|
|
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
Article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloning, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolly_the_sheep
Response:
Dolly was the first mammal to have been successfully cloned from an adult somatic cell. Who would have thought that cloning would actually be possible. Sure, it has been in man's dreams since the beginnign of time, The advent of cloning, have brought various issues in the world today. Many debates and issues have arose, such as the ethnical point of view of cloning. It has brought the world together to think that something as miraculous as cloning has surfaced, and start to stick together and think, seriously, about what is to be done. Cloning, has made an impact to the world, and all of the super powers of the world are trying their utmost to keep up with the trend and push researchers to allow them to be ahead of others in this race of superiority in technology.
Globalised @ 11:05 PM
|
Article: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite
Response:
Satellite is an advent of technology. And it certainly goes hand in hand well with technology. Today because we have satellites, we are able to see what is happening at the other end of the world, the moment we click on the tv set, of switch on the radio. Satellite tv allows live telecast. Who would have ever thought that in the 21st Century, humans would be able to see things that are happening at the same time some other place right before their eyes. Satellites have also allowed things to be quickly transmitted from a place to another. For example, most communication signals are brought by satellites. Going back to the topic of globalisation, satellite allows people from all around the globe to interact, in the comforts of their own homes.
Globalised @ 10:50 PM
|
Article: http://www.nokiausa.com/N800/1,9008,,00.html
Response:
As one can remember, not long ago in history, cell phones were this big black bulky things with antaneas and can only call and nothing else. Well, in a blink of an eye, cell phones have already lost that outfit, long ago. As from can see from this article, this relatively small phone, a so called internet web tablet, is claimed to be able to serve the net. This meant that phones nowadays are not only able to call, sent short messages, play games, they are almost as good as computers, having the ability to allow one to serve the net as and when he wants. All in all, let's face it, our phones are getting smaller, and MORE things are being put in them. Also being compatible to the World Wide Web, languages of sorts can be found on the dictionaries of our phones. This allow us to not only see pages in english, but of other languages. Therefore it is 'shrinking the world' before our eyes into a little device, allowing us to communicate with people from all around the world, and informations are just a few clicks away.
Globalised @ 10:36 PM
|
Article: http://www.minebea.co.jp/english/company/feature/global/
1182579_2197.html
Response:
Mass productions exists in every part of our lives. They can be seen from even the simplest things such as the tables or chairs that we sit on, and many of this, may not be produced locally. From this article, as technology advances, and the advent of globalisation, mass production flourished. As trade grew further and wider, mass production is more and more in demand, since being able to build fast with quality is what is highly sought after, as competition grows amongst different companies. With the advancement of today's society, it is survival of the fittest, as demand grows together with the population of the world, and the knowledge of the people. Mass production also effeciently cuts down production and manufacturing costs, and therefore, it also grew popular since companies are able to sell their products cheaper, in the unfriendly and competitive environment.
Mass production, a marvel of technology, also led to many having jobs, and having income.
Globalised @ 10:28 PM
|
Article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/nottinghamshire/
6193462
Response:
I strongly think that games, with the advancement of both technology and globalisation has allowed many, across the world to enjoy games from other parts of the world. If globalisation did not occur, people would not have been able to share their ideas of games, and less people would be able to get their hands on various games. Also one of the most popular games are contributed by MMORPGs, which stands for Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game. This games are so popular, as a report states, was due to the ability to 'meet' people from all around the world, and are able to interact with them. This may have caused many to be addicted in such games.
Pengho, technological expert.
Globalised @ 10:08 PM
|
Sunday, May 13, 2007
Article from http://chronicle.com/free/v49/i35/35b00701.htm
Globalization overcomes geographical constraints. Just because someone was born in China does not mean he can only live to speak Chinese, listen to Chinese music, eat Chinese food, watch Chinese television and read Chinese books. With globalization, anybody anywhere can take holidays to any part of the world and eat any type of cuisine they desire and have friends from all around the world. We are becoming more and more in control of our cultural experiences and this makes our lives so much more meaningful.
Globalization not only increases our individual right to choose, but also revitalizes cultures through foreign influences. Thriving cultures are forever changing and each generation challenges the one before; and science and technology alter the way we see ourselves and the world.
