soap operas. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 51(2): 265–286.

Hall

(1996) The west and the rest. In: Hall

Held

Thompson

(eds) Modernity: An Introduction to Modern Societies. Malden, MA: Blackwell, pp. 185–227.

Iwabuchi

(2002) Recentering Globalization: Popular Culture and Japanese Transnationalism. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Iyotani

(2002) Guroubarizeeshon [Globalization]. Tokyo, Japan: Sakuhinsha.

10.

Jin

(2016) New Korean Wave: Transnational Cultural Power in the Age of Social Media. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.

11.

Jin

Lee

D-H

(2012) The birth of east Asia: cultural regionalization through co-production strategies. Spectator 32(2): 26–40.

12.

Sakurai

(2007) Toward Asian media studies: the major paradigms and complex conjunctures, 1991-2006. In: Proceedings of the national communication association conference, Chicago, IL, 15–18 November.

13.

Katz

Peters

Liebes

, et al. (eds) (2003) Canonic Texts in Media Research: Are There Any? Should There Be? How about These? Malden, MA: Polity Press.

14.

Kim

(2000) Introduction: Korean studies at the crossroads. Korea Journal 40(1): 5–7.

15.

Kraidy

(2005) Hybridity Or, the Cultural Logic of Globalization. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.

16.

Levander

Mignolo

(2011) Introduction: the global south and world dis/order. The Global South 5(1): 1–11.

17.

EKW

(2000) Rethinking media studies: the case of China. In: Curran

Park

(eds) De-Westernizing Media Studies. New York: Routledge, pp. 21–34.

18.

Nye

Kim

(2013) Soft power and the Korean wave. In: Kim

(ed.) The Korean Wave: Korean Media Go Global. London: Routledge, pp. 31–42.

19.

Otmazgin

(2013) Regionalizing Culture: The Political Economy of Japanese Popular Culture in Asia. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press.

20.

Schiller

(1996) Theorizing Communication: A History. New York: Oxford University Press.

21.

Shome

(2017) Going south and engaging non-Western modernities. Media Theory. http://mediatheoryjournal.org/raka-shome-going-south-and-engaging-non-western-modernities/

22.

Sreberny-Mohammadi

(1997) The many cultural faces of imperialism. In: Golding

Harris

(eds) Beyond Cultural Imperialism. London: Sage, 49–68.

23.

Takahashi

(2007) De-Westernizing media studies: a Japanese perspective. Global Media and Communication 3(3): 330–335.

24.

Thussu

(2018) International Communication: Continuity and Change, 3rd edn. London: Bloomsbury.

25.

Waisbord

(2015) De-Westernization and cosmopolitan media studies. In: Lee

(ed.) Internationalizing International Communication. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, pp. 178–200.

26.

(2013) Assessing the potential of channel NewsAsia as the next ‘Al Jazeera’: a comparative discourse analysis of channel NewsAsia and the BBC. Global Media & Communication 9(2): 83–99.