Not All Pirates Are Bad

Mattelart’s article on Audio-Visual Piracy placed me in a time warp and brought me back to Greece. This past year I spent 14 months teaching abroad, 10 of them being in Greece. I was also a dorm mom for the high schoolers, so I got to know the kids pretty well. Let’s travel back to late May. I’m having a conversation with my boss about how excited she is for the May 27th Premier of Sex and the City 2. She even boasts that this is the same day that it’s released in America—“THAT is how important Greece is”. One of my Bulgarian students, who will always take the opportunity to take a jab at Greece, pips up: “well if you wanted to watch it, you just should have asked. I downloaded in last week. Here you can have it” as she fumbles through her backpack looking for her jump-drive.

Now, in this topic about Audio-Visual Piracy, let’s allow McChensey to chime in with some statistics: US film firms generate 50-60% of their revenue outside of the country and US music firms generate 70% of their revenue out of the country. That’s a heaping amount. Now, I fully understand the dangers and consequences of illegal downloads, for the industries and consumers alike. But Mattelart has a point that it isn’t all that bad. Piracy creates a demand for more production. The more a product is circulated, the more it, or things like it, are demanded. Now how does this help the film industry if something is being circulated that was never purchased to begin with?

Here’s my take on it. I correlate the effects of piracy to the way that I do my Christmas shopping. When I go Christmas shopping, I don’t go with a list, but I do go with the notion of knowing what I will not deem appropriate for all those who have made it onto my stingy list of present receivers. Now, here’s how it relates to the film industry. If piracy prompts demand, that’s a good thing. Consumers of movies rarely have a wish list of movies that they want created, but once they see something advertised, they know that it’s the perfect fit. I know that the details are a bit loose, but it helped comfort me in knowing that there could indeed be some positive affects to me students’ downloading behavior.

McDisney

I hadn't realized how old the McChseney article was until I read that Murdoch's bid for Manchester United was still pending. For those of you interested, it never passed. Now, old isn't bad, so long as one read's it with an appropriate distance and perspective. Another insight to the date of this article was the blurb about the McDonald's/Disney affiliation.

Disney and McDonald's did indeed have a ten year agreement in which they promoted each other across 109 nations. Disney provided all those nifty little figurines with the choking hazard warnings on them. McDonald's provided food for millions of Disney customers. However, come 2004, the alliance, or partnership, dissolved. Why? Well, aside from the bad rap that McDonald's had at the time for not properly educating its clientele? That we can only speculate on, as representatives from both parties were fairly close-lipped about the situation. So now, if you want to grab food at Downtown Disney, you'll be welcomed in by Pollo Campero a Latin Chicken Fast-Food restaurant. Not quite sure that follows Disney's objectives though:

The Walt Disney Company's objective is to be one of the world's leading producers and providers of entertainment and information, using its portfolio of brands to differentiate its content, services and consumer products. The company's primary financial goals are to maximize earnings and cash flow, and to allocate capital toward growth initiatives that will drive long-term shareholder value.

McDonalnd's has 47 million customers a day. Pollo Campero has just over double that in a year. I would say that reputation is what they were after, but then, they own E! Entertainment.

Huge changes in the UK law on internet privacy

Internet and privacy laws are some of the main topics in the United Kingdom.

This week, the EU commission stated that if the UK could not effectively safeguard against the illegal interceptions of communications, specifically internet traffic, then it would lead to fines and other actions against the government.  This all comes in the mist of many UK citizens concerns and complaints that an internet ad serving system on their internet providers’ network was intercepting their internet channels and were enrolling them without a right for them to opt out of these advertisements.

"The user's consent is required for any interception of e-mails or internet surfing, the Commission says, objecting to the UK's Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA), which allows a person to intercept communications if he or she has "reasonable grounds for believing" that consent has been given.”  (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11443734)

Sanctions??

Under the EU, there should be sanctions for any and all unlawful interceptions.  So where does the UK stand in this matter.  The EU commission in my opinion is flexing its authority and calling for the UK to make immediate changes.  Although I do not think that the EU commission will place any real sanctions on the UK I do think that this does show the power of the public sphere and governance and its ability to implement change.  

Disneyland makes a step towards glocalization???

As the world becomes closer and more cultures are being subjected to the leverage of other “dominant” cultures, many turn to the concept of globalization as the many key factor of these influences.  John Sinclair illustrates that individuals identities are not constant and that they consist of multiple and mixed layers of influence and it is this variety of levels that allows them to be able to connect with others without abandoning their own sense of self and culture.  He also goes on to say that “cultural affiliations at various levels” are “no longer obliged to assimilate themselves to a national culture.” 

Disneyland, who has long held a sense of the “American spirit” has recently reversed a ban on the Muslim employees wearing the hijab.  Although Disney did not fully lift the ban on the hijab they did recognized the religious and culture significance and allowed a specially designed headscarf as a compromise.  This was a significant step towards a more global understanding and less of the heterogeneous culture where Disney has traditional stood by not allowing religious garb.   I think this is the first step in the glocalization of many organizations in the effort to establish and/or maintain a global connection with their customers and employees by thinking globally and intern acting locally.

