CULTURAL PLURALISM: Transition from homogenization to heterogenization

Criticism against the cultural imperialism paradigm would eventually pave the way for the
emergence of a new paradigm called “cultural pluralism” or “cultural globalization” for other scholars.

The paradigm shift was a departure from the “one-way” model of cultural pluralism towards a more
nuanced and sophisticated analysis of “multi-directional flows” among country relations (Matos 2012).

-It was a reaction to the treatment of the paradigms of modernization and cultural imperialism
to the role of audience as passive receptacles of information and ideas. The mobilizing toward resistance
and empowerment, according to their socio-economic context and cultural preference(Matos 2012).

Homogenization

-Homogenization is that mighty culture has invaded local culture as well as it has become the
dominant culture in local area that aims to eliminate the local culture. Society becomes homogenous.
Everyone conforms to western ideal. It also results that loss of individual culture and religions. There are
more market competition as well.

Heterogenization

-Cultural heterogenization or multicultural society, which means region culture was widely
disseminated and accepted by other societies and cultures and meanwhile enhance the cultural diversity in
local society. It could be resulted that richer countries gives incentive to poorer countries to protect their
natural environments as well as to adopt more sustainable practices.

With the past two paradigms, the development, and imperialism approach as being under
homogenization school with their assumptions on the impact of globalization on media and cultures.
Contemporary media studies have focused on “unpacking” the audience and in capacity to receive and
interpret messages. It is departure from the view of the homogenous audience that is fragmented with
distinctive tastes (Rantanen, 2005).
 The heterogenization school has also been criticized in several aspects. Sparks (2012) describes
the new orthodoxy as systematically marginal[ing] the role of the state,” as pervasively seen from
slogans of “think of global, act local” and “globalization”.

Criticism of heterogenization school have been enumerated by Rantanen(2012), such as the

power the audiences without taking into account the inequality their access to media and
communications, and the neglect of the economic clout of global media firms their concentration in the
United States.

Gordon’s (2009). She argues that while adaptation of American programme models have been
successfully localized to the point of producing original and separate products as seen in telenovelas of
Mexico and Bollywood films of India, such success has not been present in Jamaica where “ local
programmes do not bridge the gap between local and global to the oint where an original genre is
actually created.