Clarifying the concept of contra-flow

Trite but true: There’s nothing more constant than change. This process of transformation, of course, redefines the notion of the status quo as something infused with a fluid characteristic, whether in the realm of government, media or cultural establishment.

To the extent that the coordinates of influence are shifting in a state of flux, the power of media to shape perceptions and subjective interpretations of social reality stemming from a complexity of interactions—self and society, the nations and the world, etc.—can be described as dynamic and hardly monolithic. This way, meaning can be multi-layered and polysemic. In this paradigm, therefore, the concept of control as unilateral and unleashing a politics of monoculture would entail an overhaul.

In my Sociology lessons, glocalization is among the theories I find fascinating. This neologism obviously reflects the crosscurrents of globalization and localization, implying a cyclic continuum pretty much like the movement of the tides. As defined by George Ritzer, glocalization means “the integration of the global and the local resulting in unique outcomes in different geographic areas.” In this regard, glocalization indicates the way communication—a function of power—can create identities and communities as cultural spheres marked by hybridity or heterogeneity.

Thus, Ritzer’s glocalization can be deemed as a conceptual reiteration of Thussu’s “contra-flow.” These intertwined ideas pack the potential of disentanglement from the tentacles of cultural imperialism that occurs wherever and whenever “authentic, traditional local culture…is being battered out of existence by the indiscriminate dumping of large quantities of slick commercial and media products, mainly from the United States,” according to Jeremy Tunstall in his book The Media Are American: Anglo-American Media in the World.

As an example of contra-flow, in the context of upheavals in geopolitics, the phenomenon of “people power” revolution (in the Philippines, Romania and other communist nations in Europe as well as the recent events in the Middle East) offers an astonishing example how their media had inspired and energized the people into consolidating their collective strength against their despotic regimes.

Where a considerable segment of the American press is plagued with tawdry sensationalism, their counterparts in other parts of the world have shown how democracy as well as meaningful and peaceful change can be achieved and vouchsafed through vigilance and advocacy for the truth, regardless of the risk to liberty and life. Indeed, American media can also learn how to become agents in enlightening the citizenry—like providing more nuance to the news about the Occupy Wall Street protest—by taking their cue from the courage and enterprising spirit of journalists in other nations.