Untitled

We spent a lot of time in class taking Sparks down, but in terms of O’Neil’s article on media literacy, something he says strikes a nerve. Spark’s final jab at the theory of global media domination: “A quarter of the world’s population, more than one and a quarter billion people, are today without any access to electricity, and that number will rise over the next 25 years (World Energy Outlook, 2002). No electricity, no internet. A theory that is blind to such facts is blind to reality.”
When O’Neil talks about the campaign for media literacy he frames access to communications as a human right. Put this together with Sparks… are one and a quarter billion people being denied an essential right? If having no internet access equates to denial of the right to communications access who is there to blame? Drag to the ICC?
O’Neil’s article really just gave me the impression that media literacy is a “First World” right. Protecting those who already have communications access but not bringing it to anyone new. The two authors conflicted me a little bit, because I do believe in increasing media literacy especially in children, and in communications access as a human right. But Sparks’s closing argument really stuck with me. Global communications is supposed to unite the world community, not become the new polarizer between the developed and the unfortunates. But how do you bring internet to people who can’t even access clean water?

Rated for Everyone

Disclaimer: This internet content is strictly opinion-based. While it may be based on some fact, it should not be taken at face value as any sort of journalistic news gathering. There is no explicit material. I don’t have a record of reporting fabricated material as fact, but I do tend to come from a more left/liberal perspective.

I got so excited when we started talking about rating systems in class. Maybe it is silly, but I have always wondered if there should be some sort of rating system for where people are getting their information. Not censorship. Not some kind of overreaching, controlling system, just a measure of content as compared to other content. Today, parents use existing measurements to help guide them what to let their children watch, youporn warns you explicitly that you are about to enter a page with material meant for adults only, you are warned before surgery shows that material may be graphic and not suitable for everyone, and even blogs are flagged these days as having strong content.

Should there be s system on labeling shows and websites with rating? Should we know something about their reputation on legitimacy, fact-checking, whether or not they are opinion based, and so forth? I do not want to get into the logistics of it, but maybe it can be done, and in an unimposing, non censoring, non dictatorial way. Is it is feasible? Ethical? Is it out responsibility, or the individual’s?

A double edge sword.

Both Visual piracy and the ability of subaltern contra-flows have the ability to disrupt the flow of influence and wealth to the few but reigning TNCs. Revealing that globalization and even glocalisation are more then one way flows from Western powers to the rest of the world. That the same cultural, social and political influences that are embedded into a media product can be turned around and sent back to its originators with a similar imposing force. Bring about a small but growing feeling to the originators of the dominant flow of insecurity and national insecurity.

In Daya Kishan Thussu's "Mapping Global Media Flow and Contra-flow", subaltern contra-flows are characterized as a flow of material from the South (Non-western) to the North (western/mostly US). He gives examples of telenovelas and Bollywood as small but growing influential subaltern contra-flows. While these examples are not a major presence yet there are others that are, such as Japanese animation (which Thussu kindly shoves to the side) and other pop-culture risings (Korean drama, music (of all varieties) and fashion design (where do you think your new concept of layering and leggings came from?)) in influence with regional distinction. Companies are being forced to start carrying products from abroad and recognize the ability of these entities to capture local interest. Thus find themselves having to adjust their own programing to replicate in one form or another this intrusive new media, not to say that this is a bad thing but it is something a little more noticeable then Thussu gives credit to. For example fashion institutes like FIT in New York are now turning their attention to the East for the newest trends, TV programmers are grappling with the concept of multilingual programing, while Walmart is carrying more Latin American and Asian foods in its Super stores.

Much of this is in the face of TNC's who "will respect no tradition or custom, on balance, if it stands in the way of profits" when abroad, as Robert McChesney has mentioned in "The Media System Goes Global" (pg 202). Yet, when faced with things such as piracy, are more the willing to assert their American right to their media content and that suddenly their entire industry is on the verge of collapse because they're influence isn't turning a profitable figure they hold in their minds.

Also it is interesting that in Tristan Mattelart's "Audio-visual piracy" that the threat of subaltern contra-flow isn't talked about. Yet, its been occurring since the 1980's with the boom of pirated regional goods flowing into the U.S. from abroad through those traveling on business trips, loading their briefcases full to sell at a locally "authentic" shops. Or the fact that there has been such a flood of piracy in comic material from Japan (w/ content unchanged), that American companies have just began taking legal action fearing loss of their niche on resealing the same item but with a culturally corrected addition. Its seems only recently that people and companies have began to notice and even question how much of a foreign good is being consumed but in truth the concepts of subaltern contra-flow and piracy have been a large part of American lives for sometime.

Hence, its not that piracy and subaltern contra-flows are one and the same but that they do compliment each other and perhaps even state that its not that something is wrong with globalization but that something is wrong with the players involved. That these players especially TNCs need to be more sensitive to the areas they bombard with media because they can now turn around and have similar media thrown back at them.