5.3: Theories - Cultural Diffusion

Learning Objectives

By the end of this section, you will be able to:

• Understand the role of global cities in cultural diffusion
• Analyze 'McWorld' and America's role in globalization

Global Cities and the Role of Urbanization in Cultural Diffusion 

When it comes to cities with major cultural influence, several factors are requisite to be at the top of the hierarchy, or in other words, to become a global city. A global city is a major urban center that not only plays a significant role in the global economy and serves as a hub for international business, finance, and politics, but also plays a large role in the diffusion of culture. Infrastructure is obviously a huge factor in the development of a global city, and in the contemporary era, that means being highly connected with both transportation infrastructure and also via telecommunications. Additionally, because popular culture is intrinsically linked to global capitalism, global cities need to house the drivers of culture, specifically the entities and actors who promote the distribution of cultural elements (Kaplan and Holloway, 2014). Today, three cities are generally considered to be at the top of the system, London, New York, and Tokyo.

As suggested by Kaplan and Holloway (2014), it is logical to view these three as global cities because of the breadth of activities centered in and around them. We would expect leading areas to house the headquarters of important multinational and transnational corporations and financial institutions involved in the process. Indeed, all of them are home to major financial institutions and exchanges, as well as commercial banking firms and activities, which attracts large amounts of investment from both domestic and international actors. For the individual, the economies in these three cities promote the sale and consumption of expensive and exclusive products. Finally, their populations tend to be highly educated and employed in higher order economic sectors, those that are capable of producing and distributing proprietary intellectual property. This means global cities are home to many of the actors involved in the design of important artifacts that are distributed through wider global networks, in particular consumer items such as clothing and fashion accessories (Jannson and Power, 2010). Since they are also centers of tourism, all the above factors are showcased to visitors and spread via contagious diffusion. 

Culture produced in these three cities diffuses throughout the world, spreading outward first to regional centers of culture and eventually to smaller communities. These communities can also be important drivers of culture, but they are not as well connected in as many important aspects (Kaplan and Holloway, 2014). In North America for example, culture produced in New York traditionally diffuses to cities like Chicago, San Francisco, Los Angeles and Mexico City, and then to medium-sized and eventually to smaller cities. The next level after London in Europe consists of cities like Brussels, Geneva, Frankfurt, Madrid and Milan. For Tokyo in Asia, the next level would be cities such as Osaka, Seoul, Beijing, Taipei, Bangkok, Singapore, and Hong Kong. Thus, markets and urban areas constitute nodes in networks of cultural exchange, coordinating the flow of culture (Bestor, 2001). Keeping in mind that popular culture is diffused to populations that are willing and capable of purchasing it, the better the connections to and relationships among actors in this global urban network, the more likely a given population will be to participate in the process of cultural globalization. For example, someone living in Bakersfield, California, a city of approximately 400 thousand people, is well connected to larger cities like Los Angeles and beyond, has good access to new cultural elements brought in via hierarchical diffusion. Conversely, someone who lives in Tehran, Iran, a city that has over ten million inhabitants, but is isolated and lacks access to these global networks of cultural exchange, is not able to access new cultural elements to the same degree. Therefore, while all cities are affected by cultural globalization to some degree, those in highly developed regions, like North America, Western Europe, and East Asia, are much more likely to participate in cultural globalization than areas in the developing world.  

"McWorld" and America's Role in Cultural Globalization 

The importance of hierarchal diffusion for cultural globalization puts a handful of powerful centers of cultural in the driver’s seat, and the dominance of American cultural exports within the global network of exchange has led some to equate cultural globalization with Americanization. This idea has often been termed as the “McWorld” model, or simply as “McDonaldisation,” in reference to the U.S.-based multinational fast food corporation McDonald’s (Ritzer, 1983). This concept applies to other large U.S.-based corporations as well, such as Nike, Coca-Cola, or Apple. The products and services rendered via these companies have been labeled as distinctly American in nature and have become ubiquitous throughout the developed world, and in some cases beyond. Tailoring their business models specifically for global markets has favored a trend toward hyper-standardization and predictability, regardless of the markets they enter. Adding to the view of globalization as Americanization, the United States is also a global leader in media and entertainment, as exemplified by the outsized reach of Hollywood films, along with television programing and music.  

