Ursula- Core Post #4 (belatedly)

     Shanti Kumar's chapter addressing the question of global television studies raises pointed critiques of current approaches toward globalization and universal applications of theory in television studies. The tug of war between universalizing and essentializing in scholarship that acknowledges the local's position to the global is a conversation that frequently gets discussed in my classes in East Asian Area Studies. As Kumar illustrates it is a complex problem fraught with challenges that does not have an easy answer. However, Kumar's argument seems to do little to distinguish his conclusions or discussions as specific to the field of television studies.  The complications of the global and the local are in no way unique to television studies; they apply across disciplines. It would be interesting to ask what specific challenges and contributions the television studies could add to the discussion of globalization and studies of the global. I also found that Kumar's piece did not sufficiently address its audience. Are the suggestions for how to teach the field of global television studies meant for Western university systems? American higher education? Or are the suggestions meant to apply generally across localities in the same universal way as the theories he critiques? 

    One of the key elements of global television studies that I would have loved to see the three articles address more is the highly successful and important format trade. While the articles allude to it or mention it in passing, the format trade and adaptions is a really interesting area of study that intrinsically connects to the interactions between the global and the local. As Micheal Curtin points out with his example of the Rupert Murdoch conglomerate's localization of Star TV channels, the global expansion of television often necessitates intense localization. Formats codify this type of local and global interaction as well as the complexities of universalism and essentialism. For example, American Idol, a hugely successful American television series, was previously the British format Pop Stars which was adapted from the Australian adaption of a New Zealand program. American Idol is now just one of hundreds of Idol productions around the world. Yet each of the adaptions modify the format to address the production's location. For example, if aired in the US, Pakistan Idol would receive a wildly different response than American Idol even though it is the same format. I think an acknowledgement and analysis of formats would enhance the arguments and discussions brought up in the three articles.