Brian Smith - Core Post #4

 The Morley reading was quite the compact reading that addressed so much I feel like I did not get any sort of satisfactory conclusion to the very many arguments, counter arguments, and ideas he presented. Micro and macro-processes, communication technologies and hardware, public and private bridges and distance, national/international relations and consumerism is a lot to consider in a single paper, but from what I gather his argument seems to be that when considering how television and communication technology shapes culture it is imperative to employ ethnographic studies and sociology more broadly. Again I am struggling with this proposed method because much of it feels essentialist (even when Morley criticizes another writer for doing so). How is it can we collect qualitative data from family units across national, regional, racial, and class differences to draw any sort of tangible, concrete conclusions regarding the shaping of a global culture? It seems to be a monumental (and impossible) task. Perhaps this is my own misreading (which I am more than willing to admit there is much I struggled to understand so take this criticism with a grain of salt). Also much of this felt like it was mostly relevant to the global north. Where was the conversation on the U.S. and U.K. occupation and exploitation of the global south to make these technological realities possible and how the global south is routinely excluded in the “global” community. It bugs me when these readings only ever mention class, race, imperialism, etc. tangentially or relegate these topics to muted insinuations. The British coronation or royal weddings are private events made public to build bridges with whom? Which nations are considered connected in such a way that culture becomes shared and available for participation and which are cast out and further relegated to the realm of exclusion and subjugation? If the British coronation is to be a shared sacred tradition in which the rest of Europe and America is invited to participate as digital/diasporic guests, then what is it to the nations that the U.K. is forcibly occupying? Is it still the same sense of community then? I have many more questions but I’ll save them for class I suppose.