1
The Jeremiad Over Journalism
- Studies in Americanization of Danish journalism
1.
Introduction
The jeremiad is a literary style lamenting people who have ―fallen into sinful ways and will face ruin‖ unless they quickly reform. The jeremiad over journalism, as this study perceives it, bemoans the current state of the profession, and longs for a golden past. The jeremiad is essentially
American, but it might as well have been Danish.1
Since the early 20th century, complaints about the American newspaper industry have found their way to Danish journalistic publications coupled with a fear of American influence on local
journalistic practices. Consciously or unconsciously, the jeremiad over journalism has been used by Danes to deplore the American propensity to focus on the ―shocking and astonishing.‖2 Closely associated with the criticism of American journalism is the idea that unbridled commercialism is detrimental to Danish journalism.
Yet, the commercial aspects of American journalism have also served as inspiration for Danish journalists. To Henrik Cavling, the most prominent Danish journalist in the 20th century, the United States was a place where the press played an important democratic role which was wholly absent from his experience in Denmark since newspapers were closely tied to specific political ideologies.
1 James A. Morone, Hellfire Nation: The Politics of Sin in American History (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2003). Page 14 and 44. ―Moral alarms inspire the essential American literary form, the jeremiad (a lament that the people have fallen into sinful ways and face ruin unless they swiftly reform).‖
2
H. T. Peck, "Amerikansk Journalistik [American Journalism]," Journalisten, October 1, 1906. Page 63-64. Peck mentions the focus on sensation, celebrities and personalization coverage as something uniquely American, but goes on to defend American journalism after having referred to the following common assertion. ―It has therefore been
ascertained and remarked until triviality that the lack of tact, sick vulgarity and shamelesness has never seen such a dreadful development as the one that the American press, even in its most excellent representatives, not only tolerates, but recommends.‖ My translation. Original text reads, ‖Det er derfor blevet slaaet fast og sagt indtil Trivialitet, at Mangel paa Takt, sygelig Vulgaritet og skamløs Ublufærdighed har aldrig set en saa frygtelig Udvikling som den, den amerikanske Presse selv i sine mest fremragende Repræsentanter, ikke blot tolererer, men anbefaler.‖
2
―The press in America echoes the people‘s voice and yet, or perhaps therefore, it has reached its astonishing development (...) under such conditions the journalist is transformed to reporter. He has but one task, to go out and direct the questions at the masses and without his own opinion write the answers in the so-called interviews which are at the core of the American journalism.‖3
To Danish reporters, American journalism contained the best, as well as the worst, of the profession. When it was at its best, American journalistic methods helped move democracy forward, at its worst it undermined the people‘s ability to elect public officials based on qualified information.4 In terms of journalistic profit-seeking, ethics, production, methods and distribution Americanization was at once welcomed as well as frowned upon.
Regardless of Danish journalists‘ attitudes towards Americanization, scholars argue that European journalistic methods are increasingly approximating American conditions. Moreover, the most powerful force behind this homogenization transforming ―both print and electronic media in Europe,‖ with the accompanying consequences for journalism and democracy is believed to be commercialization.5
Since Americanization of Danish journalism and political discourse is both seen as a benefit and a problem for democracy, 6 empirically studying Americanization on Danish journalism will help shed light on its actual impact.
3 Henrik Cavling, Fra Amerika [From America], 2 vols., vol. 1 (Gyldendalske Boghandels Forlag, 1897). Page 89. My translation. Original text reads, ―Pressen i Amerika er Folkerøstens Ekko og alligevel eller netop derfor har den naaet sin forbavsende Udvikling. (…) Under saadanne Forhold forvandles Journalisten til Reporter. Han har kun én Opgave, at gaa ud og rette Spørgsmaalene til Mængden og uden egen Særmening nedskrive Svarene i de saakaldte Interviews, der er Kærnen i den amerikanske Journalistik.‖
4 Thomas E. Patterson, "The United States: News in a Free-Market Society," in Democracy and the Media, ed. Richard Gunter and Anthony Mughan (ed.) (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000). Page 250. Also Joseph N. Capella and Kathleen Hall Jamieson, Spiral of Cynicism: The Press and the Public Good (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997). Page 9-13 and 29-37. Leonard Downie Jr. and Robert G. Kaiser, The News About the News: American
Journalism in Peril (New York: Vintage Books, 2003). Page 108-109. Capella and Jameson have pointed to increased cynicism in American news reporting which carries over to the electorate, and argued that the media is undermining American democracy. Others like Downie and Kaiser point to American journalism not fulfilling its democratic purpose, since the journalistic field has become too focused on entertainment and profit instead of serving American communities by doing ―aggressive, thorough intelligent coverage and revelatory accountability reporting.‖
5 Daniel C. Hallin and Paolo Mancini, Comparing Media Systems. Three Models of Media and Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004). Page 273. Also Sigurd Allern and Mark Blach-Ørsten, "The News Media as A Political Institution: A Scandinavian Perspective," Journalism Studies 1 (2010). Page 2.
6 Frits Bredal, "Amerikanisering Af Dansk Valgkamp" [Americanization of Danish Election Campaigns]," Berlingske
3
Specifically this dissertation looks at the driving forces behind ―transmission,‖
―transnationalization‖ and ―appropriation‖ of Americanization and asks the question: How have structural and symbolic developments emanating from the United States influenced Danish journalism?
1.1 Research Methods
―The methodology of the social sciences can be likened to working with paint rollers, while the methodology of the historian uses a small bristle,‖ writes the German economic historian Harm Schröter about the study of Americanization. He asserts that, in all cases of comparison, ―qualitative and quantitative evidence must be gathered to support conclusions.‖7
Employing both ―the paint roller‖ and ―the bristle,‖ this dissertation will study Americanization of Danish journalism utilizing an interdisciplinary approach collecting both qualitative and
quantitative evidence. By combining a historical hermeneutical method with a quantitative content analysis, the present study aims to identify both structural and cultural examples of American influence. According to communication scholars Daniel Hallin and Paolo Mancini, little work has been done tracing how the Americanization ―process happens concretely,‖ and the present study seeks to provide tangible examples of how economic and cultural influences emanating from the United States have succeeded or failed in being appropriated by Danish journalists.8
The interdisciplinary approach to studying Americanization is practical since the qualitative and quantitative methods chosen complement each other in important respects. To Hallin and Mancini, quantitative work is ―useful to a point,‖ in tracing the process of Americanization but reveals little of ―what really matters,‖ namely ―how journalists or other media personnel function in practice.‖9
Qualitative work, on the other hand, can reveal important aspects of journalistic practice, but can be
becomes increasingly superficial when influenced by the United States‘ commercially oriented example. Others find the commercial aspect of American political campaigns and its coverage refreshing. See for instance Martin Vith
Ankerstjerne, "Kronik: Demokrati: Amerikanisering Af Valgkamp - Ja Tak! [Feature: Democracy: Americanization of Election Campaigns - Yes Please!]," Berlingske Tidende April 18, 2008.
