Christmas eve in Detroit may look different this year. Probably fewer lights will shine in the jolly night. Probably fewer plates will be served at the dinner tables. Probably Santa Claus will not bring as many presents. This Christmas eve in Detroit will very likely not be jolly enough to help anyone forget the threatening circumstances. Even when the entire country faces a dark economic crisis, the situation is darker in Detroit where hundreds of thousands families’ incomes are dependant on three monster car companies on the brink of bankruptcy.
The Big Three is the name that has been assigned to the greatest American automakers: General Motors, Chrysler Corporation and Ford Motors. These companies, each with their own style, created icons of the American culture: All-American Muscles. These companies also employ 293,00 of the best-paid workers in the industry. With their geography, their size, their appeal, their prices, nothing seemed to indicate that anything could go wrong. But everything did. Currently the Big Three are on the verge of losing (if they have not lost already) their titles of the greatest American automakers, while asking the government for a thirty-four billion dollar bailout to keep them from declaring bankruptcy.
When it was time to point out fingers in search of blame, many different reasons arose. For one, there were the ridiculously high oil prices. When suddenly filling up a car’s tank of gasoline was worth from eighty to one hundred and twenty dollars every two weeks, everyone who owned a car that consumed twenty-five miles per gallon of gasoline was alarmed. They had to either sell their car and buy one that was cheaper and more gas-efficient or keep their car and not even think about buying a new one. Secondly, there was the building mortgage and credit crisis that threw the entire American nation into a state of recession. It was a chain reaction that started from the excessive purchase of unattainable real estate ended in the foreclosure of various important American banks and the necessity for a bailout of others. Furthermore it sunk stock prices and the foreign value of the dollar. The result was American citizens whose money was not worth as much as before, stockholders whose stocks were not worth practically anything at all, while prices still remained sky high. During a countrywide recession new cars were no longer a practical commodity but an unaffordable luxury.
Yet, for this specific situation, blaming is not particularly an easy task. According to Cahn and Abigail in their book “ Managing Conflict through Communication”, there are cognitive biases in the way people attribute fault. The attribution theory states that people act in conflict because of the assumptions they draw about others; yet, interestingly enough, these assumptions are drawn inversely than the explanations of our own actions. When the other does something wrong, we attribute it to his internal qualities. Yet, when the other does something right, we attribute it to external circumstances such as luck. Inversely, when we do something wrong we attribute it to external circumstances, while when we succeed we attribute it to our own meritorious qualities. When the time came to explain the reasons for their bleeding bank account, the Big Three looked at the outside circumstances to explain their failure. Yet, that could have most likely been product of the biases in the attribution theory and perhaps, it is necessary to look inside, and explore the faulty internal qualities of each of the Big Three companies in order to truly recognize the source of the automobile industry crisis of 2008.
A company is like a living organism. It is a structure composed of individual units that work together in order to function as a whole. Like an organism, a company too has a life cycle. In the book “Organizational Communication”, Katherine Miller asserts that the “natural life cycle of a [company] might include a start-up phase in which the company develops…a growth phase in which client relationships are developed and the size of the company grows, a steady harvest phase in which the company serves existing clients, and a decay stage in which…the services become less relevant to the marketplace” (Miller 180). To steer away from the phase of decay, a company can struggle and succeed by changing. Planned change allows the company to reinvent itself adapting to the current market’s needs and wants. Planned change is the result of vision, connoisseurship of the market, and great leading skills. Judging the Big Three’s organizational cycle, it would be accurate to say that they are facing the somber threat of decay. And even when some drastic changes occurred, none of them were planned. When a company faces unplanned change, they are by definition considered to be in a crisis. Yet, this is usually so, when a natural disaster occurs or when an important figure of the company is confronted with a scandal. But the Big Three are not in crisis due to unplanned change, but the lack of change, and more importantly the resistance to change.
“Close your eyes and picture yards of buttery pastel leather, yawning chrome grilles, ferocious V-8s, rare-wood exterior panels. Mmmmm. Now imagine vehicles with names like Thunderbird, Charger, Impala, S-Type. Although it all sounds like an early 1960s flashback, these were highlights of January's 1999 Detroit auto show” (Zesiger 1999). The latter are the opening lines of the magazine Fortune’s millennium top ten vehicles for the millennium prediction report. The styles and the names surely evoke grandness that once upon a time had its place, yet at the start of the new millennium they evoked images dusty memories that should be either at old sepia photographs or a at an antique shop. Neither of the Big Three were working with any sense of innovation, they were merely renovating structures that had once been popular.
If one should not judge a book by its cover, probably a car should not be judged by its bodywork. Regardless of the outdated Grease Lighning-esque appearance of the American cars, their efficiency was not groundbreaking either. On the list of 2009’s Most Fuel Efficient Cars, products from the Big Three are nowhere to be found. While Asian and European cars’ miles per gallon range from forty to fifty, American cars are way behind with a capacity of twenty-five miles per gallon. These low mpg standards are problematic on two levels. First, in sight of soaring oil prices, American cars were not able to adapt to the market. Regardless of the situation, a businessman’s strategy is to understand a market and sell accordingly. Even if the high oil prices are of course a problem, the actual problem was the fact that the Big Three could not adapt to the changing market. Secondly, in sight of global warming it is not a matter of adapting to the market to produce profit, but of responding to global needs to protect the environment. Even not responding eco-friendly is a way of resisting to adapt to the market for we are facing such a serious global crisis that everyone is turning “green” and looking down on those who do not.
Even when a company has suffered from visionary or adaptation problems, not all is lost. A good leader should be able to understand the situation and effectively communicate with the other members of the company to change at a time where change is necessary. Neither Rick Wagoner, Allan Mullaly, or Robert Nardelli knew how to handle their near-bankruptcy situations. Instead of devising plans to save the companies that each of them run, they all turned to the government in look for a financial Deus Ex Machina: a thirty-four billion dollar bailout. When referring to how leaders should communicate, Miller suggests that: “perhaps more important than what is said, is how it is said” (Miller 191). Worse than the fact that the Big Three CEOs were asking for a bailout, was the fact that they all flew to Washington D.C in GM’s 36 million luxury aircraft to make their case to Congress. This reckless act did not precisely communicate to anyone the despair of near-bankruptcy that needed thirty-four billion of the taxpayer’s dollars in order to save their companies.
Despite of the reasons that the Big Three have come up with to attribute their failures to, none of them stand a chance. If this auto industry crisis were in fact product of circumstances, every car company in the United States would be in the need of a bailout and that is not the case. With a third of the size, a third of the paying salaries, and twice as much vision companies like Toyota or Honda are not feeling the auto industry crisis. These Asian companies were very much underestimated when they first settled in United States, but it was their understanding of what the market was asking for that led them to produce cheap, efficient, hubrids that hold long waitlists of anxious buyers. The auto industry crisis is in fact an American car crisis. The Big Three were not as big as they thought they were, and their poor managerial skills and resistance to change led them to the position they are right now.
There are three stages in which a company that faces unplanned change might be: precrisis, crisis, and postcrisis. During precrisis, the company should anticipate what is about to come in order to prepare for it. Because this crisis was something that the Big Three brought on themselves, they did not precisely have an understanding of their situation to prepare for anything. During crisis, the organization “tries to make sense of what is happening” in order to act accordingly. Finally, during postcrisis, the company focuses on ways to deal with the crisis and determine ways to prevent it from occurring once more. The Big Three are now stationed in a limbo in between crisis and postcrisis. They have reported their failures in order to make sense of their situation and are pushing for the bailout in order to repair the damage that has been done. Yet, we must ask ourselves. Is a bailout necessary to implement change within the companies?
“Bailout” is a fancy term to signify that a certain amount of the taxpayer’s money is granted to big companies to save them from bankruptcy. There have been heated debates on whether the government should grant the bailout or not. Lack of deep knowledge in economics I do not have a set opinion on whether the bailout should be granted to the Big Three or not. Yet, the words of the Republican senator who refused last week to vote left me thinking. He argued that a bailout should not be granted to the Big Three because that would actually produce change. With the bailout, they could carry on with their faulty management at least for some amount of time. If the Big Three were to file Chapter Eleven for companies on bankruptcy, without enough money to spend they would have to regulate their budget and use it wisely because it would be all they have. If they file Chapter Eleven, that actual state of bankruptcy would probably create an impact strong enough that they would learn a thing or two about change, and organizational management in order to avoid this from occurring in the future. It would seem that continuing in this course would be lack of change, but it is precisely this course that would lead to changes in attitude, understanding of the world, and vision. Without granting the bailout, the thing to worry about is how the mistakes of three big men will have affected the lives of thousands of employees and their families. This Christmas eve will be very different in Detroit, and we should hope it is the last one like this.
References
Abigail , Ruth and Dudley Cahn. “Managing Conflict Through Communication”. Pearson Education. New York. 2007.
Cloud, John. “Why the SUV is all the Rage”. February 24th, 2003.
Dash, Eric. “Auto Industry feels the Pain of Tight Credit”. May 27, 2008.
Isidore, Chris. “The Big Three Depression Risk”. November 26, 2008.
Miller, Katherine. “Organizational Communication”. Wadsworth. Boston. 2006.
