intercultural

Even though the term globalization typically refers to economic phenomenon, there are ripple effects that make the impact of globalization much broader socially and culturally. Ideas, customs, and cultural movements all follow closely after the exchange of goods across national boundaries. For example, international trade has been the vehicle by which most religions have spread, including Buddhism to East and Southeast Asia along the Silk Road, Islam to Southeast Asia, and Christianity to Eastern Europe, Central Asia, and the Americas. These changes might be marginal, such as the emergence of the 'Hello, Kitty' cult around the world, or they may be profound, such as the rise of new religious, political, environmental, or cultural movements, such as the Falungong movement, one that relies almost exclusively upon electronic communications media to recruit and mobilize.

At the recent Davos Economic Forum in Switzerland, Humberto Eco differentiated between globalization as a fact and globalization as a value. Globalization as a fact is the real economic ties, institutions, and realities that underlie a new economy. Globalization as a value is the extent to which we seek further integration of markets, pools of capital, and industries, although many seem to use the term to refer not to greater economic integration, but rather cultural and social integration. Not everyone is in full support of further globalization, as is evidenced by the December, 1999 riots at the World Trade Organization in Seattle. Opponents, such as Stop WTO!, have argued that globalization creates further poverty, destroys the environment, and ultimately favors the interests of multinationals over national interests, or WTO rules encroaching on domestic regulations, as illustrated in this graphic implying incompatible interests.

By informatization, I refer to the process primarily by which information technologies, such as the world-wide web and other communication technologies, have transformed economic and social relations to such an extent that cultural and economic barriers are minimized. In his groundbreaking book, Information Society as Post Industrial Society Yoneji Masuda (1981) argues that the technological innovations will provoke radical cultural and social changes that will be fundamentally different from the status quo. In the post-industrial, information-based society, knowledge, or the production of information values, will be the driving force of society, rather than industrial technologies (p. 29). Moreover, the convergence of technologies will precipitate further changes that promise to fundamentally alter the human landscape.

Wang describes the same phenomenon (1994) which she calls "informatization" as "a process of change that features (a) the use of informatization and IT [information technologies] to such and extent that they become the dominant forces in commanding economic, political, social and cultural development; and (b) unprecedented growth in the speed, quantity, and popularity of information production and distribution" (p. 5). The UNDP estimates that the number of Internet users in mid 1999, 150 million, will grow to 700 million by 2001 (Human Development Report, 1999). This "New International Information Order" no longer allows national or regional considerations to stand in the way of the global integration of values, attitudes, and shopping brands.

Thus, informatization is the process whereby information and communication technologies shape cultural and civic discourse. This would include not just computers and the internet, but other related technologies that have as their primary characteristic the transfer of information, including more traditional media technologies, such as film, satellite television, and telecommunications. As societies and economies re-orient themselves around technologies, there are inevitable consequences.

These two concepts, globalization and informatization, thus explain different phenomena, but there is a marked overlap between their social, political, economic, and cultural functions. Although globalization ultimately refers to the integration of economic institutions, much of this integration occurs through the channels of technology. Although international trade is not a new phenomemon, the advent of communications technologies has accelerated the pace and scope of trade. Previously, ideas and technologies took centuries to diffuse across the globe, not seconds (Sprague, 2000). With electronic communication media, however, within an instant, the most novel ideas can reach around the globe, or news of events in one continent can drastically affect financial markets around the world. On a daily basis, over one trillion dollars flows around the world on these electronic networks (Kennedy, p. 51). Conversely, globalization allows the proliferation of information technologies, and creates a world wide market and clear strategic incentives for the adoption of information technologies.

Observers of the twin forces of globalization and informatization have argued that these forces will likely have consequences far beyond the immediate economic context. Rather, they are likely to have a profound impact on the cultural and social consequences of society. Certainly, globalization has contributed to a greater global consciousness that makes political and economic issues extend far beyond their immediate borders. Human rights, the environment, and workers' rights are just a few examples of issues that have gained international, or global constituencies. Tibet's status under Chinese rule illustrates the new global reality. The Dalai Lama, for example, now has as large a following among Westerners as he does in Dharamsala. Celebrities like Richard Gere and the reincarnated lama Steven Seagal contribute their advocacy for Tibet's human rights campaign, even as the face of Tibetan Buddhism changes by the interaction (Lopez,1997).

Masuda argues that the post-industrial society will likely have the same impact, if not more, than the industrial revolution had on eighteenth century Europe. Just as the industrial revolution ultimately contributed to an increase in urbanization, social dislocation, and the development of new economic forms, the information revolution will create a new social context, including the emergence of "information communities," participatory democracy, and a spirit of globalism. Masuda clearly predicted the convergence of technological capacities with the growth of globalization, echoing McLuhan's metaphor of a global village.

Other scholars argue that globalization and informatization are likely to diminish the concept of the nation as a political institution at all (Poster, 1999). Friedman (1999) argues that as nation-states decline in importance, multi-national corporations, nongovernmental organizations, and "superempowered individuals" such as George Soros gain influence and importance. As these non-political organizations and institutions gain importance, there are inevitable challenges to political, economic, and cultural processes.