7 Harm G. Schröter, Americanization of the European Economy: A Compact Survey of American Economic Influence in
Europe since the 1880's (Dordrecht: Springer, 2005). Page 7-11.
8 Hallin and Mancini, Comparing Media Systems. Three Models of Media and Politics. Page 303-304. ―We found in looking at the literature on ‗Americanization‘ that there was relatively little work done tracing how this process happens concretely – what kinds of changes in journalism education take place, what interactions there are among journalists from different countries, what consultants are brought in, and what seminars held, and so on.‖
4
―unrepresentative and atypical,‖ as well as ―neither replicable nor comparable,‖ when not conducted systematically.10
The present study attempts to remedy the above-mentioned pitfalls of content analysis and historical hermeneutic inquiry by incorporating both approaches in the same study. Additionally, the
historical and content analysis conducted here will provide an example of ―comparative historical research,‖ which Hallin and Mancini find lacking in the field of communication where
contemporary and ethnocentric studies abound.11
The framework for historical analysis of Americanization is proposed by the Dutch Americanist Mel van Elteren and focuses on ―transmission,‖ ―transnationalization,‖ and ―appropriation‖ of impulses from the United States, while the content analysis is inspired by comparative quantitative research between the United States and Europe which sees journalistic institutions‘ relationship to the economic and political field as key variables shaping different journalistic practices
historically.12
The historical analysis is guided by van Elteren‘s recommendation that researchers ―immerse themselves in the life-worlds of historical actors as best as they can through combined cultural-historical and cultural-historical-anthropological approaches that enable them to carefully offer tentative interpretations of people‘s attitudes, emotions and actions of relevance – ‗readings‘ of past behavior that seems most adequate within the hermeneutic circle of this interpretative research.‖13
Van Elteren‘s framework for studying Americanization is illustrated in Table 1 and 2 below and introduces the three main analytical categories along with four levels of driving forces in
10 Fiona Devine, "Qualitative Methods," in Theory and Methods in Political Science, ed. David Marsh and Gerry Stoker (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002). Page 204-205.
11 Hallin and Mancini, Comparing Media Systems. Three Models of Media and Politics. Page 2 and 304. ―There is a need for comparative historical research in communication. We were struck, just to take one example, at how little was available – at least in the English-language literature and in other literatures we could read in the original – on the history of the party press.‖Additionally, as Sørensen and Petersen note, while there has been a recent focus on
Americanization of Danish society within the last decade, very few studies before this time dealt with the cultural aspect of Americanization. See Klaus Petersen and Nils Arne Sørensen, "Kommunister, Jan-Bøger Og Drømmekøkkener [Communists, Jan-Books and Dream Kitchens]," Jysk Selskab for Historie, no. 1 (2007). Moreover, no studies within the last decade has focused on Americanization of Danish journalism.
12 Mel Van Elteren, Americanism and Americanization: A Critical History of Domestic and Global Influence (Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers, 2006). Page 145-147. See also Jesper Strömbäck and Daniela V. Dimitrova, "Political and Media Systems Matter: A Comparison of Election News Coverage in Sweden and the United States," Press/Politics 11, no. 4 (2006). Page 132-134. As well as Daniel C. Hallin and Rodney Benson, "How States, Markets and Globalization Shape the News: The French and US National Press, 1965-97," European Journal of Communication 22, no. 1 (2007). Page 28-29.
5
Americanization of Danish journalism. These driving forces have been identified through secondary literature as will become apparent in the subsequent literature review.
Table 1 – Van Elteren’s framework for Americanization: Transmission from the United States, picked up through transnational knowledge exchange and appropriated by the receiving country.
Table 2 – Framework for analysis of structural and symbolic Americanization
Transmission
Transna
tionaliz
ation
Appropriation
Key Individuals Non-profit Fulbright Institutions Techno-logy Schools of Journalism NewspapersUnited States Government
State Department U.S. Information Agency
Knowledge exchange
Key Individuals
Non-profit
JournalistenInstitutions
Newspapers Schools of journalismDanish government
6
As can be seen in Table 2, from a transmission perspective, van Elteren‘s framework suggests analyzing the ―the public, private profit, and private non-profit‖ sectors of society, here identified as the United States Information Agency (USIA) under the Department of State, educational
institutions, media institutions, private corporations selling technology, as well as the non-profit institutions that facilitated exchange between Americans and Danes. Lastly, key individuals are identified by van Elteren as driving Americanization to other countries.14
For purposes of the current study, previously classified documents from the Department of State are used to operationalize the American government‘s attempts to transmit American values and ideas overseas and will be the primary sources used for the analysis of American transmission.
Van Elteren understands Transnationalization as ―contact zones,‖ meaning areas where ―local meanings and practices interact with the intruding beliefs and practices.‖ For the current project this is specifically operationalized in regards to the educational exchange carried out between the United States and Denmark from the end of World War II and forward. A host of Danish journalists were afforded the opportunity to study in the United States while a number of Americans were likewise invited to share their knowledge with Danes through different exchange organizations with the Fulbright program being the most prominent. An analysis of archival documents from the Fulbright Commission and the Denmark-America Foundation will provide the basis for this section.
Appropriation in Van Elteren‘s framework means identifying the ―volume (‗size‘ and scale) of ideas, goods, services and practices imported or adopted from the United States, and the extent of their reach.‖ For the purposes of the current project the appropriation analysis is delimited to the Danish Union of Journalists‘ publication Journalisten, which is received and contributed to by the vast majority of Danish journalists and discusses a wide variety of topics from government policy, over education to journalistic practices.15
The content analysis entailing ―a systematic reading of a body of texts, images, and symbolic matter,‖ is guided by communication professor Klaus Krippendorff‘s conceptual framework which
14
Ibid. Page 145. As will become apparent in the chapters to follow Danish journalists such as Herbert Pundik and Anders Krab-Johansen, among others, are considered key individuals due to their role in international knowledge exchange and subsequent implementation of new-found knowledge in Danish journalistic practice.
7
emphasizes moving from ―research design,‖ through ―data making,‖ and ―inference‖ to ―narration‖ in the process of the study.16
Specifically, the ―research design‖ phase explains the choices made in relation to the research question, drawing inspiration from previous comparative content analysis studies, for example media researchers Daniel Hallin and Rodney Benson, as well as Jesper Strömbäck and Daniela Dimitrova.17 The ―data making‖ phase elaborates on the units of analysis, the coding and reliability of the study conducted, while the ―inference‖ phase ―bridges the gap between descriptive accounts of texts and what they mean‖ invoking the texts‘ broader context to reach conclusions based on the available information.18 Lastly, the ―narration‖ phase seeks to discuss the results of the content analysis in connection with findings of the qualitative study as well as other comparative scholarly projects and makes connections between the two approaches.