Newman, Rick. “Lifeline for GM, Ford, and Chrysler”. December 3rd, 2008.
Ross, Brian. “Big Three Fly Private Jets to Plead Public Funds”. November 2008.
Sachs, Jeffrey. “A bridge for the Carmakers”. November 18, 2008.
Zesiger,Sue. “Hot-wheels Nostalgia”. Fortune Magazine. February 15, 1999.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Analysis of: “Barack Obama, Feminist in Chief?” in terms of A.R Radcliffe-Brown and Sherry Ortner
Cancerous cells may remain inactive for years until they trigger a tumor. While these cells are dormant, the organism functions properly and its health is not compromised. Yet, it is harboring a disease that runs on a countdown. On the first stages after the cells mutate and develop cancer, because the disease has not manifested itself to its fullest extent, the organism still appears to be healthy. Yet, it is now infected with a tumor that holds the capacity to grow, invade and spread throughout the entire organism debilitating it. In his essay “On the Concept of Function in Social Science”, Alfred Radcliff-Brown juxtaposes a society with a living organism. He asserts that as a living organism, a society is a structure composed of units that relate to one another and work together in order to maintain the continuous functioning of the whole (Radcliffe-Brown 395). As a living organism, a society too can bear a latent cancer cells that can detonate into a sickness that may seize it in its entirety.
Analyzing the American society under a medical scope anyone could diagnose apparent symptoms of illness. After eight long years of a republican presidency that included a terrorist attack, a short invasion of Afghanistan, a war on Iraq, and the beginning of an economic crisis, Americans were looking for a change that could improve the current situation. Yet, I must note that its current situation is that of an organism sitting out on the rain- its environment is conducing to disease yet, until the body stops functioning properly, it is not sick. Even when the American society is sitting out on a tempest, the units of the society are working together in order to change their circumstances. In the 2008 elections, either of the democratic choices presented a meaningful political change, thus it was precisely “CHANGE” that led Barack Obama to become the president elect. The idea of change was not only Obama’s campaign motto, or his personal image, it was an idea embedded in his list of future policies. Some issues addressed like warfare, healthcare, or the economic crisis seem to be the most relevant in order to reestablish an asymptomatic functioning of society. Even when these matters are not merely superficial, they are in fact symptoms of the surface. It is important that a society examines itself in depth, in order to discover cancer cells that maybe if not fully manifested now, could degenerate into a malignant tumor and rupture the social fabric.
Katha Pollit recognizes some of these cancerous cells that even if not fully manifested, are far from being dormant. On her article, “Barack Obama, Feminist in Chief?”, she points out how now, even a month before Obama’s inauguration day, feminist groups are already on the look out for issues where pressure might be applied. The American society is one of many societies that nests sexism. Sexual discrimination in United States does not reside on a level of ideology merely where men believe that they are superior to women; it is reflected on the outermost layer of actions. Gender prejudice in the workplace is one of the best examples of literal measures taken that disadvantage women: wages for women are lower, the physical appearance of women may influence the decision to hire them, amongst others. Pollit points out that merely taking some feminist positions “won’t seal the deal” for Obama; he should “make gender equality a keystone of his administration”. (Pollit 2008). Any change must be deep-rooted rather than symbolical in order to have a real effect on society. Naming women in important political positions or “rectifying outmoded [policies] that disadvantage women” are practical and temporary strategies, yet, a genuine change is needed in order to heal a wound that may soon infect the structure of society: the devaluation of women.
One cannot say that it is an American issue but rather a pan-cultural fact as Sherry Ortner calls it. In her article “Is Female to Male as Nature is to Culture?”, Sherry Ortner poses an interesting analogy that may serve to understand the reasons why women in different cultures and in different ways are devaluated. As the title exposes it, it is the apparent similitude between women and nature and men and culture that posits men on a higher social rank than women. Ortner defines culture as all that which surpasses and can modify nature, which could be seen as male duties such as food gathering, technology, and even art. Thus female duties are primitive and in their natural state such as birth giving and the socialization of children (Ortner 68). It has been the very much present and noticeable devaluation that created a movement such as feminism that led social revolutions in the 20th century. It has been that devaluation that at an opportunity like Barack Obama’s election, feminist groups try to forge awareness on a social issue of such relevance.
Certain diseases like cancer may be hidden, and it is only an early detection and proper treatment of the disease that can lead an organism to combat and vanquish it. If a society discovers its cancerous cells, relevant measures must be placed effective before it degenerates into sickness. To explain how a society could become ill, Radcliff-Brown turned to the Greeks who thought that when a particular unit of society broke the condition of harmonious functioning, the society would not perish, but would be “thrown into a condition of functional disunity”, referred to as dysnomia (Radcliffe-Brown 398). A good illustrative example of a dysnomic society consumed by illness is a country in a civil war: it cannot function while its constituent parts are not only divided but attacking each other. Yet a society does not have to declare a state of war in order to face peril. An issue like female devaluation which affects half of any given population from the jumpstart may evolve into a disease so powerful that it can very realistically affect the functioning, structure, and even existence of a society.
Female devaluation has been detected, now something must be done about it. Pollit has an accurate idea on how. On her article, she subtly differentiated herself from reactive feminists. Instead of attacking president elect Barack Obama for nominating “sexist theorizer Larry Summers as director of the National Economic Council”; or asking his wife a “top-notch lawyer [to become] a stay home wife”; or articulating that he does not want a “girly dog” on the Barbara Walters Show (Pollit 2008); she encourages him to truly put on effect his ideas of change in matters of gender equality.
Radcliff-Brown contends that a structure is dependent on the “collection of its units” and yet not on the specificity of each one: the life cycle allows for cells as well as members of society to enter and leave the structure without it losing its shape (Radcliff-Brown 396). Yet, if a unit of society is granted the power to influence the functioning of the entire society maybe a key unit like the president of a country can in fact improve the functioning and structure of a society.
A president like Barack Obama who represents the idea of change in every sense of the word, is at the least the best opportunity the American society has to start curing female devaluation. Katha Pollit has some ideas on economic stimulus. Even if the problem lies further beneath economic equality, Sherry Ortner asserts that “the situation should be attacked from both sides”: social institutions should be changed in order to slowly repair cultural assumptions. Female devaluation is not a universal fact. Universality would imply that it is something that has always existed, that exists, and that will always exist; and that train of thinking is pessimistic enough to thwart change. Female devaluation should be seen as a cultural and historical flaw that must be repaired. It has been present on the years of our history yet it is treatable. More than hoping that president elect Barack Obama will take enough conscience and resolve the problem, every unit of the American society should contribute in partial activity to improve the total activity of its whole structure.
Bibliographical References
Ortner, Sherry. “Is Female to Nature as Male is to Culture”? Stanford, CA:
Stanford University Press, pp. 68-87.
Pollit, Katha. “Barack Obama, Feminist in Chief”? The Nation. December 3rd, 2008.
Radcliff-Brown, Alfred. “On the Concept of Function in Social Science”. American Anthropologist, New Series, Vol. 37. No.3. September 1935, pp.394-402.
Analyzing the American society under a medical scope anyone could diagnose apparent symptoms of illness. After eight long years of a republican presidency that included a terrorist attack, a short invasion of Afghanistan, a war on Iraq, and the beginning of an economic crisis, Americans were looking for a change that could improve the current situation. Yet, I must note that its current situation is that of an organism sitting out on the rain- its environment is conducing to disease yet, until the body stops functioning properly, it is not sick. Even when the American society is sitting out on a tempest, the units of the society are working together in order to change their circumstances. In the 2008 elections, either of the democratic choices presented a meaningful political change, thus it was precisely “CHANGE” that led Barack Obama to become the president elect. The idea of change was not only Obama’s campaign motto, or his personal image, it was an idea embedded in his list of future policies. Some issues addressed like warfare, healthcare, or the economic crisis seem to be the most relevant in order to reestablish an asymptomatic functioning of society. Even when these matters are not merely superficial, they are in fact symptoms of the surface. It is important that a society examines itself in depth, in order to discover cancer cells that maybe if not fully manifested now, could degenerate into a malignant tumor and rupture the social fabric.
Katha Pollit recognizes some of these cancerous cells that even if not fully manifested, are far from being dormant. On her article, “Barack Obama, Feminist in Chief?”, she points out how now, even a month before Obama’s inauguration day, feminist groups are already on the look out for issues where pressure might be applied. The American society is one of many societies that nests sexism. Sexual discrimination in United States does not reside on a level of ideology merely where men believe that they are superior to women; it is reflected on the outermost layer of actions. Gender prejudice in the workplace is one of the best examples of literal measures taken that disadvantage women: wages for women are lower, the physical appearance of women may influence the decision to hire them, amongst others. Pollit points out that merely taking some feminist positions “won’t seal the deal” for Obama; he should “make gender equality a keystone of his administration”. (Pollit 2008). Any change must be deep-rooted rather than symbolical in order to have a real effect on society. Naming women in important political positions or “rectifying outmoded [policies] that disadvantage women” are practical and temporary strategies, yet, a genuine change is needed in order to heal a wound that may soon infect the structure of society: the devaluation of women.
