BCM111 Bye Bye!

As I plunder through the vast array of knowledge my brain has absorbed in the past 11 weeks, it is satisfying to say that I have expanded my awareness and ideas about international media and communication. Looking back through my previous posts I recognise how my views have grown and transitioned from looking at particular theories and models “subjectively” to “objectively”. By looking at these studies objectively I am able to critically evaluate and critique the positives and negatives of each. However, I did enjoy placing my own thoughts and opinions on the matter as well.

Particular topics that I found most intriguing were “Local and Global Selves in Hip Hop” and “Television in Translation”. In studying the global spread of hip hop I learnt that such a transnational form of dance and music has in fact been influenced and in some way manipulated to different cultures. In particular, the transnational transfers of popular dance and music that filters down in order from “USA, Hawaii, US Samoa, Samoa, New Zealand and Australia” (Henderson, 2012, p188). I found theories of hybridity and glocalisation incredibly compelling and I discovered that the way in which hip-hop has been spread and altered to different cultures is a form of globalisation and communication. Now whenever I see a form of so called “American” music, dance, products, or advertisements I feel it necessary to look beyond what is depicted and interpret it with more significance, that it could in fact have been absorbed by another culture or influenced by another nation.


 I was completely shocked to learn that “Kath and Kim” wasn’t accepted as a humorous form of television series in the US. This motivated me to start viewing international media as a tool that could create and change a television series to suit a particular audience. This enticed me to do further research in which I found three similar television series that were all created to suite a target audience. These included “Jersey Shore” (USA), “Geordie Shore” (UK) and “The Shire” (Australia). I’m pleased to say that I can now relate my own research with that of theorists who elaborate that “humour, and thus comedy formats, most drama, relying as it does on some unavoidable specificities of character and place, and of course the vast bulk of news and current affairs, remain stubbornly resistant to exploitation in a multiplicity of markets” (Cunningham, 1996, p249). It is a range of factors that allows the media to translate television to suit transnational cultures.


 Following the comments received on my blog, class discussion and reading other blogs I have learnt that everyone is entitled to their own opinion and whether I agree or disagree with their point of view it is important that I acknowledge their analysis in order to gain a well-rounded outlook on the issue.

I like to see this journey, as growth towards enabling myself to look at the media objectively and determine its true implications internationally, is it being altered, changed, influenced? How has this spread globally? Is what I’m watching suited to my type of culture? What effects could this have on my media usage?

This only makes me want to go out into the world and explore more effects of international media, and that is a great thing!

Bye Bye BCM111 x