1.2 Structure of the Dissertation
After the current introductory chapter, the dissertation is divided into five subsequent chapters. Chapter 2 provides a critical review of the most important theoretical literature pertaining to the study of Americanization of Danish society. In this part of the dissertation, I show that there has been increased scholarly attention paid to Americanization of Danish society over the past decade, but argue that none of these studies has focused on journalism specifically. I also argue that the cultural imperialism perspective of the 1970‘s and 1980‘s is no longer plausible and should be replaced by a theory of Americanization occurring as a cultural encounter within an asymmetrical power relationship. Additionally, key concepts related to the historical and content analysis, such as ―commercialization,‖ ―objectivity,‖ ―new institutionalism,‖ as well as ―framing,‖ are defined.
16 Klaus Krippendorff, Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology (Thousand Oaks: Sage, 2004). Page 83-87. The four phases identified are based on Krippendorf‘s Figure 4.2 ―Components of Content Analysis,‖ on page 86. 17
Hallin and Benson, "How States, Markets and Globalization Shape the News: The French and US National Press, 1965-97." See also Strömbäck and Dimitrova, "Political and Media Systems Matter: A Comparison of Election News Coverage in Sweden and the United States." Hallin and Benson as well as Strömbäck and Dimitrova emphasize the commercial aspect of media systems as well as the national media‘s proximity to the state as key variables for studying transnational differences in journalistic products. Additionally, the content analysis is structured around theoretical hypotheses of which characteristics one would expect Danish and American newspaper articles to display based on the above authors, as well as other media scholars, who have written on comparative research.
8
The third chapter, relating to structural Americanization, meaning ―economic, technological, political‖ factors,19
constitutes a critical overview of the American government‘s aims in regards to the military, economic and technological policy towards Denmark. Here I argue, that Denmark had some leverage in relation to the United States because of country‘s geographical importance to NATO‘s defense. Moreover, I demonstrate that the American ―first amendment absolutism,‖ calling for no government regulation of the media market, is at odds with Danish politicians‘ perspective that the press is worthy of subsidies because it serves a democratizing purpose in society.
Nevertheless, this chapter also shows that the Danish media environment has become more commercialized over the years, though this commercialization has of yet not had a tangible
influence on election coverage. Additionally, the third chapter reveals that there was great demand for American technological products after World War II among Danish journalists a fact that lends empirical support to the notion that some aspects of Americanization occurred by invitation instead of imperialism.
The fourth chapter, focused on symbolic Americanization, meaning ―culture, ideology and institutions,‖20
shows that the American government very actively, both covertly and overtly, attempted to influence Danish journalism after World War II through transmission of cultural products. I examine, the aims of the USIA, its own assessment of results, and Danish skepticism over the Central Intelligence Agency‘s work in Scandinavia. Additionally, it is demonstrated that the transnational exchange programs initiated by the United States government and private
organizations in Denmark had lasting effects on the students and scholars who went and gave these students a more positive view of the United States than was the case before the exchange. The experience for some also exposed the differences between the Scandinavian and American media systems while creating an important international network for their future work and for some impacted their journalistic practice. Lastly, the chapter demonstrates that Danish journalists were aware of the commercial pitfalls espoused by the American media system, but at the same time appropriated journalistic practices emanating from America. In very real ways, the United States was seen by Danish journalists as the place to discover the future of journalism and the last part of this chapter, heeding Hallin and Mancini‘s suggestion, offers two concrete examples of how
19 Elteren, Americanism and Americanization: A Critical History of Domestic and Global Influence. Page 129. 20 Ibid. Page 142. See also Joseph S. Nye, The Paradox of American Power: Why The World's Only Superpower Can't
9
Americanization of Danish journalistic practice happened by analyzing appropriation of New Journalism as well as investigative journalism.
The fifth chapter presents a content analysis of selected American and Danish newspapers‘ election front-page coverage between 1968 and 2008 and argues that while the studied Danish journalists adopted the American ideal of objectivity, the commercial influence from the United States has been hampered in part by the publicist tradition of the Danish press, which is a requirement for receiving direct government subsidies. The findings in the selected Danish newspapers‘ election coverage thereby support the conclusion reached by the interpretative analysis of structural Americanization.
The sixth chapter discusses the counterforces of Americanization and argues that the most
important aspect of Danish society which impedes American influence on Danish journalism is the government‘s use of direct and indirect subsidies to promote political and cultural coverage among a variety of news outlets which might otherwise not exist in a free market without economic support. Additionally, a simplified model of peaks and valleys of Americanization in Danish journalism is presented, as the influence from the United States has been non-linear. Since the American government‘s strategic and economic goals cannot be separated from their cultural objectives, the unpopular foreign policy of the United States in the late 1960‘s and early 1970‘s led to less interest in using America as an example to follow, or describing the country favorably in journalistic content. A similar tendency can be seen in the pages of Journalisten during the 1980‘s when commercial influence and American propaganda became topics discussed regularly in the main journalistic publication. Further, this chapter discusses some of the methodological
shortcomings of the present dissertation and provides suggestions for further research in the field.
1.3 Research Question
Through an analysis of newspaper content and archival material this dissertation will answer the following question: How have structural and symbolic developments emanating from the United States influenced Danish journalistic institutions and practices primarily after 1968?
10
2.
Theory
In order to tie abstract concepts such as Americanization, commercialization, objectivity,
institutionalism and framing to the concrete study, this chapter will identify key texts related to the research question, and make an argument for how macro-level American influence translates into changes in journalistic institutions and micro-level reporting practices in Denmark.
The following sections will clarify and define the theoretical concepts of Americanization, commercialization, the ideal of objectivity, new institutionalism21 and framing. Moreover, the literature below will identify the key driving forces involved in the subsequent empirical analysis of structural and symbolic Americanization.
The overarching aim of the chapter is to pin-point the importance of commercialization, technology, and educational exchange among other driving forces in previous studies of American influence which will then serve as the basis for sections within the chapters of structural and symbolic Americanization based on evidence from the archival analyis. Additionally, an important
connection is made in relation to the content analysis, as it is here argued that developments at the structural level can impact individual journalists‘ framing through the restraining and enabling influence of journalistic institutions. For example, I argue that commercial pressure exerted on journalistic institutions is potentially reflected in journalistic news frames.
Turning to the subsection of important literature on Americanization, I argue that in order to study structural Americanization fruitfully, one needs to realize that there is a power ―asymmetry‖
between Denmark and the United States, yet also recognize that the is a certain ―power of the weak‖ to shape impulses from public and private sectors in America.22 The perspective of asymmetrical power rejects ―cultural imperialist‖ theory which understands Americanization as a process where a ―hegemonic America manipulated and ultimately imposed its way on passive recipients.‖23
Often a
21
Timothy Cook, Governing with the News: The New Media as a Political Institution, Second ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2005). Page 65 and 70-71. Cook combines sociological and political science definitions of
―institutions,‖ his aim is ―not to add to the theories of institutions, but to throw light on our understanding of the news media.‖
22
Poul Villaume, "Replik - Om Tankefængsler, Sikkerhedsdilemmaer Og Interessefællesskaber [Response: On Imprisoned Ideas, Security Dilemmas and Community of Interests]," Historisk Tidsskrift 16, no. 2 (1995). Page 463-464.