Proponents of the McWorld critique often posit that cultural globalization is mainly a one-way flow of cultural diffusion, from the U.S. outward. The logic here is based partly on the economic and geopolitical reality of U.S. global hegemony in terms of America’s role in global institutions and commerce. As discussed in previous chapters, the United States holds an outsized position in a number of supranational organizations, as suggested by its permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council, its role in the G20 and G8 economic groups, as well as its massive influence in NATO and various international free trade regimes. One result of this influence has been that much of the world has been made safe and accessible to U.S.-based corporations, placing them on the top of global business hierarchies and allowing them to conduct hierarchical diffusion of the cultural elements they produce, thus benefiting from the globalization of liberalization and a political economy that works in these actors’ favor (Simmons and Elkins, 2004). This dominance has led to a situation where lifestyles and built environments begin to reflect the hyper-standardized products that are diffused by American-centered companies, eventually leading to cultural homogenization based on these principles. The critique further elaborates the potential for culture shock in societies that are confronted with the influx of McWorld type elements, pointing to the fact that while American culture tends to be associated with themes such as power, status and hope, it also tends to promote consumerism while at the same time glorifying violence. This new culture is attractive to young people in particular and has the potential to perpetuate cultural generation gaps as young consumers embrace the McWorld elements and older generations are either hesitant to accept them, or reject them outright.  

While few doubt the massive influence of American culture abroad, populations in the United States themselves have also participated in cultural globalization as consumers of elements produced in other parts of the world. For example, diffusion of elements from East Asia, Japan in particular, have been particularly influential in North America, especially among young people (Garcia, 2013). Media from Japan and South Korea have become increasingly popular among young people in America over the past few decades, exemplified by the prevalence of film genres like Anime, and musical styles such as K-Pop (Korean pop music). Products from East Asia are also exceedingly popular in U.S. markets. Automobiles from Japan-based multinational and transnational corporations, such as Honda and Toyota, are among the highest selling passenger cars in the United States year in and year out. Gaming and e-sports, facilitated by hardware from corporations such as Sony and Nintendo, constitute a major source of recreation in the United States. American consumers have also popularized many brands and products from Europe in the realm of fashion, purchasing high-end items from companies such as Burberry, Louis Vuitton, Armani, and Prada, along with mass market fast-fashion products distributed by companies like Zara.  

While the prevalence of these examples suggests that cultural globalization is more than just a one-way street that leads from the U.S. outward, the pattern of elements being produced and distributed by companies in highly developed areas does seem to hold true. American consumers are much more likely to engage with elements with origins from Europe and East Asia than from developing regions. Parts of the world like South and Southeast Asia, Latin America, and other developing areas are involved in global supply chains, especially in the production phase, but the supply chains themselves, along well as their distribution networks, tend to be controlled by corporations based in developed regions, which function at the top of global value chains with subsidiaries and other actors entering and competing at lower levels (Wan and Wu, 2015). In other words, artifacts may be created in the Global South, but their aesthetics reflect the cultural values of their designers from the Global North. American-based cultural elements might be the most influential and widespread, but they do not stand alone in the process. American consumers participate in cultural exchange as they adopt new elements from outside regions, as corporations covet the U.S. market due to the American population's capability of, and tendencies toward, consumption. 

Another problem with the McWorld model lies in the fact that hyper-standardization, or the extreme standardization of products, services, or cultural elements to the point where they become uniform and lack diversity, does not always work due to fact that Western products and lifestyles may not appeal to new markets in their current form or may not be easily replicable to practice in local contexts. For cultural elements to stick in a new population, they need to be widely accepted to be worth marketing and distribution. Potential disconnects can lead to the process of glocalization, whereby companies adapt their products according to better fit local cultural norms. This process can be observed when analyzing the product offerings from McDonald’s itself, which commonly adjusts with its menu items to conform to local tastes and expectations. For example, McDonald’s has offered items such as the “Ham N’ Egg Twisty Pasta” in Hong Kong, “Tomato and Mozzarella Turnovers” in Italy, the “McLobster” in Canada, and the “McRice Burger” in the Philippines, among many other examples worldwide. As for an example of glocalization among American consumers, the rise in popularity of sushi suggests a similar approach. While it is certainly possible to find authentic sushi in the United States, finding the ‘real thing’ outside of a major city is usually challenging. However, finding a Japanese restaurant serving items like California rolls, a glocalized version of sushi that avoids raw fish, an ingredient that may be seen as off putting to someone raised in a traditional American diet, is typically quite easy.