Coronil's article details the perceived benefits of globalization, and its actual drawbacks. He begins by saying that many believe globalization to be this new trend, but in fact, it's no different than cross cultural/cross continental trade. History books look back upon these moments as seminal, and important. And they are. But globalization in the contemporary sense is not this warm, fuzzy occurrence it's made out to be. Indeed, "rather than being new," Coronil states, "[it] is the intensified manifestation of an old process of...capitalist expansion, colonization, worldwide migrations, and transcultural exchanges" (352). The issue, as Coronil explains, is that this new breed of globalcentrism "polarizes, excludes, and differentiates" (352). In short, "it unites by dividing" (352).
Further in the article--after his brief history of Marxist economics--he speaks to the differences between the globalization of today, versus the globalization of the seventies. Today, an economy "enabled by new technologies of production and communication," has led to, at least in the mind of Coronil, "new patterns of global integration and a heightened social polarization within and among nations" (358). He cites two articles: one detailing the financial disparities between the upper and lower classes, created by globalization, and the other, detailing the sentiments of Subcomandante Marcos, namely that the Cold War was actually the Third World War, insofar as it was a war waged on the third world.
By article's end, it's clear that Coronil is clearly not a fan of globalization, as he goes to great lengths to show the damage it's caused, and the social divisions it has engendered.
Gikandi, in his article, "Globalization and the Claims of Poscoloniality," echoes many of Coronil's sentiments, namely that globalization has led to the exploitation of the third world. True, we are a global community, but the relationship is becoming decidedly one sided, with the wealthy reaping the benefits of the poor--the poor, this case, being third world countries.
An argument worthy of note, is his hypothetical, though deftly constructed, scenario in which "Somali migrants in Seattle (or North Africans in Paris) insist that ‘‘circumcising’’ their daughters is crucial to their identity(644)." What, then, do we do to embrace new members of our society while acknowledging that their beliefs may differ from our own? At what point is the globalization cocktail too strong? Where does the synthesis end? And should it? Or does having a true global community mean not only accepting, but embracing cultural relativism?
If one thing is certain, it's that globalization is not easily defined, defended, or argued for. The very concept of globalization and all of its implications is infinitely more complex than one may think.
If we were to look at Poe's "The Cask of Amontillado", through the lens of Buckingham's Media Education, and delivered through a medium such as youtube, we would find that myriad opportunities to critique said story and medium, arise. For instance, in the video I've chosen to embed in this post, we can critique the speaker's delivery, his cadence, and even his facial expressions. We can examine the producer's motivation for utilizing a single voice actor, as opposed to two. And we can also examine the rationale behind using a voice actor in the first place. Why was this story not acted out with props? Why does he speak by candlelight?
In this way, students not only get a proper introduction to one of Poe's finest works, they also get a look into a particular form of media. The lesson, thus, serves two purposes: to teach students about the literary techniques employed in Poe's short story, and to show students that this is but one interpretation, through but one medium.
At first, I thought Buckingham's book was going to detail the many novel, progressive ways that media is being utilized in the classroom. This seems to be a popular theme of late. However, I came to find, after reading through the first couple chapters of his book, that Media Education is less about the use of media in the classroom than it is about the critique of media strategies. As he says in his own words, "Media education therefore aims to develop a broad-based competence, not just in raltion to print, but also in these other symbolic systems of images and sounds. This competence is frequently described as a form of literacy, and it is argued that, in the modern world, 'media literacy' is just as important for young people as the more traditional literacy of print" (4). Essentially, what he's set out to do in Media Education is to show students--and parents for that matter--that literacy no longer means the ability to read and write. To succeed in the modern world--a world filled with television, the internet, radio, advertising, etc...--one must be literate in all forms of media. This is necessary because "the media do not offer us a transparent 'window on the world', but a mediated version of the world.
In Chapter 4 he gives us some examples of media education. For instance, he details a marketing exercise in which "students are given an article from an advertising trade newspaper concerned with the Juice Up campaign" (64). The students are then asked to "consider how the marketing campaign was conceived by the advertising agency and the company. Discussion here focuses on issues such as the scheduling and placement of the ads, and what the producers assume about their audience" (64).
Buckingham goes on to detail half a dozen other exercises in 'creating the image', 'scheduling', 'catching the audience', and others, in an effort to further illustrate his point.
While I agree with much of what Buckingham has to say in Media Education, he seems to be covering a topic most of us are familiar with. The forms of media he talks about are not new, and even the most naive student should know that advertising is not always what it seems. As I said, I agree with what he's getting at, but I'd like to think that much of what he discusses is already common knowledge. What I would have liked to have seen instead, would have been a text dedicated to using these new forms of media to teach children, and adults alike, in an engaging, progressive manner. Too long has our educational system relied on the traditional lecture, quiz, pass/fail model. It doesn't work; it's just that simple. New tools are at our disposal; it's time a book actually detailed meaningful ways in which these tools can be implemented in the classroom.