11
pre-condition for Americanization is the receiver‘s voluntary acceptance,24 but there are also certain structural limits to what is accepted and what is rejected.25
Additionally, the subchapter on ―objectivity‖ will demonstrate that the ideal of objectivity in journalism originated in the United States and incorporates both ontological, epistemological, and procedural understandings of objectivity. Moreover, the section shows that the discursive practices associated with American journalistic ―objectivity‖ have spread to Europe.
In terms of ―commercialization,‖ this chapter shows that when commercial influence takes precedence it tends to overwhelm idealistic notions of customs or culture in favor of a monetarization of decision-making.
Moreover, it is argued that journalistic institutions curtail individual journalists‘ autonomy somewhat, which shows how societal structures such as increased commercialization impact journalistic institutions and can be argued to influence individual journalistic content.
Lastly, this chapter ends with a definition of framing. It is here shown that journalists actively select and highlight aspects of perceived events based on organizational routines, a fact that has real consequences in regards to how receivers understand the material presented.26
2.1 Literature Review: Americanization
"The advent of the United States of America as the greatest of world-Powers is the greatest political, social, and commercial phenomenon of our times,‖ wrote William T. Stead in The Americanisation of the World in 1902 over the course of 182 pages. Stead attempted to trace ―Americanisation‖ across the entire world focusing on religion, literature, journalism, art, science, music as well as theater, marriage, sports and business.
24 Harm G. Schröter, "Economic Culture and Its Transfer: An Overview of the Americanisation of the European Economy, 1900-2005," European Review of History 15, no. 4 (2008). Page 341.
25 Mel Van Elteren, "Rethinking Americanization Abroad: Toward a Critical Alternative to Prevailing Paradigms," The
Journal of American Culture 29, no. 3 (2006). Page 348-354.
26 Robert M. Entman, "Media Framing Biases and Political Power: Explaining Slant in News of Campaign 2008,"
Journalism 11, no. 4 (2010). Page 391. According to Entman, ―frames introduce or enhance the availability and appar-ent importance of certain ideas for evaluating a political object.‖
12
Stead had it right. Americanization was ―the greatest political, social, and commercial
phenomenon‖ of the 20th century according to contemporaries. Even authors who disliked much of what they perceived America to be acknowledged that there was something to be learned from the United States.27
While the Americans, in Stead‘s view, were extremely dynamic in every area he studied, his background was journalism, and he was very conscious of American influence on British media. As a consequence, Stead alluded to important characteristics of Americanization when he wrote, ―American journalism, as compared with that of Great Britain, is more enterprising, more
energetic, more extravagant, and more unscrupulous.‖ Moreover, ―the interview was a distinctively American invention, which has been acclimatised in this country.‖28
Stead‘s implicit understanding of Americanization (he never defined it explicitly) has interesting parallels to subsequent the work of Americanization scholars, who have emphasized the distinctive elements of American society. Among them is van Elteren, who wrote about Americanism and Americanization approximately 100 years after Stead‘s study.29
Van Elteren‘s work on Americanization has coincided with an increased focus on how the concept takes shape in a Danish context.30 Yet, while studies exist that examine the Americanization of Danish music, retail and fashion, and other culture industries, no studies have systematically analyzed the Americanization of Danish journalism.
Van Elteren, as we have seen, distinguishes between two interpenetrative levels of
Americanization: the structural dealing with strategy, economy and technology; and the symbolic, dealing with cultural transmissions. While the current study emphasizes the latter, it also recognizes the need to take structural aspects of Americanization into account, and a chapter is therefore
27 Paul Dehn, Weltwirtschaftliche Neubildungen [Global Economy Innovations] (Berlin: Allgemeiner Verein für Deutsche Litteratur, 1904). Page 191. ―Not imitate, rather learn,‖ wrote Dehn critically, but acknowledged that there was much to learn from the United States. In contrast, the Danish journalist Henrik Cavling was greatly inspired by the United States and wrote about this inspiration in his travel accounts. Cavling, Fra Amerika [From America]. Page 87-112.
28
William T. Stead, The Americanisation of the World (London: The 'Review of Reviews' office, 1902). Preface and page 111. According to Jean Chalaby, Stead actually incorporated the interview into British journalism practice
between 1883 and 1890. Jean K. Chalaby, The Invention of Journalism (New York: St. Martin's Press, Inc., 1998). Page 127-128.
29
Elteren, "Rethinking Americanization Abroad: Toward a Critical Alternative to Prevailing Paradigms."
30 See for example Klaus Petersen and Nils Arne Sørensen, "Ameri-Danes and Pro-American Anti-Americans," in The
Americanization of Europe: Culture, Diplomacy, and Anti-Americanism after 1945, ed. Alexander Stephan (New York: Berghahn Books, 2006).
13
devoted to their study.31 Based on Van Elteren‘s writings, Americanization is defined as,
―[P]rocesses in which economic, technological, political, social, cultural, and/or
sociopsychological influences emanating from America or Americans impinge on values, norms, belief systems, mentalities, habits, rules, technologies, practices, institutions, and behaviors of non-Americans.‖32
In terms of the content analysis, the current study will trace American influence on Danish political news coverage during national election campaigns from 1968 to 2008 analyzing how two
―distinctively‖ American concepts, commercialization and the journalistic ideal of objectivity, can be identified through articles‘ framing in selected newspapers. National election campaigns, according to media scholars are especially useful for cross-national comparisons as ―it allows for analysis over time‖ as well as ―across cultures.‖33
Moreover, ―election studies spur innovations in political communication,‖ and have also been shown to prompt innovation in Danish journalistic practices, thereby making election periods ideal when looking for changes over time.34
2.1.1 Cultural Imperialism
During the 1970‘s and 1980‘s the prevailing understanding of American influence was one of
31 Elteren, Americanism and Americanization: A Critical History of Domestic and Global Influence. Page 145-146.Van Elteren‘s framework for historical analysis includes an overall evaluation of ―America‘s position in the global system.‖ The chapter on structural Americanization provides this insight in relation to Denmark‘s position in the global system. 32
———, "Rethinking Americanization Abroad: Toward a Critical Alternative to Prevailing Paradigms." Page 345. 33 Elihu Katz and Yael Warshel, eds., Election Studies: What's Their Use? (Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press,2001). Page 1-10. Katz and Warshel note, ―As the role of parties continues to decline and the role of the media increases, campaigns provide a major vantage point for investigating not only the direct influence of media on opinion but also the indirect influence via phenomena such as media analysis of campaign events ('spin'), media representations of the distribution of opinion, media forecasts that may produce 'bandwagon effects' and 'spirals of silence,' or strategic 'horse-race' coverage that may produce cynicism towrad the electoral process.‖ See also Jay G. Blumler and Denis McQuail, "Political Communication Scholarship: The Uses of Election Research," in Election Studies: What's Their Use?, ed. Elihu Katz and Yael Warshel (Boulder: Westview, 2001). Page 236-239. Blumler and McQuail also argue that election studies are convenient benchmarks for tracing developments over time, are useful when examining political
communication in new media formats, help test key concepts from political communications theory and contribute significantly to the debate about citizenship. Also see Hallin and Mancini, Comparing Media Systems. Three Models of Media and Politics. Page 303-304.