However this does not mean national identity is gone, because we are not citizens of the world but citizens of our individual countries. But even if there is no longer a clear and definite line of nationality, it might not actually be a bad thing. People may lament the passing of old ways but people choose the modern ways because they are more relevant to our current needs and offer new opportunities that the old ones could never offer.
Cultural Expert, Beatrice
Globalised @ 10:22 PM
|
Saturday, May 12, 2007
 Reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_music_market
This pie chart shows the US music market shares in 2005, according to Nielsen Sound Scan. From this pie chart, we can see that Universal Music Group has the largest portion, account for 31.71% of the US music market; Sony BMG has the second largest portion, account for 25.61% of the US music market; Warner Music Group accounts for 15% and EMI Group accounts for 9.55%; independent labels account for 18.13% of the US music market.
Universal Music Group, Sony BMG, Warner Music Group and EMI Group make up the “Big Four” record label groups in world music market. Other record label companies which are not owned by any one of the “Big Four” are called independent labels. From the pie chart, we can see very clearly that the “Big Four” dominate the world music market. It accounted for 81.87% of the US music market which is the largest and dominant music market in the world. While other record label companies only account for 18.13%. What a huge difference it is!
Universal Music Group is the largest bussiness group and family of record labels in the recording industry. It owns one of the largest music publishing businesses of the world-the Universal Music Publishing Group, and its record labels have many of the world's biggest artists [1] including Shania Twain, Bon Jovi, Elton John, Method Man, Tupac Shakur, Aaliyah.
Sony BMG Music Entertainment is the result of a 50/50 joint venture between Sony Music Entertainment (part of Sony) and BMG Entertainment (part of Bertelsmann) completed on August 5, 2004. It includes ownership and distribution of recording labels such as Arista Records, Columbia Records, Epic Records, J Records, RCA Victor Records, RCA Records, Legacy Recordings, Sonic Wave America, and others.
The EMI Group is a British music company comprising of the major record company EMI Music which operates several labels, based in Brook Green in London, England, and EMI Music Publishing, based on Charing Cross Road, London.
Warner Music group owns lots of record labels, including Atlantic records, Lava records, Bad Boy records, Roadrunner records and so on. It also has divisions worldwide such as Australia, Japan and all over Europe. These branches are usually called Warner Music followed by the name of the country.
Above is some basic information about the “Big four”. From that, we can see currently how big, powerful these four groups are.
I think these powerful groups have become stronger and stronger in recent years due to the wave of globalization. The strong and powerful wave of globalization helps them expend their businesses and markets all over the world in a very quick speed. Globalization allows them get into other countries’ markets very easily, set up businesses all over the world very easily and buy lots of record labels in different countries very easily. Globalization injects fresh and powerful energies to these countries continuously, making them growing stronger and stronger.
But is this strong effect of globalization on these four big countries beneficial? Obviously, it is very beneficial to these four groups. As they expand further and further, they become more and more powerful in the world’s music market and finally dominate the global music market.
And their expansions help create more and more jobs in different countries, bring more and more money to different countries.
But their trend to dominate the whole world’s music market is very dreadful, not only for independent labels, but also for global customers. Since these four groups become stronger and stronger, they tend to buy as many record label companies as possible. Nowadays, hundreds of record label companies are under their control, only a relatively small numbers of record label companies survive independently in the world’s markets. And these relatively small and independent companies would be easily oppressed by these four big groups. They can only barely survive in the world’s market. From the pie chart, we can find out that they only make up 18.13% of the US music market. As time goes on, as the globalization wave becomes stronger and more powerful, as these four groups become stronger and stronger, more and more independent companies would not be able to survive. They either close their business or become part of any one of these four groups. One day, the global music market would be totally under the control of the “big four”!
Once the world’s music market is controlled by the big four, it is not beneficial for global customers. Global customer would not be able to have many free choices as before. And the prices would be controlled by the big four groups. Customers can’t have a say in the prices determination any more since they only can buy things from these four companies. Prices have to be controlled by these four groups. But very luckily, there are still four big groups. If there is only one group dominating the world’s music market, that would be dreadful.
