Modernisation Theory and Dependency Theory

Modernization theory of international communication is a framework that emerged in the mid-20th century, primarily in the field of sociology and communication studies. It suggests that as societies modernize economically, socially, and politically, their communication systems also evolve in a linear progression. This theory posits that as countries develop, they adopt more advanced forms of communication, such as mass media, which in turn facilitate social change and modernization.

According to modernization theory, communication technologies play a crucial role in the development process by disseminating information, fostering cultural exchange, and promoting political participation. This perspective often emphasizes the role of Western media and technologies in spreading modern values and ideas globally.

Authors like Wilbur Schramm, Daniel Lerner, and Everett Rogers have contributed to the development of modernization theory in international communication. Schramm, in his book “Mass Media and National Development,” explores how mass media can contribute to national development by promoting education, democracy, and economic progress. Lerner, in “The Passing of Traditional Society,” discusses how modern communication technologies can facilitate the transition from traditional to modern societies by disseminating knowledge and shaping public opinion. Rogers, in “Diffusion of Innovations,” examines how new communication technologies spread through societies, influencing social change and development.

While modernization theory has been influential in understanding the role of communication in development, it has also been criticized for its simplistic view of modernization as a one-size-fits-all process and its tendency to overlook cultural differences and power dynamics in international communication. This theory doesn’t necessarily apply to all the nations in the world in general because of the varied geopolitical structures of these nations per se India.

India has a very different geographical structure when compared to some western nations due to the vast cultural influence across the country and how soft powers such as food, religion, tribal background and social structures play a major role in deciding the exact definition of modern or urban society in India.

The influence of the West or the developed nations also hampers the growth of these secondary and tertiary nations. This is exactly the reason why the NWICO (New World Information and Communication Order) and the McBride Commission was established.

(NWICO) was a set of proposals advocated by developing countries in the 1970s and 1980s to address what they perceived as inequities in global communication flows. These countries, primarily from Africa, Asia, and Latin America, argued that Western dominance in the media and communication industries resulted in a skewed portrayal of their cultures and interests, perpetuating a one-sided flow of information to the rest of the world.

The MacBride Commission, also known as the International Commission for the Study of Communication Problems, was established by UNESCO in 1977 and chaired by Irish diplomat and journalist Seán MacBride. The commission aimed to examine global communication issues and propose recommendations for a more equitable and balanced international communication system.

The primary concerns addressed by the MacBride Commission included media imperialism, cultural imperialism, unequal access to communication technologies, and the need for greater cultural diversity in media content. The commission’s final report, titled “Many Voices, One World,” was published in 1980 and advocated for democratizing communication systems, promoting cultural diversity, and fostering a more participatory and inclusive global media landscape.

However, the NWICO and the MacBride Commission faced opposition from Western countries, particularly the United States and the United Kingdom, as well as media corporations and industry groups. Critics argued that the proposals threatened freedom of the press and the free flow of information, and they accused the commission of promoting censorship and government control over media.

Ultimately, the NWICO and the MacBride Commission did not lead to significant policy changes at the international level. And the situation till now is pretty much the same However, they raised awareness about the need for greater equity and diversity in global communication and contributed to ongoing debates about media ownership, representation, and cultural globalization.

Now coming onto the dependency theory,

Dependency theory of international communication is a perspective that emerged in the 1960s and 1970s, It argues that the global communication system is structured in a way that perpetuates and reinforces inequalities between developed and developing countries. According to dependency theory, developing countries are economically and culturally dependent on developed countries, which control the production and distribution of media content.

The theory highlights several key dynamics:

1. Media Ownership and Control: Developed countries, particularly Western nations, dominate the ownership and control of global media conglomerates. This concentration of media power allows them to shape the flow of information and control the narratives presented to the world.
2. Cultural Imperialism: Dependency theorists argue that the media content produced by developed countries often reflects their own cultural values and interests, while marginalizing or misrepresenting the cultures and perspectives of developing countries. This phenomenon is sometimes referred to as cultural imperialism and it is still the case and exactly the reason why there are talks on free media in our country.
3. Economic Exploitation: Dependency theorists contend that the global media system operates in a way that benefits developed countries economically, often at the expense of developing countries. This can involve unequal trade relations, exploitation of labor, and the extraction of resources for media production.

In countries like India, dependency theory has struggled to gain widespread traction among audiences for several reasons:

1. National Pride and Identity: Many people in India take pride in their country’s cultural heritage and diversity. While they may acknowledge the influence of Western media, they also value and support indigenous media industries that reflect Indian culture and perspectives.
2. Media Consumption Patterns: Indian audiences have diverse media consumption habits, including consumption of both domestic and international media content. While Western media products are popular in India, they coexist alongside a thriving domestic media industry that produces content in multiple languages and genres.
3. Globalization and Hybridity: The globalization of media has led to the emergence of hybrid forms of cultural expression that blend elements from different cultures. In India, for example, there is a vibrant fusion of traditional and modern influences in music, film, and fashion, which challenges simplistic notions of cultural domination.

Although dependency theory highlights important issues related to global communication inequalities, its overall view of media influence and its focus on structural constraints often overlooks the agency and creativity of audiences and media producers in shaping their own cultural identities and media landscapes. Ultimately curbing the freedom of expression in many nations and what i conclude from this is that it’s not the developing nations that are dependent on the developed nations rather it’s the other way around and still a matter of discussion.