


Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Community
Ask the community for help and clear up your study doubts
Discover the best universities in your country according to Docsity users
Free resources
Download our free guides on studying techniques, anxiety management strategies, and thesis advice from Docsity tutors
It is a position paper about the social impact of media and religion in the globalization.
Typology: Study Guides, Projects, Research
1 / 4
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
Comparing and Contrasting the Social Impacts of Media and Religion in the processes of Globalization The purpose of this paper is to compare and contrast the social impacts of media and religion in globalization processes. The contemporary world is both the most secular and the most religious of all worlds. Religions face both possibilities and difficulties as a result of globalization within world culture. The world's cultural religious character is crucial in understanding the role of religions and religious movements within it. Globalization refers to the growing interdependence of culture, people, and economic activity on a worldwide scale. It did not originate through normal communication and cultures. One of the most essential components is mass media, sometimes known as media. Broadcast media such as television and radio, as well as online and print media such as newspapers and magazines, are examples of mass media. ¹The impact of mass media on cultural globalization is sometimes referred to as cultural imperialism, which is based on commercial and political motives. According to Roland Robertson, "globalization has swiftly become one of the most utilized and contested terms of our day." Globalization is perceived differently by different people. Globalization, according to skeptics, is a fiction (Held et al., 1999: 5-7). Others argue that, while globalization is not a fiction, most of what is spoken about it is 'globaloney' (Veseth, 2005). According to one popular introduction to the subject, "globalization is everything and its opponent" (Fried-man, 2000: 406). There is some validity in such notions, but globalization is far larger. Sociological theory has largely ignored religion as a component of globalization, focusing instead on the economic, financial, and military dimensions of the process. Those sociologists who have studied religious dimensions of globalization have concentrated on extremism. Globalization has transformed the general concept of "religion" into a world-system of competing and warring religions. This institutional specialization process has converted local, varied, and fragmented cultural traditions into recognisable religious systems. As a result, globalization has had the paradoxical consequence of making faiths more self-conscious of their status as "world religions" (Beyer, 2006). The Internet, pilgrimage, consumerism, and the development of higher education have all contributed to "religions becoming more self-consciously global in nature" (Smart, 1989: 556). The rebirth of faiths in the post-communist world order frequently leads to additional
competition, culminating in a "clash of civilizations." As a result, a new sort of imperial dominance has emerged. Robertson (1985; 1990; 1992; 1993; Robertson and Chirico, 1985), Featherstone (1990), Ritzer (1995), and Kurtz (1995) have studied religion, religious organizations, and religious movements in a global context since the mid-1980s, and they were the first to take a global approach in charting the processes and implications of religion(s) in the global context, the consequences of internationalization, and 'McDonaldization.' Religion-related globalization theory, on the other hand, is incorporated into modernity or postmodernity theories, based on the awareness that the industrial revolution has gone global and that globality creates the social and cultural background against which to investigate and assess social events. Global society is increasingly defined by social networks, a series of contacts and exchanges known as 'flows' because of the way they travel back and forth, over and beneath, across and inside society's conventional borders. Networks are constructed in certain ways, which localizes social ties in significant ways. They are, however, global, or 'glocal' in Robertsonian terminology. Cultural interaction or a series of flows define the relationship between diverse nodes. Some see contact as generating localization or distinct local circumstances, while others see interaction as homogenizing and spreading uniformity over the globe. According to this point of view, much of what happens in these areas is the negotiation or production of new realities, identities, and social interactions, which might be described as a hybridization process. Manuel Castells offers numerous significant concepts for comprehending the world's development and the obsession with identity, meaning, and alienation. His principal focus is on the world as a network of networks, a new type of social interaction involving economics, politics, and culture. Religions, for example, regroup, re-emerge, grow, and re-politicize in different configurations inside and across nation-states, using new technology to convey their message in accordance with their own history, culture, and institutions. Religion in its detached form may be an essential sort of religious expression in global society, but religious expression should not be limited or reduced to its traditional forms. Understanding religious reactions to societal change in a "network society" is critical. To sum up everything that has been stated, electronic exchanges such as telecommunications, television systems, and information technologies describe the substance of social flows (Castells). And global society is built asymmetrically around social spaces dominated by elites, as seen by the inclination toward uniformity and homogeneity. Social interactions become
Beyer, P. & Beaman, L. (2007). āReligion, Globalization and Cultureā, International Studies in Religion and Society, vol. 4. (pdf).