So I think globalization might bring “big companies domination” to the world’s markets, not only to the world’s music market. The consequence of the domination is what we do not like to contemplate. Minyun_Economic Expert
Globalised @ 6:14 PM
|
Tuesday, May 8, 2007
U.S. Trade in 2002 with Countries of Current and Proposed Free-Trade Agreements
U.S. Exportsto Countryin Billionsof Dollars
U.S. Importsfrom Countryin Billionsof Dollars
U.S. Exportsto Country asa Percentageof Total U.S.Exports
U.S. Importsfrom Country asa Percentageof Total U.S.Imports
Agreements Already Implemented
U.S.-Israeli Free Trade Agreement
5.3
12.4
0.8
1.1
U.S.-Canadian Free Trade Agreement
142.5
210.5
22.6
18.2
North American Free Trade Agreement (Mexico only, excluding Canada)
86.1
134.1
13.7
11.6
U.S.-Jordanian Free Trade Agreement
0.4
0.4
*
*
Agreements Negotiated but Not Yet Ratified
U.S.-Singaporean Free Trade Agreement
14.7
14.1
2.3
1.2
U.S.-Chilean Free Trade Agreement
2.3
3.6
0.4
0.3
Agreements Under Negotiation or for Which Intention to Negotiate Has Been Announced
U.S.-Central American Free Trade Agreement
Costa Rica
2.9
3.1
0.5
0.3
El Salvador
1.6
2.0
0.3
0.2
Guatemala
2.0
2.8
0.3
0.2
Honduras
2.5
3.3
0.4
0.3
Nicaragua
0.4
0.7
*
*
Subtotal
9.4
11.8
1.5
1.0
From the long lists of free trade agreements between US and lots of different countries, we can see that more and more free trade agreements are negotiated around the world. Before the free trade agreements are so thrive, multilateral negotiations under the WTO are most important for countries to pursue the objective of trade liberation. By the way, the international trade liberation is the elimination of artificial barriers and other distortions, like tariffs, quotas subsidies that countries use to protect their domestic industries from foreign competition to trade. However in recent years, US and other countries have begun to negotiate free-trade agreements to eliminate almost all trade restrictions and subsidies, with various individual countries and groups of countries.
I think the quick progress of the free trade agreements between countries in recent years is mainly due to the strong desire for lots of countries to increase foreign trade and develop their economy in a more convenient way. As we know, that multilateral negotiations under the control of WTO are a bit complicated. There are too many rules of the WTO that countries have to obey. And too many procedures have to go through before a negotiation would be done. While free trade agreements between individual countries are more free, detailed and convenient although certain criteria have to be met as well.
Free trade agreements, very obviously, can help countries develop their economy in one way or another. For example, reduction in trade barriers increases the competitiveness of imports from other countries not only relative to domestic production but also relative to imports from other countries. It is easy to understand that if the price of the import is lower than the domestic cost of producing the same good after the reduction of the trade barriers, it’s economically beneficial to the country. Although as an importing country which every country has a role to act as, it is not so beneficial since the competitiveness is so intense after the reduction of trade barriers of other countries, the overall result is beneficial to the country’s economy since every country has so many choices to export their products to other countries with small barriers. It is said that ultimately, negotiating individual free trade agreements with all the countries would benefit all the countries around the world.
But it is true that free trade agreements benefit all the countries in the world? Obviously the answer is no. Since it is possible for free trade agreements divert the world away from multilateral trade liberation and lead to the development of large, competing trading blocs-the United States, the Western Hemisphere, the EU and Japan, it would give those powerful countries too much advantages in negotiation with individual countries, especially small developing ones. The result of such unequal bargaining power can be significant trade restrictions by the large countries remain in place. Further, if small countries individually negotiate disproportionate concessions in free trade agreements, it may be difficult to rectify the situation multilaterally in WTO talks since the small countries would no longer have anything of substantial interest to trade away to the large countries in exchange for the latter eliminating their remaining significant barriers.
