Dr. Forqan Uddin Ahmed :
Satellite channel, one of the most outstanding inventions of humankind, has become a matter of controversy. Any scientific invention, which has widespread application, gives birth to controversy. It is nothing new or unusual. Which makes difference in case of satellite channels is that the question raised are connected with the concept of ethnic purity and to some extent cultural ethics. They are indiscriminately blamed for bringing up cultural distortion on one hand and thus creating disintegration with the mainstream culture on the other by a section of people almost in every country. Is this accusation wholly true, or it is biased reflection, a one-eyed fundamentalist approach?
Whenever we discuss about satellite channels or cultural integration or disintegration, what comes naturally in the course is globalisation. Conceptually globalisation is a complex, holistic and multi-dimensional process, which goes beyond mere economic growth and integrates all the dimensions and all the energies of the communities worldwide, aiming at the benefit of all the nations. Cultural globalisation also emerges from that very idea and satellite channels, somehow, are working as a tool of that idea. Neither globalisation nor the concept of cultural globalisation is a new concept, but the main agents of cultural globalisation have historically changed significantly. What is new about cultural globalisation in contemporary society is the role of mediated communication in processes of globalisation and the intensity with which images symbols and cultural imaginary worlds are expressed and circulated through, for instance, satellite channels. But although national cultures have already lived for a long time with heavy global interaction, there is often a very strong feeling against globalisation, which is seen as a threat to the nation as well as to its cultural identity.
Satellite channels through their presentation of various programs keep people tuned to them. Why are these programs so popular? Why do they appeal so much to our young hearts? If we want to get the answers to these questions, we have to turn our eyes to criteria of the programs set by them. Basically and mostly, the programs are entertainment oriented. These channels use modern audio-visual technology in formulating those programs. The duration of a program is very short, which does not take much time from busy people of the busy world. Easy and accessible colloquial language, unambiguous and specific approach and cheap availability of the channels make them attractive to people. The salient features of these channels include the representations of all sorts of opinion and the massive presence of common people.
Television is clearly the most important medium of communication in any countries. A variety of polls have shown that in Bangladesh 70%-75% of the adult population acquire socio-political information predominantly from television while 25 &-30% get it from newspapers and 5%-10% from radio. By far, the most popular programs are aired on satellite channels, where available, and only 40% watch State Run television BTV, reason in many cases, the absence of satellite channels. There is widespread popular agreement that the professionalism and the overall quality of satellite channels far surpassed the State Run channel BTV, which broadcast shows on national history and folk culture. Therefore the State Run television lacks both the money and experienced personnel to be competitive in the market. The satellite channels present commercial in a very lucrative way, as a result, the market acceptability of the product also increases. They also run mostly foreign (Hollywood and Mumbai) films, shows and advertisements using little of home production. According to data from the daily newspapers, we find 75% of popular foreign channels in Bangladesh are based on American and Hindi films and shows and the rest are Bangladeshi production. Even we look at India; we will see that Durdarshan, the state run television, can by no means compete with the glamorous presentation of satellite channels like Zee Network, Sony TV, Star Jalsha, etc.
In fact the impact of changing patterns of work, family structures, urban living and income distribution have all made inroads into a range of social and cultural behavior, including identity formation and expression, life style, political behaviour and association, etc, in all of these media at one and the same time act as resources of symbols and ideas. The impact of satellite channels is so intense that the younger generation of today can hardly think of doing without them. These channels are like the windows to the modern world to them. They give them a taste of perturbed world where life can offer a relief from the mundane monotony. They have an alcoholic effect over the human mind, which can impart temporary forgetfulness, and consequently a strong addiction grows among the people. In the age of market economy, everything is judged upon its market value. Now people follow the policy, which can generate instant profit. Satellite channels are one of the biggest profit making sectors. In setting up programs, we can perceive the reflection of it. Our channel owners are also driven by this very policy-maximum consumerism and minimum spiritualism. We are compromising with it at the cost of the spiritual aspect of our cultural identity. It is of course very unclear to what extent the global-local national hybridisation has so far had a very strong and significant influence on mainstream-production and distribution of global cultural products. In fact, many national films and television products easily complete with American products, and studies of national product will also tell an interesting story about how hybridisation on a global level takes places. Hollywood has always been good European directors. Likewise, European films and televisions transform American form in quite innovative ways.
Taking the above-mentioned example into consideration, we can say the earlier perception that the two opposing phenomena-regionalism and multilateralism in international communication area cannot go together-is not viable in 21st Century. Regionalism, which was essentially considered as a stumbling block to multilateralism is rather viewed as complementary to that. Through diffusion process, foreign cultures can both weaken and strengthen domestic ethnic cultures in a state. What we have to ensure regarding satellite channels is that it does not turn into a tool for cultural imperialism, thus giving birth to cultural disintegration. On the other hand, it should become a hub of cultures, where ethnic cultures can flourish through meaningful coexistence.
To sum up, cultures are not able to struggle with each other. Cultures can only raise interest positively; their influence on each other has consequence, mutual enrichment, cross-fertilisation, and mutual stimulation of development. We can very well predict that the future of humanity will be determined not by turning the World into a techno centric global village of markets with firms-arms and industries, but by rebuilding a culture and faith in which the cosmic, divine and human dimensions are suitably integrated. The immense possibility of the satellite channels should not be used merely as an empire of so-called cultural elite. We should strive for bringing a symbiosis of World cultures through satellite channels. Only then, this wonderful and revolutionary invention of society can get rid of this stigma namely cultural disintegration.
(Dr. Forqan Uddin Ahmed, writer, researcher and columnist)