One cannot say that it is an American issue but rather a pan-cultural fact as Sherry Ortner calls it. In her article “Is Female to Male as Nature is to Culture?”, Sherry Ortner poses an interesting analogy that may serve to understand the reasons why women in different cultures and in different ways are devaluated. As the title exposes it, it is the apparent similitude between women and nature and men and culture that posits men on a higher social rank than women. Ortner defines culture as all that which surpasses and can modify nature, which could be seen as male duties such as food gathering, technology, and even art. Thus female duties are primitive and in their natural state such as birth giving and the socialization of children (Ortner 68). It has been the very much present and noticeable devaluation that created a movement such as feminism that led social revolutions in the 20th century. It has been that devaluation that at an opportunity like Barack Obama’s election, feminist groups try to forge awareness on a social issue of such relevance.
Certain diseases like cancer may be hidden, and it is only an early detection and proper treatment of the disease that can lead an organism to combat and vanquish it. If a society discovers its cancerous cells, relevant measures must be placed effective before it degenerates into sickness. To explain how a society could become ill, Radcliff-Brown turned to the Greeks who thought that when a particular unit of society broke the condition of harmonious functioning, the society would not perish, but would be “thrown into a condition of functional disunity”, referred to as dysnomia (Radcliffe-Brown 398). A good illustrative example of a dysnomic society consumed by illness is a country in a civil war: it cannot function while its constituent parts are not only divided but attacking each other. Yet a society does not have to declare a state of war in order to face peril. An issue like female devaluation which affects half of any given population from the jumpstart may evolve into a disease so powerful that it can very realistically affect the functioning, structure, and even existence of a society.
Female devaluation has been detected, now something must be done about it. Pollit has an accurate idea on how. On her article, she subtly differentiated herself from reactive feminists. Instead of attacking president elect Barack Obama for nominating “sexist theorizer Larry Summers as director of the National Economic Council”; or asking his wife a “top-notch lawyer [to become] a stay home wife”; or articulating that he does not want a “girly dog” on the Barbara Walters Show (Pollit 2008); she encourages him to truly put on effect his ideas of change in matters of gender equality.
Radcliff-Brown contends that a structure is dependent on the “collection of its units” and yet not on the specificity of each one: the life cycle allows for cells as well as members of society to enter and leave the structure without it losing its shape (Radcliff-Brown 396). Yet, if a unit of society is granted the power to influence the functioning of the entire society maybe a key unit like the president of a country can in fact improve the functioning and structure of a society.
A president like Barack Obama who represents the idea of change in every sense of the word, is at the least the best opportunity the American society has to start curing female devaluation. Katha Pollit has some ideas on economic stimulus. Even if the problem lies further beneath economic equality, Sherry Ortner asserts that “the situation should be attacked from both sides”: social institutions should be changed in order to slowly repair cultural assumptions. Female devaluation is not a universal fact. Universality would imply that it is something that has always existed, that exists, and that will always exist; and that train of thinking is pessimistic enough to thwart change. Female devaluation should be seen as a cultural and historical flaw that must be repaired. It has been present on the years of our history yet it is treatable. More than hoping that president elect Barack Obama will take enough conscience and resolve the problem, every unit of the American society should contribute in partial activity to improve the total activity of its whole structure.
Bibliographical References
Ortner, Sherry. “Is Female to Nature as Male is to Culture”? Stanford, CA:
Stanford University Press, pp. 68-87.
Pollit, Katha. “Barack Obama, Feminist in Chief”? The Nation. December 3rd, 2008.
Radcliff-Brown, Alfred. “On the Concept of Function in Social Science”. American Anthropologist, New Series, Vol. 37. No.3. September 1935, pp.394-402.
Intercultural Communication
Human interaction used to take place in a local scope, but with the advent of most of the 20th and 21st century technology, our scope has become global. We travel, we have conversations, we see movies, we do business with people that come from a different culture and have a different background. And exactly that is the point I am trying to get at. Within local horizons we do not have to prepare to communicate.. It is almost natural to us to express what we think and how we feel through words. Yet, what may seem natural or normal to us, is not necessarily for someone else from a different culture. So intercultural communication has become more relevant than ever, especially to us who live in New York City –a melting pot of cultures- and attend NYU – a university with a very diverse student body-. There are a list of obstacles that would be useful to learn about to better prepare for intercultural interactions.
The first obstacle that we may encounter is at the basic level of words. When communicating in a language other than our native language we may literally get lost in translation. According to David Victor, in his studies of Cross-cultural communication, there are two types of translation errors: gross translation errors and mistranslations of subtle distinctions. Gross translation errors occur when we flat out use an incorrect word. Mistranslations of subtle distinctions occur when a word is used but its meaning, even though closely related to the intended one, is not completely accurate. These are the most detectable errors because at the moment that an incorrect word is used by the non-native speaker, the native speaker can indicate the interruption of the message. After we have the words down, we have to regard how many words we choose to communicate.
The second obstacle that we may encounter is at the level of context. The language of some cultures is structured in a way that there should be no space for open interpretation. These cultures are referred to as low-context. They pay closer attention to the word choice rather than to intended meaning. Some low context cultures are United States, England, and Western European countries. On the other hand, there are cultures where the context is more important than the actual words that are said. High- context cultures, more than valuing what is said, they value how things are said. Some high context cultures are China, Japan, Mexico, and Greece. It is important to keep in mind the context, because it also affects our approach to any given message.
The third obstacle that we may encounter is at the level of directness. According to Sarah Trenholm in her book Thinking Through Communication, closely related to context dependence is Verbal directness. Low-context cultures appreciate directness. They go straight to the point. High context cultures on the other hand, tend to hint and beat around the bush. Thinking about how to approach a message leads us to think how to address the rank of the person who we are talking to.
The fourth kind of obstacle that we may encounter is at the level of formality. How we address authority varies from culture to culture. Cultures with distinct power hierarchies tend to be more formal. They have protocol to address to authority figures and show respect. Chinese and Spanish for example, as languages, they contain words to distinguish different levels of authority. English on the other hand, only has the pronoun you, which is reflected on the informal and value of equality that the American society has. After we manage how to speak with our words, we have to think about how we speak with our body.
The fifth kind of obstacle that we may encounter is at the level of non-verbal behavior. Nonverbal behavior includes dress, kinesics, oculesics, haptics, proxemics and paralangue. These are fancy terms for dress, body language, eye contact, touching behavior, body space, and entonation. How much we express ourselves affect our intercultural communication, so we must understand how different cultures perceive non-verbal expressions. In the one hand, expressive cultures display their emotions highly. They hug or cry without any social concerns. This is mostly predominant in latin cultures. On the other hand, non-expressive cultures try to neutralize their emotions. They value evenness. This is mostly predominant in the southeast asian cultures. The American and European cultures are somewhere in the middle. It is important to keep in mind the non-verbal preferences of the person we are speaking with to keep ourselves from unintentional offenses; like President Bush who went to Australia and made the peace sign when the V holds a sexual meaning.
As I said earlier, we do not have to go very far to be exposed to a different culture. In New York, the locality has very much become global. When interacting with a person from a different background try to think about what I said today. Try to understand how you and the person who you are talking to, respond to a different language, speak contextually, speak directly or indirectly, are comfortable or not with with expressiveness and body language, and finally act formally in the interaction. Understanding the importance of intercultural communication can save you from an offense in a casual conversation, from an offense that could ruin an international business deal. The world is at our hands, we must treat it carefully.
The first obstacle that we may encounter is at the basic level of words. When communicating in a language other than our native language we may literally get lost in translation. According to David Victor, in his studies of Cross-cultural communication, there are two types of translation errors: gross translation errors and mistranslations of subtle distinctions. Gross translation errors occur when we flat out use an incorrect word. Mistranslations of subtle distinctions occur when a word is used but its meaning, even though closely related to the intended one, is not completely accurate. These are the most detectable errors because at the moment that an incorrect word is used by the non-native speaker, the native speaker can indicate the interruption of the message. After we have the words down, we have to regard how many words we choose to communicate.
The second obstacle that we may encounter is at the level of context. The language of some cultures is structured in a way that there should be no space for open interpretation. These cultures are referred to as low-context. They pay closer attention to the word choice rather than to intended meaning. Some low context cultures are United States, England, and Western European countries. On the other hand, there are cultures where the context is more important than the actual words that are said. High- context cultures, more than valuing what is said, they value how things are said. Some high context cultures are China, Japan, Mexico, and Greece. It is important to keep in mind the context, because it also affects our approach to any given message.
The third obstacle that we may encounter is at the level of directness. According to Sarah Trenholm in her book Thinking Through Communication, closely related to context dependence is Verbal directness. Low-context cultures appreciate directness. They go straight to the point. High context cultures on the other hand, tend to hint and beat around the bush. Thinking about how to approach a message leads us to think how to address the rank of the person who we are talking to.
The fourth kind of obstacle that we may encounter is at the level of formality. How we address authority varies from culture to culture. Cultures with distinct power hierarchies tend to be more formal. They have protocol to address to authority figures and show respect. Chinese and Spanish for example, as languages, they contain words to distinguish different levels of authority. English on the other hand, only has the pronoun you, which is reflected on the informal and value of equality that the American society has. After we manage how to speak with our words, we have to think about how we speak with our body.