Although free trade agreements might bring some bad effects to small developing countries, their benefits to lots of countries’ economies cannot be neglected. But whether free trade agreements is an advisable path to take to the final goal of multilateral free trade is difficult to judge. Economic reasoning alone is not powerful enough. Other factors such as foreign policies are important as well. Minyun_Economic Expert
Globalised @ 12:01 PM
|
Sunday, May 6, 2007
Here's the link to the article:http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=1527
It was not just one step that China decided to make that allowed SARS to be so rampant in China, but in fact, a series of same mistakes which ultimately resulted in the deaths of so many Chinese. The same mistake which is withholding information about their SARS status during the early period that had caused the disease to turn into an epidemic at a much greater pace.
Globalization could have been their friend and might have even been their saviour if that had let international organizations such as the World Health Organization know about their situation earlier. Globalization can work both ways. As SARS was a fairly new mutated virus, if China had released more information about their SARS statistics, then countries all over the world could have used all the information they had to fight the battle against SARS and perhaps find a way to save the SARS infected patients. It is only when countries across the globe do their part by giving out whatever information they have that we can see the true power of globalization to aid us. However, if every country were to do what China had done, then even with the help of globalization, there would be little progress.
In the later part of the SARS outbreak, where many countries were being invaded by the virus, it was also because of globalization that the SARS virus was being able to be contained. Researchers all over the world had begun to study the virus and exchange their findings with one another. Although to this date, no cures have yet to be found for this virus, globalization has allowed us to understand more about SARS in a way faster rate than without it.
When a country like Singapore had safely been able to successfully prevent the virus from spreading to the doctors and nurses working in the frontlines, others in the medical field all over the world followed suit. They followed the way we took preventive measures and sure enough, there were lesser and lesser incidents of the virus infecting the doctors and nurses. Without globalization, would the different countries all over the world have found the way to prevent SARS from spreading to others so quickly?
With increasing globalization, the mobility of people also increases. Many people travel across countries for work making it easier for the SARS virus to reach other countries. This is a global virus and to contain it, it must be contained globally. It is no use if developed countries successfully contain the virus whilst the virus continues to spread rapidly in developing countries. The virus will eventually just reach the developed countries again. So, these developed countries must take it upon themselves to help countries with insufficient medical facilities so that the virus can be contained across the globe. This is the power of globalization.
In the same event, globalization has shown itself to spread the virus more quickly and yet also help in the combat against SARS. If we plan to combat an epidemic such as SARS, then we better make full of what globalization has to offer us- and China should have learnt its lesson by now.
Janice Fan
The Environmentalist/ Health expertLabels: disease, globalisation, health, SARS
Globalised @ 8:00 PM
|
Saturday, May 5, 2007
Article taken from: http://globalizationandculture.rediffblogs.com/
While there are good arguments and valid points about globalization having a very negative impact on cultural conservation, I feel that globalization can actually help better cultural awareness, understanding, and acceptance of others across the world. The presence of sateillte television, world-wide-websites and cable television enables us to just turn on the television and watch travel programmes that explore that lifestyles, rituals and traditions of people in remote parts of the world we never even knew existed. If it weren't for globalization and the presence of media such as the aboved mentioned, we would never know about other cultures and would only be confined to the knowledge of traditions in our own country.
Cultural expert, Beatrice
Globalised @ 8:16 PM
|
Wednesday, May 2, 2007
Article “The impact of globalization on Islamic political identity: the case of Turkey” by Hasan Kosebalaban
Taken from: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2393/is_1_168/ai_n15944529
This article gives rise to a number of queries, and misgivings about what globalisation is best at doing - opening up countries to the world. Does globalisation rob a country of its identity, equalizing every country into a uniform worldwide village? By opening up countries, will they be negatively or positively influenced by others? And also, will countries, like Islam, cherish what globalisation brings to them or instead, be ignorant about the endless possibilities globalisation offers and choosing instead to exploit it and let it go to waste like what Africa is doing at this very moment? Let’s hope that the former will occur instead.
Turkey was the first democratic Islam nation to be governed by a party rooted in Islam politics, and Islamic participation in politics is finally allowed, due to the international confidence gained by Islam while undergoing globalisation. Thanks to globalisation, east meets west as Turkey finally opens doors to trade in the west. Positive interaction between them has changed what bad impressions Islamists have of globalisation and the West, that globalisation is a battlefield for global politics and the West is a ferocious monster exploiting their countries. Now, globalisation has become a golden opportunity for interaction between the West and themselves, and this has led to increased domestic liberation, modernisation and Westernisation. Globalisation has also increased Turkey’s economic growth, and gone are the days in which Turkey is struggling by itself in poverty and unstable political turmoil. Globalisation has proved itself to be extremely useful in the case of Turkey. Turkey is beginning to accept a more open-minded view on politics regarding their country, and is indeed opening up to the West. In this case, Islamist governments have gained more confidence in presenting themselves politically, economically and socially on a global level. They fit in, having felt like they own a place in the world.