34 Blumler and McQuail, "Political Communication Scholarship: The Uses of Election Research." Page 236. See also Peter Bro, Aktionsjournalistik [Public Journalism] (Odense: Syddansk Universitetsforlag, 2004). Page 15-17. Bro shows how American public journalism inspired Danish regional election coverage in 1997.
14
cultural imperialism where individuals on the receiving end of Americanization had little opportunity to resist these influences. An overview and brief analysis of two American and one Danish example are provided in the pages below.
Schiller, 1976
Media scholar and journalist Herbert Schiller‘s thematically organized book ―Communication and Cultural Domination,‖ serves as an early example of the ―cultural imperialism‖ paradigm within Americanization studies. In the book, Schiller demonstrates how closely the United States‘ policy towards worldwide communication after World War II was tied to the country‘s economic, strategic and technological interests.35 Through the prism of class-struggle between workers and capitalists worldwide, Schiller traces United States policy from World War II to the 1970s and shows that American leaders overtly have tried to mold the global communication structure to their own advantage. Utilizing terminology which includes ―cultural take-over,‖ ―cultural imperialism,‖ ―U.S. global hegemony,‖ and ―imperial ascendancy,‖36
Schiller argues that,
―Assisted by the sophisticated communications technology developed in the militarily oriented space program, techniques of persuasion, manipulation, and cultural penetration are becoming steadily more important, and more deliberate, in their exercise of American power. In addition, the accumulation of fifty years of domestic marketing expertise is now let loose in the world at large (…) Made-in-America messages, imagery, life-styles, and information techniques are being internationally circulated and, equally important, globally imitated.‖37
According to Schiller, cultural imperialism, as propagated by the United States, dominates other nations who are ―attracted, pressured, forced, and sometimes bribed into shaping social institutions
35 Herbert I. Schiller, Communication and Cultural Domination (New York: International Arts and Sciences Press, 1976). Page 53-54. Writing on the development of satellites for communication purposes, Schiller notes, ―[i]n this effort monopolistic business worked closely with the U.S. Armed Forces, whose interest in instantaneous global
communications was extraordinarily high.‖ 36 Ibid. 5-24.
15
to correspond to, or even promote, the values and structures of the dominating center of the system.‖38
As is apparent in Schiller‘s argument, nations on the receiving end of American influence have little agency or ability to resist the impulses received. Though Schiller sees American military and
economic influence on the decline in the 1970s due to the failed Vietnam War, he perceives American attempts at influencing global communication structures as being on the rise.39
In the realm of American journalism, Schiller demonstrates that after World War II leading media owners and editors have been able to frame the discussion over free access to information to
coincide with the news outlets‘ own economic interests. Additionally, Schiller argues that American institutions have directly influenced journalism teaching in Latin America, ―patterned after the North American model,‖ by subsidizing journalism schools through funds which at times flow through ―obscure channels.‖40
Furthermore, Schiller posits that the United States‘ dominance in the technological realm, especially in the use of satellites for communication purposes, after World War II led to a shift in global communicative power from Britain, who dominated information transfer through cables in the early 20th century, to the United States. The shift in power, in Schiller‘s view, leads to dependence on American government sponsored technological innovations by less affluent nations and thereby perpetuates global inequality.41
Though Schiller‘s argument concerning the economic, strategic and technological policies explicitly meant to promote American interests globally is well-founded, and thereby presents a valuable contribution to the study of structural Americanization, his view of cultural imperialism leads much to be desired empirically.
As in the example with American-sponsored journalism education in Latin America, Schiller generalizes without specifically stating how many or which universities are subsidized, and exactly what he means by the phrase concerning funding through ―sometimes obscure channels.‖
38 Ibid. Page 9. 39
Ibid. Page 22-23. 40 Ibid. Page 11 and 25-29.
41 Ibid. Page 47. Schiller writes, ―it is imperative today to consider the general role of technology not only as an instrument for effectuating cultural domination but as an embodiment of this very domination.‖
16
Additonally, Schiller‘s reliance on cultural imperialism as the framework though which he interprets events leaves out the instances when American technology is actually welcomed in by other countries and not forced upon them. As will become apparent in the subsequent section on how structural Americanization was perceived in Denmark, there was actually quite a demand for technology from the United States which was believed to make everyday journalism practices easier and not least cheaper. This aspect of ―empire by invitation,‖ as the Norwegian director of the Nobel Committee, Geir Lundestad, has termed American influence in the post-World War II years, is absent from Schiller‘s study.42
Ritzer and Stillman (2003)
George Ritzer and Todd Stillman‘s book chapter ―Assessing McDonaldization, Americanization and Globalization,‖ gives a fairly pessimistic appraisal of Americanization defined as ―a powerful one-directional process that tends to overwhelm competing processes (e.g. Japanization) as well as the strength of local forces that might resist, modify and/or transform American models into hybrid forms.‖43
Americanization is described in terms of cultural, political and economic imperialism and in Ritzer and Stillman‘s view does not leave room for much individual agency on the receiving end of the process.
Ritzer and Stillman organize their concepts in a hierarchy and argue that ―globalization is the broadest process, Americanization is a specific, powerful globalizing force, and McDonalidization is (among other things) a constituent part of Americanization.‖ Yet the authors concede that in the political realm Americanization is perhaps the single most important concept in order to understand present day global society.
The authors define McDonaldization as a ―top-down, ‗iron cage‘ version of modern social theory,‖ associated with efficiency as well as standardization, and disclose their view of Americanization as cultural imperialism with the following definition.
42
Geir Lundestad, "Empire by Invitation? The United States and Western Europe, 1945-52," Journal of Peace Research
23, no. 3 (1986). Page 276. ―American expansion was one of the most striking phenomena of the post-war period; this expansion can be said to have created an American empire equal in scope to any the world had seen before. Yet, this was to a large extent an empire by invitation and it turned out that many of those who issued the invitations prospered more in material terms under the new order than did the United States itself.‖
43 George Ritzer and Todd Stillman, "Assessing McDonaldization, Americanization and Globalization," in Global
America? The Cultural Consequences of Globalization, ed. Ulrich Beck, Natan Sznaider, and Rainer Winter, Studies in Social and Political Thought (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2003). Page 35.