The fifth kind of obstacle that we may encounter is at the level of non-verbal behavior. Nonverbal behavior includes dress, kinesics, oculesics, haptics, proxemics and paralangue. These are fancy terms for dress, body language, eye contact, touching behavior, body space, and entonation. How much we express ourselves affect our intercultural communication, so we must understand how different cultures perceive non-verbal expressions. In the one hand, expressive cultures display their emotions highly. They hug or cry without any social concerns. This is mostly predominant in latin cultures. On the other hand, non-expressive cultures try to neutralize their emotions. They value evenness. This is mostly predominant in the southeast asian cultures. The American and European cultures are somewhere in the middle. It is important to keep in mind the non-verbal preferences of the person we are speaking with to keep ourselves from unintentional offenses; like President Bush who went to Australia and made the peace sign when the V holds a sexual meaning.
As I said earlier, we do not have to go very far to be exposed to a different culture. In New York, the locality has very much become global. When interacting with a person from a different background try to think about what I said today. Try to understand how you and the person who you are talking to, respond to a different language, speak contextually, speak directly or indirectly, are comfortable or not with with expressiveness and body language, and finally act formally in the interaction. Understanding the importance of intercultural communication can save you from an offense in a casual conversation, from an offense that could ruin an international business deal. The world is at our hands, we must treat it carefully.
Analysis of Postmodernism on Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
The postmodern man is often described as a speeding entity, running away from his primitive past towards the future; until he stops to realize that the future he is running to is unclear and dark. When he thinks about it, he realizes that he does not know where he is running to because he has detached himself from the past he was running from. In my opinion, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind definitely ranks between the best of postmodernist movies. In fact, the movie does not only encompass postmodernist characteristics in terms of form, but also depicts the image of the postmodern man in a relationship.
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind is an amalgamation between Romantic Comedy and Science Fiction, which allows us to understand the intricacies of the relationship of the postmodern man. The main narrative of the movie consists of an odd couple Joel (Jim Carey) and Clementine (Kate Winslet) who after a terrible break up fight decide to engage themselves in a memory erasing procedure to forget their ache of heartbreak. Inside of Joel’s psyche while the procedure is taking place, we are able to view into the relationship from his perspective and later accompany him in the task of avoiding the procedure as he regrets having his good memories erased.
If we analyze the film through the lens of postmodernism judging by the characteristic traits of the movement pointed out in Marita Sturken and Lisa Cartwright’s book Practices of Looking, we can conclude that it is very much postmodern for a series of reasons.
Primarily, as I mentioned before, the postmodern man is a running entity who at one point stops and questions his path towards the future: “Do we really know that progress is always a good thing”? (251) In the film, both main characters Joel and Clementine, attempt to run away from their past -a failed relationship- by undergoing the clinical procedure of having their memories erased. Not only the situation that the main characters decide to receive the procedure, but the fact that there was a clinic that would perform it to the public symbolizes the “running away from the past”. Yet, in the middle of the procedure Joel questions and regrets his decision of submitting himself to it, as if he was questioning the progress he had decided to make. A large segment of the movie is about Joel trying to escape the procedure from inside his mind.
The film has a psychological quality to it because we, through Joel, are able to explore the depths of his consciousness. His subconscious is attributed a body inside his memories. This refers to the trait of postmodernism of simulation: “where the original and the copy coexist in a digitized version [of the world]” (253). Once the procedure has started, Joel is able to see himself, from inside his head, submitting himself into the procedure. Throughout the movie there is a clash between Joel’s conscious original and the digitized copy, which is being erased. There is a brief moment when the simulation ends and the digitized and the real Joel meet, as his subconscious is able to make the body open the eyes and look at the external world and process it with the subconscious. Yet, this moment is very brief and Joel returns to his digitized version of his world of memories.
Because the film portrays the coexistance of the original and the subconscious copy, I will dare claim that this movie translated a postmodernist technique of form into content. One of the characteristics of postmodernism in advertising is reflection: “[where] an ad acknowledges to the viewer the ad’s placement within a magazine” (265). In other words, an entity acknowledges its place within a given space. Inside Joel’s psyche and memories, not only his subconscious form recognizes that it exists inside its mind but also the characters it interacts with. Both the doctor and Clementine inside his head at one point or another as interacting with Joel, accept that they are in fact his head. While trying to escape the procedure, Joel tries to ask doctor Mierzwiak to stop it, but he replies that he is just a product of his own imagination; therefore placing himself inside Joel’s head and accepting his imaginary state. The situation with Clementine is somewhat different. Joel is able to explain to Clementine that she is in fact a memory of him inside his head, but she instead of constricting herself to being a mere product of his psyche, she acquires her own personality and tries to aid Joel into getting the procedure stopped.
Because the postmodern man is running and halting to question the future he is running to is “a crisis of cultural authority”(251). It is almost as if after running for so long towards the future, the postmodern man hesitates and doubts his position and how he came to being there. This is best exemplified by a scene where Clementine undergoes an emotional breakdown a few days after she has had her memory erased. She comments to her recently acquired boyfriend that she feels old, and that her skin is coming off. She repeats various times “nothing makes any sense to me” with a tone of frustration. Another scene that presents confusion on the present state, is a moment when Joel opens his journal and cannot remember having ripped out a number of pages, which were in fact ripped right before the procedure so he would not have anything to remember Clementine by. If one thinks of it, to stand in a present point without knowledge of the past must be quite puzzling. Linked with the idea that the postmodern man runs away from the past, is the idea that maybe running, detaching ourselves, or disregarding the past prevents us from learning something. Clementine and Joel, after having part of their memories erased, have no explanations for the feelings they could be having and are ignorant to the fact that the feelings felt are not without precedent, but consequence of a past that was erased. If we skip a step, we skip all the elements of it that would most likely explain the succeeding stage.
Consequence of the uncertainty of the present and how he came to being there, the postmodern man is unable to retell his personal narrative chronologically. The movie depicts this both in form –“[by] defying the conventions of cinematic language”- and in content (259). In regards to form, there are jump cuts in a nonlinear retelling of the story. We travel back and forth in time to learn about Joel and Clementine’s relationship. There are visual cues that hint once the narrative has changed directions such as Clementine’s hair color which is different in between stages of their relationship and furthermore of the retelling of it. In regards to content, the film starts at the most recent event –when they meet again- and roughly changes to the first event of the main narrative –the breakup-.
Another trait of postmodernism is “the notion that perhaps nothing new can be made, which implies to a certain degree that the idea of something completely new is a fallacy” (261). This is presented in the movie in two different ways.
First, initiated with postmodern architecture, there is “the plagiarizing…and borrowing of previous styles” (260). In the movie, we see the character of Patrick who works at the erasing clinic, and falls inlove with Clemetine the night she has her procedure done. Because he is so desperate to have her like him, he steals the items that she had turned in because they reminded her of Joel, in order to learn how to be like him. He gave her the same gifts and tried to reproduce the same lines that Joel had used previously. At the beginning, the concept of borrowing does work because Clementine dates Patrick for a while, but towards the middle of the movie the concept only backfired because subconsciously Clementine feels that there is something odd with her feeling of déjà vu.
Secondly, there is the impossibility of creating something new. After the movie ends we are able to see that Joel and Clementine, after having their memories erased, they meet again. Not only do they meet again but they reproduce one date they had had previously: having a picnic on a frozen river. This clearly represents the idea of going back to the start and reproducing what was already once. This notion interacts with the confusion of how the postmodern feels on how he got to be where he is. This occurs because when we skip a step and don’t learn what we should have we lose a sense of direction, and go around in circles, repeating what we had already done before.
Ultimately we can conclude that the movie sends a message about postmodern relationships in the postmodern era. We live in a world of speed and of emotions on sale. It is hard enough of a task to figure ourselves out in our environment to truly understand relationships. Yet, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind has some advice to give.When we rush things, there comes a point where the relationship becomes unsustainable and thrusts us into crisis. When this occurs, we must not attempt to flee inconveniences for when we try to suppress the problems, erase them or escape them, instead of going back to work them out, we come to re-encounter them, forming a vicious cycle that might eventually become inescapable.
Works Cited
1. Cartwright, Lisa and Marita Sturken. Practices of Looking. Oxford University Press: New York, 2001. pp 251-265
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind is an amalgamation between Romantic Comedy and Science Fiction, which allows us to understand the intricacies of the relationship of the postmodern man. The main narrative of the movie consists of an odd couple Joel (Jim Carey) and Clementine (Kate Winslet) who after a terrible break up fight decide to engage themselves in a memory erasing procedure to forget their ache of heartbreak. Inside of Joel’s psyche while the procedure is taking place, we are able to view into the relationship from his perspective and later accompany him in the task of avoiding the procedure as he regrets having his good memories erased.
If we analyze the film through the lens of postmodernism judging by the characteristic traits of the movement pointed out in Marita Sturken and Lisa Cartwright’s book Practices of Looking, we can conclude that it is very much postmodern for a series of reasons.
