The ongoing significance of national media systems in the context of media globalization

Abstract

This article argues that the concept of national media systems, and the comparative study of media systems, institutions, and practices, retains relevance in an era of media globalization and technological convergence. It considers various critiques of 'media systems' theories, such as those which view the concept of 'system' as a legacy of an outdated positivism and those which argue that the media globalization is weakening the relevance of nation-states in structuring the field of media cultures and practices. It argues for the continuing centrality of nation-states to media processes, and the ongoing significance of the national space in an age of media globalization, with reference to case studies of Internet policies in China, Brazil, and Australia. These studies indicate that nation-states remain critical actors in media governance and that domestic actors largely shape the central dynamics of media policies, even where media technologies and platforms enable global flows of media content.

The case for communication rights: A rights-based approach to media development

“…We aimed to identify initiatives and practices that could grant communication rights to marginalized groups and promote a democratic, inclusive and plural media landscape, which is an important aspect of social and political representation (Fraser, 2009). In a critique of the goals and actions proposed by WSIS, we argued that they put too much focus on providing technologies to individuals, rather than creating public policies that Finally, we argue with Flew and Waisbord (2015) that even in the current reality of globalized markets and international communication and information flows, the national sphere is still important in media development. Communication, as multifaceted and complex practices and processes, unfolds within the framework of society, politics and culture, and these are, despite upholding virtues of a global citizenship, anchored in national and local symbolic universes and imaginaries.…”

“…Modernization was no longer viewed as a desired goal that followed a linear process and evolved equally in all nations. It became clear that the positivist models of development, in overlooking the role that native cultures played for societies of the South, had failed to consider the context in which modernizing variables such as urbanization, literacy, mass media use, and democratic participation were applied (Flew & Waisbord, 2015;Melkote, 1991Melkote, , 2003Narula & Pearce, 1986;Rogers, 1976;Stevenson, 1998).…”

“…Not only are they incapable of producing content, but are deliberately ignored or misrepresented by local, national and international media (examples are provided in the following sections). Despite the fact that the digital gap is diminishing, largely thanks to private actors in cooperation with the development industry, the lack of functioning and diverse national communication systems (Flew and Waisbord, 2015) Peruzzo's view on the right to communication would be possible in a media landscape in which the principle of regulated pluralism (Thompson, 1995: 240) is applied, which requires 'the establishment of an institutional framework which would both accommodate and secure the existence of independent media organizations' (Ibid). Both the principle of regulated pluralism and the right to communication as described by Peruzzo (2011)…”

“…Peruzzo, 2011). Discussing examples from China, Brazil and Australia,Flew and Waisbord (2015) conclude that nation-states are central to media processes, even in an age of media globalization. While international organizations with the collaboration of private actors, as suggested by WSIS plan of action, can be effective in operationalizing programmes and policies that grant access to technologies, the democratization of media depends on policies and measures that need to be applied at the national level.The right to communication goes beyond the individual right to have access to information and communication technologies that are vital in many aspects of life (health, dealing with government, education, finance, etc).…”

Convergent News? A Longitudinal Study of Similarity and Dissimilarity in the Domestic and Global Coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

“…In addition, scholars have advanced numerous persuasive arguments for the likelihood of a convergence of news contents (e.g., Boyd‐Barrett, ; Cottle, ; Hallin & Mancini, ). At the same time, recent empirical evidence has challenged some of these expectations, documenting enduring differences, and even new divergences in media system characteristics (Nielsen, ) or national media policies (Flew & Waisbord, ). Umbricht and Esser () have shown that even a common tendency toward popularization does not necessarily result in a convergence of news contents.…”