17
―Americanization is a cousin to a neo-Marxian conception of economic imperialism and cultural hegemony. This perspective asserts that America‘s aggressive exporting of media and commodities amounts to a crypto-imperialist attack on national sovereignties.‖44
In line with their ―cultural imperialist‖ definition of Americanization, the authors attach negative connotations to the concept that may not have been present had the study incorporated van Elteren‘s more inclusive definition focusing both on the ―sender‖ and ―receiver‖ perspective while
acknowledging the asymmetrical power relationship between the two. To Ritzer and Stillman globalization holds more positive potential for the people experiencing this process than does Americanization or McDonaldization. Here globalization emphasizes the ―self-creating agency‖ of individuals which in turn ―generates a host of new organizational forms that increase the options for local actors, rather than damaging or displacing traditional forms.‖45
In essence, Ritzer and Stillman thereby see globalization as a process which expands individuals‘ choices in modern society, while Americanization limits these choices. Yet, despite their
pessimistic view of Americanization, the authors concede that the concept is presently useful, because of the United States‘ current military, diplomatic, economic, technical and cultural power, while they argue that globalization theory will be prove more functional in the years to come as America‘s dominant position is increasingly challenged.46
―It seems clear that the globalization perspective has perhaps glimpsed the future but also has overstated the case for the present. Nation states are by no means on the verge of
disappearing‖47
Even if Ritzer and Stillman view Americanization negatively, the concept to them still holds important explanatory power in terms of politics. ―Americanization is a political reality,‖ note the
44
Ibid. Page 31.
45 Ibid. Page 34-36. This observation is also apparent from the classification between the concepts made by the authors. Globalization is described as ―multi-directional circulation of persons, information, resources and commodities,‖ while Americanization, according to the authors is, ―exploitation of world markets and resources.‖ Lastly, McDonaldizaiton is portrayed as ―emphasis on eficiency, predictability, calculability, and the replacement of human with non-human technology.‖
46 Ibid. Page 42-43. 47 Ibid. Page 43-44.
18
authors, adding that the United States plays a role of ―key mediator‖ in international diplomacy and is ―obviously an influential political player on the world scene.‖48
Ritzer and Stillman conclude that McDonaldization, with its emphasis on efficiency and rational principles, is on the rise but at ―the expense of individual creative energy,‖ while ―globalization‘s insights into the diversity of other ‗global flows‘,‖ serve as a useful corollary to the ―perils of Americanization.‖49
Ritzer and Stillman‘s categorization of the three main concepts rests mainly on secondary literature and seems not to have taken the latest developments within Americanization studies into account. The authors have used a definition for Americanization based on a book from 1962,50 while the definitions chosen for globalization and McDonaldization are from 199251 and 200052 respectively. This difference in chronology seemingly plays a part in the authors‘ out-dated view of
Americanization as ―cultural imperialism‖ compared to definitions emphasizing assimilation or asymmetrical power.53
Christensen et al., 1983
In 1983 Peter Knoop Christensen et al. edited Amerikanisering Af Det Danske Kulturliv i Perioden 1945-58 [Americanization of the Danish Cultural Life in the Period 1945-58] a volume that the authors described as the first study to incorporate the concept of Americanization in Danish economy and culture after World War II. The authors define Americanization as ―the sum of the economic, political, ideological and cultural influence we receive from USA in the period, but in addition the development and processing of i.e. the production environment, the production methods, the distribution patterns, social interaction, literary expressions and language.‖54
From the very first pages it is apparent that the authors view the struggle between labor and capital (and by extension capitalist fueled American influence) as the driving force of history. The text
48
Ibid. Page 43. 49
Ibid. Page 46.
50 Francis Williams, The American Invasion (New York: Crown, 1962).
51 Roland Robertson, Globalization: Social Theory and Global Culture (London: Sage, 1992). 52 George Ritzer, The McDonaldization of Society (Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge, 2000). 53
Ritzer and Stillman, "Assessing McDonaldization, Americanization and Globalization." Page 36. The authors use Francis Williams‘ definition from his 1962 book The American Invasion as their characterizaiton of Americanization. 54 Peter Knoop Christensen, ed. Amerikanisering Af Det Danske Kulturliv I Perioden 1945-58. [Americanization of the
19
abounds with references to American ―imperialism,‖ ―hegemony,‖ ―class struggle,‖ ―working class,‖ and critical stabs at the ―bourgeoisie.‖55
As a consequence, the text serves as a lucid example of the ―cultural imperialism‖ paradigm within Americanization studies.56 In the authors‘ interpretation the influence from the United States is all encompassing and furthermore happens against the wishes of the so-called Danish ―masses.‖ In a telling example, the authors argue that a referendum concerning membership of NATO ―could easily have been decided to the advantage of the opposition,‖ and cite Gallup surveys between February and April 1949 to back up their claim. Yet, for every political party cited in the survey, with the obvious exception of the communists, the support for NATO membership is on the rise between the first and third survey.
Support for NATO is not attributed to a genuine popular sentiment, but rather a ―hetz against [the] Soviet [Union],‖ as well as ―horror propaganda‖ from the Social Democrats.57 Consequently, the Danish population‘s ability to resist or adapt American influence is absent from this study and especially in the realm of culture does this become evident for the authors.
Through the four overall themes of ―Cold War,‖ ―growth,‖ ―class cooperation,‖ and ―family‖ the authors analyze cartoons, journals, novels, advertisements, film, music and the development of language. This leads Christensen et al. to conclude that the messages conveyed through the Danish version of Readers Digest along with cartoons and novels, resonate with the working class‘ wishes for (or experience of) upward social mobility, while the bourgeoisie is not affected by the same ―American trivialization,‖ but instead adopt American influences or practices through high-brow plays, journals or rationalization techniques in business.58
In a final attempt to demonstrate Danish opposition to American influence, the authors argue that anti-Americanism in Denmark, personified by the hippie movement, was inspired by the student protests in France, the cultural revolution in China, and the Vietnamese fight against American imperialism, but Christensen et al. ignore the fact that this Danish movement was largely inspired
55 Ibid. Page 11, 19, 22, 29, 35, 46, 63, 83-86, 88-89, 90, 96.
56 Marianne Rostgaard, "Opinionsdiplomati Og Amerikanisering [Public Diplomacy and Americanization],"
Arbejderhistorie, no. 4 (2004). Page 107.
57 Christensen, ed. Amerikanisering Af Det Danske Kulturliv I Perioden 1945-58. [Americanization of the Danish
Cultural Life in the Period 1945-58]. Page 60-61. 58 Ibid. Page 251-259.
20
by the so-called American counterculture,59 made up of a ―disaffected‖ young students who ―chose long hair and beards as a way of distancing themselves from traditional norms of middle-class respectability.‖60
In this respect, the authors make the ―cultural imperialism‖ fallacy of viewing the United States as a monolithic nation in regards to the military, the economy and the diverse cultural currents.
Christensen et al. convincingly demonstrate the United States‘ leading role in transnational economic organizations like the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), but put too much emphasis on capitalism as the primary driving force of Americanization at the expense of agency within the ―receiving‖ nation.61
Conclusion
The above review have revealed some of the key aspects forces in Americanization deemed
important by researchers writing from a cultural imperialist perspective. Schiller‘s study emphasizes the importance of the American government‘s conscious involvement in shaping international communications networks after World War II. Ritzer and Stillman‘s study acknowledges that Americanization is the most fruitful way to understand contemporary society out of the
transnational tendencies they evaluated. Additionally, Christensen et al. argue the significance of capitalism as the main driving force behind Americanization and point to the Danish
counterculture‘s importance in understanding opposition to Americanization, and in the process inadvertently highlight the fact that the Danish counter-culture resisted structural Americanization but appropriated parts of symbolic Americanization.