The eventual result of globalisation will be a “borderless” world, where countries are evidently exposed to the rest of the world, and their domestic social, economic and political problems are magnified under the critics of the world. With it comes political instability and conflicts, so much so that political turmoil ensues and establishes itself once again in Turkey. Islamists may be so much westernised that they are trying to think like the West, act, and govern like the West. Not all political maneuvers of the West bring about positive changes, and Turkey may find itself following in the footsteps of the West if it tries to mimic what the West is doing. The now stable political parties may generate tensions between themselves, if they are conflicted in both domestic and global decision making.
Is it also true that countries are losing their identities with increased globalisation and increasing invisible boundaries between countries? Globalisation has indeed made its point on erasing political boundaries in the world. But with it comes more open-mindedness on each countries politics, and one good example will be how Turkey has accepted Islamic participants in its politics when it is previously disapproved by the public and socially unacceptable. Also, globalisation exposes how countries govern themselves, and how their political problems are handled etc. How one’s politics are handled may influence another to do the same, and this results in a knock-on effect in which more and more countries do the same. Soon, politics will be uniformed globally and even the way a country does things may influence others to do the same. Will countries lose their individuality and become a “clone”, and reach a point in time where one is identical to many others? Of course, it is too early for tell-tale signs to show but this may be a great possibility in the future. Uniformity is already evident in our globalised world as mass-production takes place everyday and most of our possessions originate from there. I do hope that politics within countries will not reach the extent of uniformity throughout the world even with the blurring of boundaries.
Though opening up to the West may bring about optimistic economic and political turns, too much of it may only result in chaos and instability in the country. It will be best that Turkey knows what’s best for itself and decide wisely. We do not know what will happen in the future, but it is apparent that Turkey holds the key to greater political stability and economic growth if it makes use of globalisation wisely - to expand their boundaries and bring about greater growths in its economy and greater breakthroughs in politics.
Political expert,
Vanessa(:Labels: globalisation, Islam, politics
Globalised @ 8:07 PM
|
Tuesday, May 1, 2007
Article taken from http://www.ssrc.org/sept11/essays/teaching_resource/ tr_globalization.htm
One tool that makes globalization so much easier is technology; especially the internet. Computer based communication through the internet and electronic mail makes everything faster, simpler and more efficient. Through the World Wide Web, anybody anywhere is able to put their views about virtually anything across. However, this creates a “digital divide” because not everybody has access to technology and it is not fair to exclude people from what goes on in the world just because they do not have computers or telephones.
CNN is another passageway for globalization. With the help of satellite technology, people can be informed of events in places like Iran as they happen. CNN is also able to reach out to even the most geographically inaccessible places of the world. This way, in an event of a disaster, help can be brought there immediately.
Globalization has increased the transmission of popular culture easily and inexpensively through radio stations and television channels such as MTV. However, despite efforts of nationally-based media to develop local television and talent, many media markets in countries of Asia, and Latin America are saturated with productions from the U.S., Europe and a few countries in Asia (especially Japan and India). Local critics of this trend lament not only the resulting silencing of domestic cultural expression, but also the entire world becoming too attached to western culture.
Cultural Expert, Beatrice
Globalised @ 3:16 PM
|
The physical influences that the increasing tourism flow, and its consequent developments, has on a destination can cause severe social stress as it impacts the local community. Damage to cultural resources arise from vandalism and littering, especially at sacred or holy places. A common problem at archaeological sites is that poorly paid guards supplement their income by selling cultural artifacts to tourists. Degradation of cultural sites may occur when historic sites and buildings are unprotected and the traditionally built environment is replaced or virtually disappears. As an example of how local people can suffer from tourism development, in coastal areas construction of shoreline hotels and tourist faculties often cuts off access for the locals to traditional fishing ground and even recreational use of the areas. There many cases where local residents have lost access to local natural resources because of tourism development. On Boracay Island in the Philippines, one quarter of the island has been bought by outside corporations, generating a crisis in water supply and only limited infrastructure benefits for residents. Similarly, in Bali, Indonesia, prime agricultural land and water supplies have been diverted for large hotels and golf courses, while at Pangandaran, village beach land, traditionally used for grazing, repairing boats and nets, and festivals, was sold to entrepreneurs for construction of a five-star hotel.