Primarily, as I mentioned before, the postmodern man is a running entity who at one point stops and questions his path towards the future: “Do we really know that progress is always a good thing”? (251) In the film, both main characters Joel and Clementine, attempt to run away from their past -a failed relationship- by undergoing the clinical procedure of having their memories erased. Not only the situation that the main characters decide to receive the procedure, but the fact that there was a clinic that would perform it to the public symbolizes the “running away from the past”. Yet, in the middle of the procedure Joel questions and regrets his decision of submitting himself to it, as if he was questioning the progress he had decided to make. A large segment of the movie is about Joel trying to escape the procedure from inside his mind.
The film has a psychological quality to it because we, through Joel, are able to explore the depths of his consciousness. His subconscious is attributed a body inside his memories. This refers to the trait of postmodernism of simulation: “where the original and the copy coexist in a digitized version [of the world]” (253). Once the procedure has started, Joel is able to see himself, from inside his head, submitting himself into the procedure. Throughout the movie there is a clash between Joel’s conscious original and the digitized copy, which is being erased. There is a brief moment when the simulation ends and the digitized and the real Joel meet, as his subconscious is able to make the body open the eyes and look at the external world and process it with the subconscious. Yet, this moment is very brief and Joel returns to his digitized version of his world of memories.
Because the film portrays the coexistance of the original and the subconscious copy, I will dare claim that this movie translated a postmodernist technique of form into content. One of the characteristics of postmodernism in advertising is reflection: “[where] an ad acknowledges to the viewer the ad’s placement within a magazine” (265). In other words, an entity acknowledges its place within a given space. Inside Joel’s psyche and memories, not only his subconscious form recognizes that it exists inside its mind but also the characters it interacts with. Both the doctor and Clementine inside his head at one point or another as interacting with Joel, accept that they are in fact his head. While trying to escape the procedure, Joel tries to ask doctor Mierzwiak to stop it, but he replies that he is just a product of his own imagination; therefore placing himself inside Joel’s head and accepting his imaginary state. The situation with Clementine is somewhat different. Joel is able to explain to Clementine that she is in fact a memory of him inside his head, but she instead of constricting herself to being a mere product of his psyche, she acquires her own personality and tries to aid Joel into getting the procedure stopped.
Because the postmodern man is running and halting to question the future he is running to is “a crisis of cultural authority”(251). It is almost as if after running for so long towards the future, the postmodern man hesitates and doubts his position and how he came to being there. This is best exemplified by a scene where Clementine undergoes an emotional breakdown a few days after she has had her memory erased. She comments to her recently acquired boyfriend that she feels old, and that her skin is coming off. She repeats various times “nothing makes any sense to me” with a tone of frustration. Another scene that presents confusion on the present state, is a moment when Joel opens his journal and cannot remember having ripped out a number of pages, which were in fact ripped right before the procedure so he would not have anything to remember Clementine by. If one thinks of it, to stand in a present point without knowledge of the past must be quite puzzling. Linked with the idea that the postmodern man runs away from the past, is the idea that maybe running, detaching ourselves, or disregarding the past prevents us from learning something. Clementine and Joel, after having part of their memories erased, have no explanations for the feelings they could be having and are ignorant to the fact that the feelings felt are not without precedent, but consequence of a past that was erased. If we skip a step, we skip all the elements of it that would most likely explain the succeeding stage.
Consequence of the uncertainty of the present and how he came to being there, the postmodern man is unable to retell his personal narrative chronologically. The movie depicts this both in form –“[by] defying the conventions of cinematic language”- and in content (259). In regards to form, there are jump cuts in a nonlinear retelling of the story. We travel back and forth in time to learn about Joel and Clementine’s relationship. There are visual cues that hint once the narrative has changed directions such as Clementine’s hair color which is different in between stages of their relationship and furthermore of the retelling of it. In regards to content, the film starts at the most recent event –when they meet again- and roughly changes to the first event of the main narrative –the breakup-.
Another trait of postmodernism is “the notion that perhaps nothing new can be made, which implies to a certain degree that the idea of something completely new is a fallacy” (261). This is presented in the movie in two different ways.
First, initiated with postmodern architecture, there is “the plagiarizing…and borrowing of previous styles” (260). In the movie, we see the character of Patrick who works at the erasing clinic, and falls inlove with Clemetine the night she has her procedure done. Because he is so desperate to have her like him, he steals the items that she had turned in because they reminded her of Joel, in order to learn how to be like him. He gave her the same gifts and tried to reproduce the same lines that Joel had used previously. At the beginning, the concept of borrowing does work because Clementine dates Patrick for a while, but towards the middle of the movie the concept only backfired because subconsciously Clementine feels that there is something odd with her feeling of déjà vu.
Secondly, there is the impossibility of creating something new. After the movie ends we are able to see that Joel and Clementine, after having their memories erased, they meet again. Not only do they meet again but they reproduce one date they had had previously: having a picnic on a frozen river. This clearly represents the idea of going back to the start and reproducing what was already once. This notion interacts with the confusion of how the postmodern feels on how he got to be where he is. This occurs because when we skip a step and don’t learn what we should have we lose a sense of direction, and go around in circles, repeating what we had already done before.
Ultimately we can conclude that the movie sends a message about postmodern relationships in the postmodern era. We live in a world of speed and of emotions on sale. It is hard enough of a task to figure ourselves out in our environment to truly understand relationships. Yet, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind has some advice to give.When we rush things, there comes a point where the relationship becomes unsustainable and thrusts us into crisis. When this occurs, we must not attempt to flee inconveniences for when we try to suppress the problems, erase them or escape them, instead of going back to work them out, we come to re-encounter them, forming a vicious cycle that might eventually become inescapable.
Works Cited
1. Cartwright, Lisa and Marita Sturken. Practices of Looking. Oxford University Press: New York, 2001. pp 251-265
On American Healthcare
United States is often referred to as the most powerful country in the world. The president of the United States is often referred to as the Leader of the Free World. The opportunities for social mobility in United States are often referred to as the American Dream. Such strong names convey positive images about the entire country. Yet, a country founded on equality is a country of inequality especially when it comes to Health Care. Is this just another example of market failure or can other entities be blamed?
Capitalism creates inequality in many sectors of the social sphere but almost in one same type of occurrence. Those who have the resources have access to exclusive opportunities, which they pass on for generations, leaving out for generations also those with scarce resources. Although most of the forms of inequality cannot be regulated, I believe that for the specific topics of health and education it must not be left to the market but that the government should come in to make accessible for the entire country without discrimination of social class, capital, or possession of insurance.
In their article, Armstrong and Armstrong, give the example of Canada, a country similar to United States in socio-economic and political spheres, which has a universal health care plan which works in favor of the entire country. Even countries that do not go near to United States in the economic sphere (like Panama) have public health facilities administered by the government. With proof of success in other public health plans, one must wonder why United States does not offer public health to its citizens.
In his article, Vicente Navarro contradicts Enthoven asserting that United States is not a class dictatorship, supporting this opinion with testimony of his experience of living in Spain under the fascist rule of Francisco Franco. To this I must deeply disagree. Enthoven was not making a literal comparison but a metaphorical one where he indicates that the upper class has the power and leverage to impose their interests over the general interest. Even though the state would be the agent to regulate inequality in the market, people in high places with various zeros in their bank accounts may influence some decisions. Navarro said it himself, when the 1 million petition for public health care was not published by the media because 4 out of 12 New York Times’ board members are also directors of Health Insurance Companies. It is that same people that can “capture” the state to maintain the status quo where they have the power, resources, and opportunities.
It is in such situations when the real flaw of the market is seen. Even though it must be a terrible sight to witness how someone dying is denied medical attention, the inequality in health is not the market failure to worry about, but the unequal distribution of power that allows those who can prevent change by paying up.
“Short-Time Horizons” is an accurate description of a common human practice. People focus about lowering costs and making money on the now, rather than thinking about the consequences of their actions on the later. Every country is a chainlike system; somewhat like the food chain. Slowly, the lower classes are being driven to extinction. In a greedy competition for money and power, those without resources and their families through the generations are living with poor health and education. This is not only dangerous for the survival of the society, but on shorter terms causes social resentment that lead to violence and crime.
A country is nothing but the sum of its people. If the vast majority suffer from sickness the entire country should be considered ill. The virus of private health should be treated, and soon.
Capitalism creates inequality in many sectors of the social sphere but almost in one same type of occurrence. Those who have the resources have access to exclusive opportunities, which they pass on for generations, leaving out for generations also those with scarce resources. Although most of the forms of inequality cannot be regulated, I believe that for the specific topics of health and education it must not be left to the market but that the government should come in to make accessible for the entire country without discrimination of social class, capital, or possession of insurance.
In their article, Armstrong and Armstrong, give the example of Canada, a country similar to United States in socio-economic and political spheres, which has a universal health care plan which works in favor of the entire country. Even countries that do not go near to United States in the economic sphere (like Panama) have public health facilities administered by the government. With proof of success in other public health plans, one must wonder why United States does not offer public health to its citizens.
