Globalisation: taking it further

Globalisation case study

Why was Google Glass controversial?
Google Glass was considered controversial due to the fact that it allowed little to no privacy for people surrounded by the technology. The technology was able to film both video and sounds at great capabilities, which raised a lot of concerns for the public as it meant that people could record other people without their permissions at any given time.

What are the positive elements to Globalisation that the article highlights?
The article highlights the fact that due to globalisation, the world has become a lot more accessible as people are greater enriched with the benefits of knowledge and information. This is due to the fact that the internet has led to a rapid rate of expansion for globalisation as it induces greater inter connectivity between people across the world within minutes. This would lead to society as a whole becoming a lot more empowered as there is less ignorance and people make better well informed decisions based on new information.

What are potential negatives to Globalisation?
The article also highlights potential negatives which are caused by globalisation. It highlights especially Pareto's law, as the article states how the masses are using the services created by a small minority of corporations in power. This would lead to greater debates and issues into ownership as many people can argue that those same small percentages of corporations can distribute the world's wealth however they please.

What is a techno-panic? How does it link to moral panics?
A techno panic is the fear, like moral panic, is linked to a change that many people would consider to be a threat to society as a whole. However, techno panic focuses more on the fact that the panic centres on fears regarding specific contemporary technology or technological activities. It should be noted that often the threat on society could be exaggerated and is generally done with the intent to sell more newspapers or products.

What is your opinion on the privacy debate and major corporations being able to access large quantities of personal data?
Personally, I think it is awful and unnecessary that major corporations such as Google are able to access large quantities of users personal data. It is reasonable to use specific user data securely in order to improve their own services, however it is completely unreasonable for all of a users data to be access by the major corporations. It is especially worrying due to the fact that many of these corporations are transnational corporations which are very easily able to circumvent government legislation in order to use loop holes and get away with whatever they want to do.

Globalisation and capitalism

Who coined the phrase 'a global village' and what multinational companies illustrate this?

The phrase "global village" was coined by Marshall McLuhan. It defined the aspect that countries were becoming a lot more interconnected and more independent in terms of their economies. The multinational company Coca Cola illustrates this idea of the world becoming a global village.

What role does Slavoj Zizek suggest the media plays in global capitalism? How can you link this to our previous work on Marxism and Hegemony? 

Slavoj Zizek argues that the media has a huge influence in the way global capitalism works. He argues that the media reinforces the ideology that making money is the right way of conducting businesses, but at the same time allows people to feel less guilty about how these goods are produced.

What does 'capitalism with a conscience' mean?
This was a term created by Zizek that argues that western culture has actually turned social activism into a profitable business model. He argues that global media has raised awareness about social issues by creating campaigns that also sustain western capitalist dominance. For example, the Starbucks campaign using Fairtrade.

What is the (PRODUCT) RED campaign?
(PRODUCT) RED was a campaign created in 2006 by Bono, the lead singer of the band U2. It was created with the sole intention to raise awareness and funds to help eliminate AIDS in Africa. The campaign consisted of creating a brand and logo that many corporations would use to create products using the campaign's branding. This was incitement for the corporations as it encouraged greater profits. A percentage of the company's revenues and profits would go to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS.

Based on what you've read in the Factsheet, what is YOUR opinion of the (PRODUCT) RED brand? Is it a positive force helping to fight AIDS in Africa or a cynical attempt to make multinational companies look more ethical than they actually are? 
I personally think, the idea for the campaign had its strengths but most largely it had a lot of negatives. The marketing had a lot of negative connotation regarding people living in Africa, such as, the black African has to be saved by western society. However, I do believe that the campaign worked in favour of raising awareness for a cultural issue that could be a huge factor to poverty. If instead of a small percentage of the company's revenues, the entire profits of the (PRODUCT) RED products made by the corporations would go to the Global Fund, then perhaps it would encourage a lot more positivity as it meant all proceeds would be used, rather than just a small percentage of the company's profits.