Restoring the media to the function of truth-telling strikes the loudest chord with me in terms of developing the right kind of globalization. However, even though I agree with this ideal, I do not agree with Prabhu Guptara’a argument that global controls and in essence artificial competition would improve media integrity.
Mandating a worldwide “strengthening” of public broadcasting by increasing their budgets would only proliferate the problem of dishonesty in the media. The most influential reason for this is referenced in P. Guptara’s following commentary, that “in most parts of the world, media provide only government and/or elite propaganda.” Additionally, P. Guptara summarizes his steps by saying we should work at the level of culture to alleviate the problems of globalization, while his solutions mostly disregard individual cultures, enacting worldwide mandates.
I agree with P. Guptara’s overall conclusion that law should be “transparent, light and effective – and is, above all, seen as just.” However, I disagree with his notion that global laws can be effective over such a wide range of cultures. Creating laws by a few, for the cultures of many destroys culture itself, producing a more monoculture world. Guptara also chides totalitarian-type reactions to his resolutions, but a centralized governmental body would implement most of his 7 Steps.
I further agree with P. Guptara’s four key issues of our global economy, but I think globalized solutions to these problems disregard the uniqueness, wants and desires of our world’s diverse cultures. It is insensible to conclude that worldwide laws and regulations can alleviate his four key issues. Such laws are enacted in the name of fighting poverty, materialism, and other global issues, in the same breath as using the materialistic desires of one over another and assumes a few know what is best for an entirely foreign culture.
Guptara, P. (2010), ‘Towards creating the right kind of globalization: an analysis
– with proposals’, Journal of Organisational Transformation and Social Change
7: 1, pp. 89–103.