In his article, Vicente Navarro contradicts Enthoven asserting that United States is not a class dictatorship, supporting this opinion with testimony of his experience of living in Spain under the fascist rule of Francisco Franco. To this I must deeply disagree. Enthoven was not making a literal comparison but a metaphorical one where he indicates that the upper class has the power and leverage to impose their interests over the general interest. Even though the state would be the agent to regulate inequality in the market, people in high places with various zeros in their bank accounts may influence some decisions. Navarro said it himself, when the 1 million petition for public health care was not published by the media because 4 out of 12 New York Times’ board members are also directors of Health Insurance Companies. It is that same people that can “capture” the state to maintain the status quo where they have the power, resources, and opportunities.
It is in such situations when the real flaw of the market is seen. Even though it must be a terrible sight to witness how someone dying is denied medical attention, the inequality in health is not the market failure to worry about, but the unequal distribution of power that allows those who can prevent change by paying up.
“Short-Time Horizons” is an accurate description of a common human practice. People focus about lowering costs and making money on the now, rather than thinking about the consequences of their actions on the later. Every country is a chainlike system; somewhat like the food chain. Slowly, the lower classes are being driven to extinction. In a greedy competition for money and power, those without resources and their families through the generations are living with poor health and education. This is not only dangerous for the survival of the society, but on shorter terms causes social resentment that lead to violence and crime.
A country is nothing but the sum of its people. If the vast majority suffer from sickness the entire country should be considered ill. The virus of private health should be treated, and soon.
How Media as a business infringes with Democracy
Today, the business of media exists in the capitalist market like any other form of business. It is privately owned, it sells one commodity, and it has a target market. As any other forms of business, the business of media lies at the workings of the free market. Yet, I will explore discrepancies of liberal capitalist theory and conservative capitalist practice - how: the price mechanisms, the incentives to reduce costs, the inequality of players, and lastly the commodity that is sold, fail to work regularly in the business of media. Despite liberal capitalist beliefs that businesses left at the grip of the “invisible hand” work most efficiently, due to the particularities that arise when media functions as a business, the business of media attempts against the democracy of a country.
The commodity: Information
In a capitalist society, those without capital have one ascribed asset to sell: their labor power. According to Adam Smith, in a capitalist society a man can “be rich or poor according to the quantity of that labour which he can command, or which he can afford to purchase” (Wealth of Nations). The difference between having to sell or being able to purchase labor, then depends on the ownership of the means of production, the source of inequality that created “two great classes directly facing each other”, according to Karl Marx (Marx 79). Even though problematic, the inequality created a symbiotic relationship between the upper and lower and class; the owners depended up to a certain extent on the workers to manufacture the goods that were later to be sold, and the workers depended on the owners for a wage of life.
Like labor power, another abstract notion was commodified: information. Various historical occurrences contributed to the commoditization of information as we buy it today. First, with the written practice, information became tangible. It moved from the abstract sphere of thought and discussion into the concreteness of an inked piece of paper. Furthermore, the paper and the information it contained could be transmitted for the duration of the lifetime of the piece of paper without the time constraint of the brief duration of the pronunciation or conception of an idea. Secondly, with Gutenberg’s invention of the movable type, information became mass-produced. It moved out from the exclusivity of the slow monks’ hands into the availability of the public sphere. Thirdly, with the fall of the dominion of the Catholic Church, the information sold and bought in the Western World did not belong anymore to the realm of high celestial matters but to the realm of the daily and the popular. Habermas described it accurately when he said that the daily prayer had been replaced with the daily newspaper at our breakfast table.
Information as a commodity is most predominantly sold by the business of media in the forms of news. The business of distribution of information also creates a top-down polarization between the owner and non-owners of means of production. In this particular case, even though those at the top are those who own the means of production, those at the bottom do not depend on them for a salary. Yet, those at the bottom –generally the public- do rely on those at the top –media corporations- for the relevant and accurate distribution of news.
The public relies on the business of media for information, as it relies on any other business for a number of commodities. Yet, unlike other commodities, information has one particular and special attribute: power. Information envelops the power of education. It is through information that the public can become educated of the occurrences of their country. It is through information that political awareness is forged. Then, how well information is disseminated plays a crucial role on the maintaining of democracy for popular votes are educated through information.
Price Mechanisms:
In capitalist societies, the price mechanism “transmits information… [and] provides an incentive to adapt to methods of production that are least costly” (Friedman 14). First, prices provide information to the customer. The high price of a commodity may indicate: scarce supply or popular demand. Low or dropping prices then indicate the opposite. Adam Smith asserted that prices emerged from “voluntary exchanges in the market” (Friedman 13) that result in an affinity between the value of a commodity suggested by the selling party and the value of the commodity perceived by the customer, in order for the transaction to take place. Then, secondly, prices provide information for the consumer. High supply and low demand of a product informs the producer that the price of his good is not acceptable in the market for customers, which then might lead to a motivation to alter the price. Milton Friedman asserts, in his book Free to Choose, that: “one of the beauties of a free price system is that the prices that bring the information also provide both an incentive to react to the information and the means to do so” (Friedman 18). In the case of discrepancies between suggested and perceived value of a commodity, any regular business would have the incentive to change something about the process of production of the good to lower the costs. This process may then account for the self-regulating characteristics that liberal capitalists attribute to the free market. Nevertheless, the source of revenue of media and its content interfere with the pricing theory and furthermore with the incentives.
The main source of revenue for media outlets are not the sales of circulation but the advertising space that is sold to advertising corporations. This frees the media of the “burden of sales” (Chibber, Lecture). Then, the price mechanism does not act as a vehicle of information in the way it would in other forms of business. For all other businesses, the price mechanism works in the relationship of the business an the entire public; in the media, the relationship is between the media and the select group of advertisers. Because the media are not constrained by their sales of circulation, their incentive to provide news that reflect the general interest of the public does not come from the price mechanism, but from the drive to report news. It is important to note that the media does have an interest in circulation, I just emphasize that its sustainability is not dependent on it. Furthermore, this does not mean that what is reported is completely narrow and subjective; it means that it could be broader and more objective.
The fact that advertising sales are the main source of revenue for media outlets, affects the pricing system stripping it from its characteristics of mechanism of communication between the public and the providers of information. Because in the media business the pricing system does not function as a regular vehicle of information, the providers of information do not have the incentive to act to their fullest capacity in response to the public.
Consequences on the quality of the information:
Recalling Friedman on the functions of the price mechanism, he argued that the price mechanism produced an “incentive to adapt to methods of production that are least costly” (Friedman 14). There are two ways in which a change might alter the price of a product. The first is to directly lower the suggested price. This occurs as items are placed on sale. The reduction of the price brings closer the suggested value with the perceived value and may end up in a business transaction. The second way is to reduce the costs in the process of making a product, to avoid losing money as the suggested price for the commodity is lowered. Reduction of costs in the process is reflected in less quality in the product. This is true for any type of business as it is also true in the case of media.
Because media corporations do not profit of their sales of information, but of the advertising space they provide, an easy way to reduce costs was to reduce the cost of the search of information. This could translate in shorter investigations or the utilization of common sources of information such as the Associated Press.This accounts for the decline of investigative reporting in the media. In his book Flat Earth News, Nick Davies asserts that modern journalism is characterized by a “penny-pinching newsroom”- product of “overbearing owners, influential advertisers and market forces” (Davies 2008).
Even if the pricing mechanism affects the quality of the news, this is limited by another facet of the free market: competition. The presence of competition restrains media outlets from publishing completely shallow and biased information. Advertisers spend the money that becomes the main source of revenue for newspapers, with the goal of reaching the most amounts of people in mind. Then, media outlets because of competition must report enough information to be considered the best out there, in comparison. Yet it must be noted that competition creates the need for relative goodness.
Inequality of actors: Oligarchy of Media Conglomerates
The liberal capitalist view asserts that the distribution of income (and therefore power in the form of social leverage) is dependant on the price of an actor’s contribution to society. Any given actor’s chance in the market is dependant on the accumulation of “physical capital in the form – of factories, mines, offices… [and] human capital- in the form of increased knowledge” (Friedman 21).
Even though Friedman recognizes that an individual’s chances on the market are also affected by social backgrounds or even luck, he does not delve into how, for example, the background of our resources play an important role in the market. An actor in the market who is limited by his conditions to a certain type of education and a limited networking tree, stands almost no chance in the playing field against an actor who (for example) might have inherited the capital and the meritocracy to attend elite schools. Then the supposedly free market is not “free”- it is open for the participation of those who can afford to play.
Consequences on the content of information:
Robert McChesney writes passionately about how the media infringes with democracy in his “Corporate Media and the Threat to Democracy”. According to McChesney, democracy works ideally when three factors are in place. The first is that in society there [should not be] “significant disparities in wealth and property” (McChesney 5). Significant disparities in wealth are common in almost every type of business, and a great example being the business of media. There have been “significant mergers” that have unified and created mega media corporations- Time Warner and Disney/ABC are just two to mention. In total, there are six mega media corporations that make billions of dollars in profit- each individually makes more profit than the rest of the media corporations combined (Friedman 22).
Even though mergers, mega corporations, or oligarchies may not present a dangerous consequence in other forms of business it does so in the media. First, the oligarchy of ownership of influential media outlets has the opportunity to report news without taking into consideration the voice of the majority of the public. Second, because it is a business based on capitalist competition, even if there were a general discontent with the workings of the influential media outlets, smaller competitors without the possibility of mega resources would fail to communicate, as they would be driven out of business by the larger media corporations. This second consequence has been diminished with the advent of the Internet. A space where no capital is needed to publish has become essential in the rise of new media reporters –bloggers- who can now for the first time, speak up.