The overall impact of these forces, however, is difficult to discern. Predictions that they would usher in a new utopia, in which demarcations of economic, political, or geographical advantage would no longer matter, have proven to be chimeric. In some ways, globalization and informatization have clear advantages for human societies, but there are just as many potential problems that arise, so that the overall impact is still merely a subject for speculation. On the positive side, globalization and informatization can empower individuals and societies to engage in international arena for economic, political, and cultural resources. Moreover, these forces allow for the greater flow of information, even from places and to people who have traditionally been sealed off from the free flow of information. North Korea's Central Daily News , for example, is just as accessible to anyone with an internet connection as is CNN. As Friedman argues, technologization has brought about a "democracy of information" (p. 53).

Moreover, there is a proliferation of information about lifestyles, religions, and cultural issues. For example, the rise of the internet allows commerce to take place from anywhere, to anywhere, and is open to anyone. Consumers around the world can buy books from a source such as Amazon.com, and never have to travel outside of their country to get access to the information previously limited to the developed world. Religious pilgrims can use live video streams to have a "virtual visit" to religious shrines, such as the Western Wall. The telecommunications and computer networks also allow for unprecedented global activism. Nonprofit activist groups such as the Ruckus Society, for example, use technological means to gather volunteers, teach about environmental and human rights activism, publicize events, and raise support through such traditional means as offering coffee mugs and T-shirts to supporters. This democratization of information increases the potential for international harmony, although it by no means guarantees it.

Information technology can also be used to empower marginalized communities, and some resources, such as the Global Knowledge partnership, engage in activities to make information technologies, including computing resources and telecommunications, as well as more low-tech media forms, available for the purposes of national and local economic development. This video clip from the World Bank argues that technological development should be used for the purposes of providing for health, agriculture, and environmental change, and ultimately, to eliminate poverty (World Bank statement on new technology, 2000). Some argue that the new forces will help to democratize regimes that must either allow information or risk losing out on economic growth, contributing to an inevitable democratization of societies. In the People"s Republic of China, for example, the webwar between the government and democratic activists is usually won by the activists (US Embassy, 2000). There is no doubt that there is far greater access to various opinions, but whether or not these are accessed, and their impact if they are accessed, is still open to some debate.

On the negative side, however, these twin forces threaten to undermine centuries of tradition, local autonomy, and cultural integrity. The internet, for example, is overwhelmingly an English language medium, and those who want to participate fully with all it has to offer had best read English (Barber, 1995). In fact, a high level government panel recently recommended that Japan consider adopting English as an official language in the future (English 'imperialism,' 2000). Moreover, globalization establishes a global economic system in which those with the most capital are best able to capitalize on the global market, setting up what Friedman calls a "winner take all" system (1999, p. 245). Although technology levels the playing field, it does nothing to diminish the size of the competitors. The US, for example, overwhelmingly benefits from the rise of information technology, as it is the US that dominates almost all commercial sites and many, if not most, of the most profitable technology manufacturers. In addition, Westerners have clear advantages in telecommunications, as illustrated by the fact that there are more internet connections in Manhattan than in the entire African continent (World Bank statement on technology, 2000). The same access to information made possible by the internet also empowers those with devious ends, such as international terrorism or even garden variety hackers, with greater powers at their disposal to exploit or attack others.

A United Nations Development Project report in 1999 argued that globalization was indeed widening the gap between the rich and poor nations, and that the industrialized nations overwhelmingly benefit from both globalization of markets and the rising importance of information and knowledge in the new global economy. Moreover, the report estimates that English is the language of choice for 80 percent of web sites, and that 26 percent of Americans use the World Wide Web -- as opposed to 3 percent of Russians, 0.4 percent of the population of South Asia and 0.2 percent for Arab states (UNDP, 1999)

Finally, one of the potentially most devastating impact of the forces of globalization and informatization is that there is created an insidious conflict between the new global economic order and the local, or even tribal, interests. Friedman argues that this tension between the 'lexus (global) and the olive tree (local)' is one of the defining characteristics of the new world. Barber (1995) characterises the dialectic between "McWorld vs. Jihad" as an inevitable point of conflict in the future, between a "McWorld tied together by communications, information, entertainment,and commerce" versus a "Jihad...against technology, against pop culture, and against integrated markets; against modernity itself." (1995, p. 4).

Moreover, the aggressive nature of the forces of globalization and informatization make mutual acceptance untenable. It is impossible to stand outside the globalizing world, as there are too many political, economic, social, and even technological forces pushing nations and societies in that direction. Although it might be possible for an individual to refuse to cooperate, the very nature of the globalized world make it impossible for whole societies to stand against it and still prosper.

This brief introduction to the forces of globalization and informatization is by no means exhaustive, but it helps to raise some of the salient issues for further discussion. I will turn my attention now to the implications of these forces for international and intercultural communication theory, and give tentative expression to some of the questions that arise for theorists of intercultural communication.

As noted previously, intercultural communication theorists have often noted the globalizing forces of economic integration, tourism, migration, etc, as important forces that provide a rationale for increased intercultural communication competency. Few, however, have attempted to discern the more fundamental questions of how these forces will change the very nature of intercultural contact. (One notable exception is Chen and Starosta, 2000) In this section, I will attempt to articulate several broad areas of questions, and articulate some important areas that merit the attention of intercultural communication theorists. I will articulate these in two broad categories, the social implications and the interpersonal implications. Given that the field of intercultural communication is typically construed as primarily interpersonal, it might seem more helpful to address these first. However, given the fact that these forces are inherently cultural and social, I think it best to begin with a discussion of the larger social and cultural implications.