59
Ibid. Page 290-292. These observations have also been made by Søren Schou, "Det Er Dansk - Eller Er Det? [It Is Danish - or Is It?]," Mediekultur, no. 5 (1987). Page 14 and Petersen and Sørensen, "Ameri-Danes and Pro-American Anti-Americans." Page 138. Also Klaus Bruhn Jensen, ed. Dansk Mediehistorie 1880-1920 Og 1920-1960 [Danish Media History 1880-1920 and 1920-1960], 4 vols., vol. 2, Dansk Mediehistorie (København: Forlaget
Samfundslitteratur,2001). Page 322.
60 William F. Chafe, "The Unfinished Journey: America since World War II," (New York: Oxford University Press, 1991). Page 326.
61 Christensen, ed. Amerikanisering Af Det Danske Kulturliv I Perioden 1945-58. [Americanization of the Danish
Cultural Life in the Period 1945-58]. Page 14, 22 and 42-44. ―The daily dose of ‗Americanization‘ is difficult to avoid since it occurs at the work place and in the spare time (…) these cultural expressions are contingent upon some basic economic structures – that the ideology is produced by an imperialistic superpower, and that both directly and indirectly it is connected to profit motives to export different products which contain this ideology.‖ Page 88.
21
2.1.2 Assimilation
The most prominent example of an assimilationist view, meaning a relationship close to
―negotiating among equals,‖ is provided by Richard Pells in a study of relations between the United States and Europe.62 Due to the limited focus on Americanization processes in Denmark during the 1990‘s the only example of ―assimilationist‖ Americanization research in a Danish context is provided by the American journalist and author Nancy Graham Holm, who for a number of years taught at the Danish School of Journalism (DJH).
Pells 1997
In his study Not Like Us: How Europeans Have Loved, Hated, and Transformed American Culture Since World War II, American Studies professor Richard Pells traces the American cultural impact on Europe primarily after World War II. Pells‘ focus on Europe is important, since a host of other studies in the same vein focus more narrowly on American influence on one specific locality. Pells‘ book is an interesting dialectic exercise where the author spends a lot of space and energy on arguing American influence, but still finds examples to counterbalance the original claims of influence. Despite convincingly arguing that the United States‘ government played an active role in promoting American influence on both the cultural, political, and economic levels, Pells
nevertheless concludes that ―Americanization‖ is myth.
Through a chronological and thematic approach, and with the a vast focus on culture, Pells depicts how Europeans and Americans thought about each other before World War II, and how Americans have influenced Europe after 1945; aided greatly be the European immigrants who arrived in the United States in the 1930s and 1940s.
Pells‘ impressive overview of cultural initiatives takes the reader from the Marshall Plan, to the Fulbright Program, the ascendancy of American Studies and the role of the United States
Information Agency in shaping opinions around Europe. Also the American media‘s prominent role in post-War Europe is explored. Pells demonstrates how the American idea of journalism was more or less forced upon Germany and played an inspirational role in other countries.
62 Richard Kuisel, "Debating Americanization: The Case of France," in Global America? The Cultural Consequences of
Globalization, ed. Ulrich Beck, Natan Sznaider, and Rainer Winter (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2003). Page 98.
22
In the end Pells wraps up his study by listing examples of European influence on the United States, and also mentions examples of European resistance to American influence. Yet, Pells‘ argument that Europe was never ―Americanized‖ remains unconvincing.
By way of example, early in his book Pells declares that ―during the 1950s and 1960s, America dominated the economies of Britain and the Continent as never before.‖ Later Pells argues that the European emigrants to America before World War II represented ―a hemorrhage of talent and intellect from which the Continent never recovered,‖ and also describes Washington‘s attempt to transplant America‘s style of journalism to Germany as ―remarkably successful.‖ Still, Pells concludes that it was ―inevitable that the Marshall Planners,‖ failed to ―Americanize‖ Europe.63 Behind this conclusion is a convincing rejection of the outdated ―cultural imperialism‖ paradigm but Pells seemingly goes too far in assigning agency to European citizens, when he claims that Europe has had as much influence on the United States after World War II as the United States has had on Europe. Part of the reason is probably to be found in the fact that Pells spends almost the entire book discussing cultural aspects, without the facet of power, despite asserting that,
―American culture and American power were inextricably connected.‖64
Pells‘ analysis would have benefited from a greater discussion of the structural aspects of American influence, meaning the economic and political framework, within which American and European culture has interacted since 1945.65
Additionally, part of the reason that Pells‘ argument of mutual influence fails to convince is because of frequent generalizations, such as ―the European countries – often ashamed of their behavior of the prewar governments, and suffering in the immediate postwar years from economic chaos and social dislocation – emphasized their art, literature, language, and philosophy.‖66 Because of the breadth of Pells‘ study countries often gets lumped together within Europe, and even regional differences disappear within discussions of ―The French,‖ ―The British‖ or ―The Germans.‖ Furthermore, Pells‘ analysis from time to time raises questions about the representativity of the examples that he draws upon. The author for example devotes five pages to recounting his own
63 Richard Pells, Not Like Us: How Europeans Have Loved, Hated, and Transformed American Culture since World
War II (New York: Basic Books, 1997). Page 27, 50-51, 188 and 344. 64
Ibid. Page 39.
65 Elteren, Americanism and Americanization: A Critical History of Domestic and Global Influence. Page 218. 66 Pells, Not Like Us: How Europeans Have Loved, Hated, and Transformed American Culture since World War II. Page 83.
23
experience as a visiting scholar in Europe and backs it up with four or five other individual account in the footnotes, but rarely is a survey or a broader study used to enhance the assertion of a
representative argument.67
Holm, 1999
In her study ―American Influence on Danish TV Journalism,‖ Nancy Graham Holm argues that endogeneous forces as much as exogeneous forces have shaped the development of Danish
television from 1990 to 1999 and that while ―Danish TV journalism has changed fundamentally in the last ten years it is not a direct result of American influence.‖68
Utilizing questionnaires and qualitative interviews with Danish journalists, Holm nevertheless admits that ―it is difficult to measure America‘s influence on Danish TV journalism,‖ and does not attempt to define or operationalize Americanization any further. Despite Holm‘s description of the difficulties in measuring American influence, the author finds that changes have been taking place with increased speed after 1988 when the Danish Broadcasting Service no longer was the sole actor on the Danish TV market. Thereby, Holm implicitly argues the importance of commercialization and deregulation in transforming the Danish media market.