Nevertheless, this occurrence has an impact on the content of the information transmitted. When only a few own the means of distribution of information, the information available is then very much aligned with the interests of just a few (Chibber, Lecture). This has a direct impact in the political sphere. In his book, “Who rules America?”, William Domhoff writes that in United States there is a tendency for choosing the images of politicians rather than their political agendas. The media more than anything, plays a key role in the portrayal of the images that are presented to the voters. By offering more information about one political view than another, or criticizing more harshly one political party rather than the other, the public’s opinion which is dependant on the information that they receive through the media is then biased to the availability of the information.
Infringement of democracy:
The capitalist model may work for some businesses but when applied to the media as a business, it refrains it from achieving its duties. A criterion for the preservation of democracy is that “there be an effective system of political communication…that informs and engages the citizenry (McChesney 5).
The entire society suffers as the media can: answers first to a select group of advertisers; reduce costs by reducing investigation, therefore not presenting the general voice of the nation; and survive in oligarchies, that furthermore reflect the voice of a select group of the population. When the media functions as a business that revolves around making profit but is able to disregard the general public as consumers, it cannot perform its duties as an accurate system of communication. Furthermore, the ineffective system of communication works in a perpetuating cycle that affects both the democracy and the general wellbeing of society. The transmission of accurate information is crucial for the healthy development of a country. According to the article “The role of Media in Democracy”, published by the Center for Democracy and Governance, the role of the media in the preservation of democracy can be exemplified by two reasons. First, it allows the citizens of a country to make educated and informed decisions. Second, it serves as a monitoring service that ensures that elected officials perform the duties they were elected to do. As the media detaches itself from a relationship of dependence of the general public, in a way it also allows the government to detach from answering to the general interests of society. When the media acts as another business in a capitalist society, its interests of report are not necessary aligned with its duties as a service to the people.
The effects on democracy are not seen in the relationship between the media and the public, but between the public and the government when the information between them is mediated by a business. The problem is not only that the voice of the majority of the people is not heard, or that the information is shallow, biased or incomplete. The problem is that without the proper information, the public becomes informed on political candidates that then become elected if their profiles were “news fit to print” not necessarily if their ideas fit the needs of the majority of the citizens.
Bibiliography:
McChesney, Robert. “Corporate Media and Threat to Democracy”. Seven Stories Press. New York.
Davies, Nick. Flat Earth News. Chatto and Windus. New York.
Friedman, Milton. Free to Choose. Harcourt Brace Janovich. New York
The commodity: Information
In a capitalist society, those without capital have one ascribed asset to sell: their labor power. According to Adam Smith, in a capitalist society a man can “be rich or poor according to the quantity of that labour which he can command, or which he can afford to purchase” (Wealth of Nations). The difference between having to sell or being able to purchase labor, then depends on the ownership of the means of production, the source of inequality that created “two great classes directly facing each other”, according to Karl Marx (Marx 79). Even though problematic, the inequality created a symbiotic relationship between the upper and lower and class; the owners depended up to a certain extent on the workers to manufacture the goods that were later to be sold, and the workers depended on the owners for a wage of life.
Like labor power, another abstract notion was commodified: information. Various historical occurrences contributed to the commoditization of information as we buy it today. First, with the written practice, information became tangible. It moved from the abstract sphere of thought and discussion into the concreteness of an inked piece of paper. Furthermore, the paper and the information it contained could be transmitted for the duration of the lifetime of the piece of paper without the time constraint of the brief duration of the pronunciation or conception of an idea. Secondly, with Gutenberg’s invention of the movable type, information became mass-produced. It moved out from the exclusivity of the slow monks’ hands into the availability of the public sphere. Thirdly, with the fall of the dominion of the Catholic Church, the information sold and bought in the Western World did not belong anymore to the realm of high celestial matters but to the realm of the daily and the popular. Habermas described it accurately when he said that the daily prayer had been replaced with the daily newspaper at our breakfast table.
Information as a commodity is most predominantly sold by the business of media in the forms of news. The business of distribution of information also creates a top-down polarization between the owner and non-owners of means of production. In this particular case, even though those at the top are those who own the means of production, those at the bottom do not depend on them for a salary. Yet, those at the bottom –generally the public- do rely on those at the top –media corporations- for the relevant and accurate distribution of news.
The public relies on the business of media for information, as it relies on any other business for a number of commodities. Yet, unlike other commodities, information has one particular and special attribute: power. Information envelops the power of education. It is through information that the public can become educated of the occurrences of their country. It is through information that political awareness is forged. Then, how well information is disseminated plays a crucial role on the maintaining of democracy for popular votes are educated through information.
Price Mechanisms:
In capitalist societies, the price mechanism “transmits information… [and] provides an incentive to adapt to methods of production that are least costly” (Friedman 14). First, prices provide information to the customer. The high price of a commodity may indicate: scarce supply or popular demand. Low or dropping prices then indicate the opposite. Adam Smith asserted that prices emerged from “voluntary exchanges in the market” (Friedman 13) that result in an affinity between the value of a commodity suggested by the selling party and the value of the commodity perceived by the customer, in order for the transaction to take place. Then, secondly, prices provide information for the consumer. High supply and low demand of a product informs the producer that the price of his good is not acceptable in the market for customers, which then might lead to a motivation to alter the price. Milton Friedman asserts, in his book Free to Choose, that: “one of the beauties of a free price system is that the prices that bring the information also provide both an incentive to react to the information and the means to do so” (Friedman 18). In the case of discrepancies between suggested and perceived value of a commodity, any regular business would have the incentive to change something about the process of production of the good to lower the costs. This process may then account for the self-regulating characteristics that liberal capitalists attribute to the free market. Nevertheless, the source of revenue of media and its content interfere with the pricing theory and furthermore with the incentives.
The main source of revenue for media outlets are not the sales of circulation but the advertising space that is sold to advertising corporations. This frees the media of the “burden of sales” (Chibber, Lecture). Then, the price mechanism does not act as a vehicle of information in the way it would in other forms of business. For all other businesses, the price mechanism works in the relationship of the business an the entire public; in the media, the relationship is between the media and the select group of advertisers. Because the media are not constrained by their sales of circulation, their incentive to provide news that reflect the general interest of the public does not come from the price mechanism, but from the drive to report news. It is important to note that the media does have an interest in circulation, I just emphasize that its sustainability is not dependent on it. Furthermore, this does not mean that what is reported is completely narrow and subjective; it means that it could be broader and more objective.
The fact that advertising sales are the main source of revenue for media outlets, affects the pricing system stripping it from its characteristics of mechanism of communication between the public and the providers of information. Because in the media business the pricing system does not function as a regular vehicle of information, the providers of information do not have the incentive to act to their fullest capacity in response to the public.
Consequences on the quality of the information:
Recalling Friedman on the functions of the price mechanism, he argued that the price mechanism produced an “incentive to adapt to methods of production that are least costly” (Friedman 14). There are two ways in which a change might alter the price of a product. The first is to directly lower the suggested price. This occurs as items are placed on sale. The reduction of the price brings closer the suggested value with the perceived value and may end up in a business transaction. The second way is to reduce the costs in the process of making a product, to avoid losing money as the suggested price for the commodity is lowered. Reduction of costs in the process is reflected in less quality in the product. This is true for any type of business as it is also true in the case of media.
Because media corporations do not profit of their sales of information, but of the advertising space they provide, an easy way to reduce costs was to reduce the cost of the search of information. This could translate in shorter investigations or the utilization of common sources of information such as the Associated Press.This accounts for the decline of investigative reporting in the media. In his book Flat Earth News, Nick Davies asserts that modern journalism is characterized by a “penny-pinching newsroom”- product of “overbearing owners, influential advertisers and market forces” (Davies 2008).
Even if the pricing mechanism affects the quality of the news, this is limited by another facet of the free market: competition. The presence of competition restrains media outlets from publishing completely shallow and biased information. Advertisers spend the money that becomes the main source of revenue for newspapers, with the goal of reaching the most amounts of people in mind. Then, media outlets because of competition must report enough information to be considered the best out there, in comparison. Yet it must be noted that competition creates the need for relative goodness.
Inequality of actors: Oligarchy of Media Conglomerates
The liberal capitalist view asserts that the distribution of income (and therefore power in the form of social leverage) is dependant on the price of an actor’s contribution to society. Any given actor’s chance in the market is dependant on the accumulation of “physical capital in the form – of factories, mines, offices… [and] human capital- in the form of increased knowledge” (Friedman 21).
Even though Friedman recognizes that an individual’s chances on the market are also affected by social backgrounds or even luck, he does not delve into how, for example, the background of our resources play an important role in the market. An actor in the market who is limited by his conditions to a certain type of education and a limited networking tree, stands almost no chance in the playing field against an actor who (for example) might have inherited the capital and the meritocracy to attend elite schools. Then the supposedly free market is not “free”- it is open for the participation of those who can afford to play.
