Globalization and Television
The term global village trips lightly from the lips of people in every generation everywhere in the world. The abundant evidence that supports such a concept appears to be incontrovertible. Since World War II the evolution in transportation has been extensive. If you have the money to do so, today you can fly from Paris to New York on the Concorde and arrive at a time earlier than when you departed. The revolution in communications is just as startling. By e-mail I can get a message to a friend in Berlin as fast and reliably as I can get a message to a colleague down the hall in the same building on the university campus where I teach. What happens in Peking or Paraguay gets reported to us as quickly as what happens in Philadelphia or Peoria. What Hollywood produces for movie theaters and for television plays to equally enthusiastic audiences in Bozeman, Montana, Berlin, Germany, and Bogota, Colombia. While vacationing in the interior of the island of Sicily a few years ago, I saw a man dressed in traditional black peasant clothes riding a donkey. As he approached, I saw how old and weathered he looked. I also saw that he was wearing a black baseball cap with a Los Angeles Raiders emblem.
But how and why the world has become smaller and, more importantly, what this may mean, is a complex matter. It is easy to overlook how extensively the development of civilization always has depended upon the flow of ideas and images between peoples. That movement has certainly accelerated at the end of the twentieth century, but influences crossing the continents and the boundaries between nations long have