According to Holm, the changes ascribed to Danish TV journalism are not exclusively the result of American influence, but these developments are ―a response to competition, changes in technology and globalization. (…) It is incorrect, therefore, to say that America is responsible.‖69 Despite her argument that media markets are mostly shaped by endogeneous forces, Holm‘s text does not seem to reflect over differences within the countries she describes. On the contrary, Americans ―thrive on innovation,‖ Danes ―do not like change,‖ some Danes prefer a growing trend towards populism, while Danish intellectuals ―have a tendency to prefer the elitist‖ public service model for television. Holm sees the Danish adherence to public service as an important counterforce of American
influence especially combined with Danish aversion to change.
―[I]n spite of market forces, techonology and globalization, there has been strong resistance to outside influence. In spite of America‘s enormous power to influence, there is one
67 Ibid. Page 145-151. 68
Nancy Graham Holm, "American Influence on Danish TV Journalism," Update (1999),
http://www.update.dk/cfje/VidBase.nsf/ID/VB00140562. Article accessed July 11, 2008. Page 12.
69 Ibid. Holm does, however, point out that ―the electronic teleprompter, used in American [sic] since the 70s was introduced to Danish TV news only in the 1990s.
24
fundamental reason why her media influence would be limited in Denmark. Danish society is deeply rooted in tradition and there are powerful cultural boundaries which protect Danish TV journalism from outside influence, boundaries so strong that penetration is a slow process. Nevertheless, the Danish TV industry is definitely in a growth and development phase. Most of the changes between 1988 and 1999 were the result of market forces.‖70
Generalizations, lack of precision in the use of Americanization, and subsequent challenges in operationalizing a study of American influence, however, hamper the credibility of Holm‘s study. Though plausible, it is, for example, not apparent how Holm knows that electronic news gathering (ENG) vans in Denmark ―is definitely the result of American and British influence.‖71
In the end, nevertheless, it seems that Holm arrives at her conclusion that Americanization is not responsible for changes in Danish television journalism simply because she does not at any point attempt to define Americanization. Had Holm systematically used van Eltern‘s broad definition of processes ―emanating‖ from the United States, and later being transferred to another culture on both the structural and symbolic level, she may well have concluded that the centrality she attributes market forces, changes in technology, and globalization all, to some extent, could be attributed to American influence.72
Conclusion
The above review of driving forces behind Americanization from an ―assimilationist‖ perspective reveal that Pells emphasizes the American governments active role in shaping European society after World War II. The economic aid administered under the Marshall Plan and the cultural influence from the United States Information Agency are emphasized as important factors behind American influence, and the development of German journalism after an American model is stressed.
Additionally, Holm‘s study underlines the importance of commercialization on change in media environments while also stressing the important counterforce of the Danish government‘s adherence to public service ideals in hampering American influence.
70 Ibid. Page 3. 71
Ibid. Page 9.
72 Elteren, "Rethinking Americanization Abroad: Toward a Critical Alternative to Prevailing Paradigms." Page 355-359. Nils Arne Sørensen also makes the argument that globalization to a large extent must be viewed through the prism of Americanization. See for example, Tom Buk-Swienty, "Amerika I Danmark," Weekendavisen, January 4 2008.
25
2.1.3 Power Asymmetry
The most prevalent current interpretation of relations between the United States and surrounding societies is one of a disproportionate power relationship. This approach takes as its premise that a nation‘s greater economic, military and (mass-) cultural power also translates into greater influence when interacting with other nations. The international research in this field will be presented first followed by the latest Danish scholarship.
Kuisel (2003)
In ―Debating Americanization: The Case of France‖ Richard Kuisel emphasizes language as a prime indicator of Americanization in France and points to the French government‘s attempt to regulate American-English as an example of Americanization‘s pervasiveness.
Kuisel defines Americanization as ―the import by non-Americans of products, images, technologies, practices and behavior closely associated with America/Americans. Or, in more general terms, the phenomenon can be defined as the adoption of mass consumption, market capitalism, and mass culture.‖ The author then points to the difficulty of studying behavior and values, but maintains that Americanization can be measured in ―for instance the number of movie screens devoted to
Hollywood films.‖ 73
Kuisel rejects the ―cultural imperialist‖ interpretation of Americanization as ―simplistic and highly tendentious,‖ and also cautions against going so far towards interpretations of globalization or local assimilation that one loses sight of Americanization‘s significance. Dividing his study into four main parts, Kuisel analyzes Americanization in France through the prism of ―assimilation,‖ ―culture in motion,‖ ―globalization‖ and ―behavior, meaning and identity,‖ which leads him to conclude that there is still much to be said for maintaining Americanization as an analytical category.
Against the claims that Disney, Coca Cola and McDonalds have been assimilated into French culture, Kuisel finds little evidence and instead asserts that ―nothing basic is changed about food, the ambience, the appeal, or the operations.‖ Kuisel also argues that despite the warranted criticism that ―America has never transmitted a single, coherent message,‖ referring to the great cultural and regional diversity in the United States, there are still ―products and images, technologies and
73 Kuisel, "Debating Americanization: The Case of France." Page 96-97.
26
practices that have been and sometimes still are, closely identified with ‗America,‘ which is evident if one looks at the process historically.‖74
Additionally, in terms of globalization, Kuisel argues that the United States is still so central to this process, that it must play a prominent part in any study. ―Globalization in the twentieth century has had (and to a considerable extent still has) an American face,‖ writes Kuisel and adds ―America remains the prime producer and distributor of an identifiable mass culture as well as certain practices.‖75
In the final part of his analysis, Kuisel addresses the difficulty of causality and admits that many variables, such as ―women in the workforce, intensified urbanization, traffic congestion, greater leisure, higher incomes among adolescents and shorter midday breaks,‖ must be taken into account before concluding that since the number for fast-food outlets has grown and the number of French cafés decreased France is becoming more Americanized.76 Despite these qualifications Kuisel concludes that a significant shift has taken place in France and that Americanization has occurred based on a study of language as well as culture and consumption.
However, one must also be mindful that Kuisel‘s study is largely based on secondary literature and news sources as opposed to primary resources. Citations of The New York Times, Washington Post, The Economist and Le Monde abound while references to other scholars‘ discussion of the concept appear less frequently.77
Schröter, 2005
In 2005 the German economic historian Harm G. Schröter published a book called Americanization of the European Economy, and three years later summarized the results in an article called
―Economic Culture and its Transfer: An Overview of the Americanisation of the European Economy, 1900-2005.‖ Like van Elteren introduced in the introductory chapter, Schröter emphasizes economic influence on Europe as a key driving force of Americanization. Schröter
74 Ibid. Page 103. 75 Ibid. Page 105-106. 76
Ibid. Page 109. Kuisel also cautions about concluding too much about Americanization based on French youth drinks more Coca-Cola and less wine than their parents‘ generation.
77 Ibid. Kuisel does, however, mention well-known cultural and Americanization scholars such as Pierre Bourdieu, Loïc Wacquant, Rob Kroes, Jessica Gienow-Hecht,Heide Fehrenbach and Uta Poiger among others.