Tourism can create more serious situations where ethical and even criminal issues are involved. Crime rates typically increase with the growth and urbanization of an area and growth of mass tourism. The presence of a large number of tourists with a lot of money to spend, and often carrying valuables such as cameras and passports, increases the attraction for criminals. This is accompanied by activities like robbery and drug dealing which causes social tension and makes life more dangerous. Due to the high risk of criminal attacks, armed guards are sometimes hired to protect these areas often face aggressive reactions from locals. After all, who would want fully armed guards with machine guns near their homes? Tourism also increases the rate of child labour because they are cheap and flexible employees. An estimated 13-19 million children and young people below 18 years of age are employed in the industry worldwide. However, these figures take no account of the number of children working in the informal sector in ancillary activities. Child labour in tourism is common in both developing and in developed countries. Many boys and girls below 12 years of age are engaged in small business activities related to hotels and restaurants, the entertainment sector or the souvenir trade, often as porters or street or beach vendors. They are frequently subjected to harsh working and employment conditions. Tourism can also result in an increase in prostitution and sex tourism. Tourism might not be the cause of sexual exploitation, but it provides easy access to it. The lure of this easy money has caused many people, including children, to trade their bodies in exchange for basic necessities and even air tickets out of the country.
Cultural Expert, Beatrice
Globalised @ 11:36 AM
|
If a poor country that is rich in cultural heritage realizes that it can get its money from tourism, they will most certainly do whatever it takes to increase the number of visitors; even if this means changing cultural expressions to suit the tastes of tourists and having locals stage “authenticity”. Short-term, this might not have any effect on the society but in the long run, people might become so accustomed and used to that false culture that they forget what their real culture is and eventually accept this new culture as their own. This will be very tragic because a country’s culture should be something that the locals treasure and can all relate to, and it should not change. However, with globalization, some countries may forgo their cultural identity for the sake of increasing tourism rates. For example, creating molas, (blouses worn by Kuna women in Colombia) is an art that began with designs that reflected the conception of the world, of nature, and of the spiritual life of the Kuna Nation. Now it is increasingly being transformed, through tourism, into a commercial trade which causes loss of its spiritual value and quality. This is changing the designs of the molas to correspond to the interests of the tourists, while at the same time the Kuna women are losing their knowledge of the old designs and the interpretations and meanings of the mola designs.
Because tourism involves movement of people to different geographical locations, and establishment of social relations between people who would otherwise not meet, cultural clashes can take place as a result of differences in cultures, ethnic and religious groups, values and lifestyles, languages, and levels of prosperity. The result can be an overexploitation of limits of acceptable change in society and limits of acceptable change in the culture of the host of the local community. The attitude of local residents towards tourism development may unfold through the stages of euphoria, where visitors are very welcome, through apathy, irritation and potentially antagonism, when anti-tourist attitudes begin growing among local people. Many tourists, after visiting a certain area, and being exposed to its culture for just a few days, tend to form stereotypes of the area’s people. Stereotypes are often offensive and this will be harmful towards the relationships between the locals and tourists; even though the tourists themselves might not be aware of it. In many Muslim countries, strict standards exist regarding the appearance and behaviour of Muslim women, who must carefully cover themselves in public. Tourists in these countries often disregard or are unaware of these standards, ignoring the prevalent dress code, appearing in revealing shorts, skirts or even bikinis, sunbathing topless at the beach or consuming large quantities of alcohol openly. Besides disapproval from locals arising, this kind of behavior could well be an incentive for impressionable locals, especially youth, to disregard their own religion.
Cultural Expert, Beatrice
Globalised @ 11:31 AM
|
Reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_music_market