According to Bernd Hamm and Russell Smandych (2005) there are numerous reasons why this is so but these include the shrinking of the world into a global village due to technology, particularly the internet and other forms of information and communication technologies. the phenomenal growth and influence of American-exported cultural industries. and, the shifting state of international relations and global politics. (p. 3)
“In his lucid appraisal of the term ‘cultural imperialism’, John Tomlinson identifies four ways of employing this composite notion: as media imperialism, as a discourse of nationality, as a critique of global capitalism and as a critique of modernity.” (Colas 2007, p. 153)
Tomlinson based his assumption that media imperialism can be equated with or could be used as a way of talking about cultural imperialism on the fact that media is intimately connected with other aspects of culture in terms of people’s ‘lived experience’. In his discourse of media imperialism and cultural imperialism Tomlinson extensively referred to Chin Chuan Lee and his account on media imperialism. He particularly gives credence to Lee’s suggestion that links exist between media and other aspects of culture and that there are indeed connections between economics, politics, and culture. (p. 224)
Media imperialism is a way of discussing cultural imperialism because it involves all the complex political issues – and indeed, the political commitments – entailed in the notion of cultural domination. (p. 224-225)
There are global media events, when virtually everyone with access to a television set is able to witness major events at the same time (for example, the Gulf War, the Bosnian conflict). Then there is the regional and potentially global spread of service delivery platforms (for example, Star TV, CNN, BBC World TV). On a broader scale, it can mean the formation of global media firms, which own and/or control media outlets in most regions of the world. (p.