Consequences on the content of information:
Robert McChesney writes passionately about how the media infringes with democracy in his “Corporate Media and the Threat to Democracy”. According to McChesney, democracy works ideally when three factors are in place. The first is that in society there [should not be] “significant disparities in wealth and property” (McChesney 5). Significant disparities in wealth are common in almost every type of business, and a great example being the business of media. There have been “significant mergers” that have unified and created mega media corporations- Time Warner and Disney/ABC are just two to mention. In total, there are six mega media corporations that make billions of dollars in profit- each individually makes more profit than the rest of the media corporations combined (Friedman 22).
Even though mergers, mega corporations, or oligarchies may not present a dangerous consequence in other forms of business it does so in the media. First, the oligarchy of ownership of influential media outlets has the opportunity to report news without taking into consideration the voice of the majority of the public. Second, because it is a business based on capitalist competition, even if there were a general discontent with the workings of the influential media outlets, smaller competitors without the possibility of mega resources would fail to communicate, as they would be driven out of business by the larger media corporations. This second consequence has been diminished with the advent of the Internet. A space where no capital is needed to publish has become essential in the rise of new media reporters –bloggers- who can now for the first time, speak up.
Nevertheless, this occurrence has an impact on the content of the information transmitted. When only a few own the means of distribution of information, the information available is then very much aligned with the interests of just a few (Chibber, Lecture). This has a direct impact in the political sphere. In his book, “Who rules America?”, William Domhoff writes that in United States there is a tendency for choosing the images of politicians rather than their political agendas. The media more than anything, plays a key role in the portrayal of the images that are presented to the voters. By offering more information about one political view than another, or criticizing more harshly one political party rather than the other, the public’s opinion which is dependant on the information that they receive through the media is then biased to the availability of the information.
Infringement of democracy:
The capitalist model may work for some businesses but when applied to the media as a business, it refrains it from achieving its duties. A criterion for the preservation of democracy is that “there be an effective system of political communication…that informs and engages the citizenry (McChesney 5).
The entire society suffers as the media can: answers first to a select group of advertisers; reduce costs by reducing investigation, therefore not presenting the general voice of the nation; and survive in oligarchies, that furthermore reflect the voice of a select group of the population. When the media functions as a business that revolves around making profit but is able to disregard the general public as consumers, it cannot perform its duties as an accurate system of communication. Furthermore, the ineffective system of communication works in a perpetuating cycle that affects both the democracy and the general wellbeing of society. The transmission of accurate information is crucial for the healthy development of a country. According to the article “The role of Media in Democracy”, published by the Center for Democracy and Governance, the role of the media in the preservation of democracy can be exemplified by two reasons. First, it allows the citizens of a country to make educated and informed decisions. Second, it serves as a monitoring service that ensures that elected officials perform the duties they were elected to do. As the media detaches itself from a relationship of dependence of the general public, in a way it also allows the government to detach from answering to the general interests of society. When the media acts as another business in a capitalist society, its interests of report are not necessary aligned with its duties as a service to the people.
The effects on democracy are not seen in the relationship between the media and the public, but between the public and the government when the information between them is mediated by a business. The problem is not only that the voice of the majority of the people is not heard, or that the information is shallow, biased or incomplete. The problem is that without the proper information, the public becomes informed on political candidates that then become elected if their profiles were “news fit to print” not necessarily if their ideas fit the needs of the majority of the citizens.
Bibiliography:
McChesney, Robert. “Corporate Media and Threat to Democracy”. Seven Stories Press. New York.
Davies, Nick. Flat Earth News. Chatto and Windus. New York.
Friedman, Milton. Free to Choose. Harcourt Brace Janovich. New York
Un dia de lluvia en Panama
El viento chocaba fuertemente contra mi ventana y me despertó diez minutos antes que sonara mi alarma. Me aliste rápidamente y bajé a desayunar. El día estaba frío y el cielo tenía un aspecto lúgubre. El estruendo de los truenos y la impresión de los relámpagos era la excusa perfecta para que algún niño consentido faltara a la escuela.
Si no hubiera estado esperando al bus en la puerta, la lluvia no me hubiera dejado escuchar el pito. Mi nana se demoró en venir con el paraguas y, como a mi no me gusta llegar tarde a la escuela, me mojé en el camino pero me monté rápidamente. De seguro alguien se graduó de ingeniero vial haciéndole favores a su profesor, y su ineptitud a la hora de organizar las calles se notaba hoy; cuando el agua no circulaba, impidiendo el paso de mi bus.
En la escuela los niños pequeños saltaban como ranitas en los charcos y enlodaban sus zapatos como si fuera divertido quedar sucio por el resto del día. La serenidad oscura del día se mostraba también en los profesores y en mis compañeros quienes bostezaban como si estuvieran bajo un hechizo de sueño interminable. Las clases se acabaron y el regreso a casa fue una odisea mucho mayor que la de la mañana.
Llegué a mi casa a las dos y cuarenta y cinco, veinte minutos más tarde de lo usual. Fui a la mesa y me di cuenta que mi carne debía tener como quince minutos de estar ahí; no hay nada que deteste más que un pedazo tieso y frío de carne. No podía contener las ganas de armar un escándalo pero las voces de la televisión llamaron mi atención. Esa chaparra que sueña con ser buena reportera, estaba frente a un lodazal, con cara de tragedia. Ya me lo imaginaba, algún árbol se había caído, algún carro fino se había rayado y el dueño furioso quiere demandar al ANAM porque no se ha enterado que con mucha suerte el único que podría pagar por los daños, es el seguro.
Pero no, eso no era lo que había pasado. La lluvia caudalosa había acrecentado los ríos. Los ríos sobrenadaron y provocaron derrumbes. Y como si fuera poco, todo el lío que las lágrimas del cielo provocaron, llegó a la casa de Ana; una niña que había caminado a su casa para ahorrar los veinticinco centavos del bus y así, poder pagarle a su vecina un pedacito de pan para el almuerzo. Como Ana, muchos niños regresaron a sus casas, para ver el miedo puro en los ojos de sus padres y encontrar sus casas bajo el agua; sus casas que sus padres habían arreglado con sus salarios de quinientos dólares mensuales. Los muebles estaban inservibles y la comida se había echado a perder, pero no fue eso lo que preocupo a los padres panameños; fue saber que ese día no se iban a poder ir a la cama porque ya no tenían una, pero se quedarían dormidos después de ver el hambre en los ojitos de sus hijos. Volteé a ver mi carne fría y ya no era importante. Mi actitud de niña malcriada fue reemplazada por una madurez que nunca había sentido y fui a la despensa a buscar comida enlatada.
Si no hubiera estado esperando al bus en la puerta, la lluvia no me hubiera dejado escuchar el pito. Mi nana se demoró en venir con el paraguas y, como a mi no me gusta llegar tarde a la escuela, me mojé en el camino pero me monté rápidamente. De seguro alguien se graduó de ingeniero vial haciéndole favores a su profesor, y su ineptitud a la hora de organizar las calles se notaba hoy; cuando el agua no circulaba, impidiendo el paso de mi bus.
En la escuela los niños pequeños saltaban como ranitas en los charcos y enlodaban sus zapatos como si fuera divertido quedar sucio por el resto del día. La serenidad oscura del día se mostraba también en los profesores y en mis compañeros quienes bostezaban como si estuvieran bajo un hechizo de sueño interminable. Las clases se acabaron y el regreso a casa fue una odisea mucho mayor que la de la mañana.
Llegué a mi casa a las dos y cuarenta y cinco, veinte minutos más tarde de lo usual. Fui a la mesa y me di cuenta que mi carne debía tener como quince minutos de estar ahí; no hay nada que deteste más que un pedazo tieso y frío de carne. No podía contener las ganas de armar un escándalo pero las voces de la televisión llamaron mi atención. Esa chaparra que sueña con ser buena reportera, estaba frente a un lodazal, con cara de tragedia. Ya me lo imaginaba, algún árbol se había caído, algún carro fino se había rayado y el dueño furioso quiere demandar al ANAM porque no se ha enterado que con mucha suerte el único que podría pagar por los daños, es el seguro.
Pero no, eso no era lo que había pasado. La lluvia caudalosa había acrecentado los ríos. Los ríos sobrenadaron y provocaron derrumbes. Y como si fuera poco, todo el lío que las lágrimas del cielo provocaron, llegó a la casa de Ana; una niña que había caminado a su casa para ahorrar los veinticinco centavos del bus y así, poder pagarle a su vecina un pedacito de pan para el almuerzo. Como Ana, muchos niños regresaron a sus casas, para ver el miedo puro en los ojos de sus padres y encontrar sus casas bajo el agua; sus casas que sus padres habían arreglado con sus salarios de quinientos dólares mensuales. Los muebles estaban inservibles y la comida se había echado a perder, pero no fue eso lo que preocupo a los padres panameños; fue saber que ese día no se iban a poder ir a la cama porque ya no tenían una, pero se quedarían dormidos después de ver el hambre en los ojitos de sus hijos. Volteé a ver mi carne fría y ya no era importante. Mi actitud de niña malcriada fue reemplazada por una madurez que nunca había sentido y fui a la despensa a buscar comida enlatada.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)