In other words, scholars argue that globalization of media is just another word replacing ‘cultural imperialism’, or even, ‘Americanization’ and that as a result, the media will no longer remainHistorically, individual cultures existed relatively independent of one another. Media outlets operated on a local or national level without interference from neighboring countries or large corporations. The public sphere was shaped by units such as national cinemas, national newspapers, and state-owned public television. Today, however, the mass media operates on an increasingly global scale. This trend towards globalization is often attributed to the rise of huge, ‘monopolistic’ media outlets where a very small percentage of individuals and corporations dominate the majority of the world’s media. As cultural and communications systems are becoming increasingly global and international, the preservation of national, local and distinct cultures is still important. In other words, scholars argue that globalization of media is just another word replacing ‘cultural imperialism’, or even, ‘Americanization’ and that as a result, the media will no longer remain orations. The public sphere was shaped by units such as national cinemas, national newspapers, and state-owned public television. Today, however, the mass media operates on an increasingly global scale. This trend towards globalization is often attributed to the rise of huge, ‘monopolistic’ media outlets where a very small percentage of individuals and corporations dominate the majority of the world’s media. As cultural and communications systems are becoming increasingly global and international, the preservation of national, local and distinct cultures is still important. In other words, scholars argue that globalization of media is just another word replacing ‘cultural imperialism’, or even, ‘Americanization’ and that as a result, the media will no longer remainal scale. This trend towards globalization is often attributed to the rise of huge, ‘monopolistic’ media outlets where a very small percentage of individuals and corporations dominate the majority of the world’s media. As cultural and communications systems are becoming increasingly global and international, the preservation of national, local and distinct cultures is still important. In other words, scholars argue that globalization of media is just another word replacing ‘cultural imperialism’, or even, ‘Americanization’ and that as a result, the media will no longer remainty of the world’s media. As cultural and communications systems are becoming increasingly global and international, the preservation of national, local and distinct cultures is still important. In other words, scholars argue that globalization of media is just another word replacing ‘cultural imperialism’, or even, ‘Americanization’ and that as a result, the media will no longer remain In other words, scholars argue that globalization of media is just another word replacing ‘cultural imperialism’, or even, ‘Americanization’ and that as a result, the media will no longer remain agents of the public, but become representatives of a corporation.

Cultural imperialism can be defined as when one culture either attempts to control or force its own ideologies onto another culture through the use of the media. Scholars assert that “as a so-called global economy spreads, breaking down nationalistic barriers for production, distribution, and consumption, thousands of formal and informal culture and political rules are under assault.” The globalization of media can result in bias, as specific groups of people outside of the so-called status quo can become entirely neglected or misrepresented. As individual communities absorb foreign information, their own culture is weakened, and a new, uniform culture emerges at their expense. The heavy importa