The role of media in contemporary international relationscu.docx

The role of media in contemporary international relations:
culture and politics at the crossroads
Hamid Mowlana
International Communication Program, School of International
Service, American University
The purpose of this article is to reflect on the role of media in
contemporary international relations and the ecological aspects
of
international communication in the technological age through
the
life and work of Edgar Snow, an American pioneering writer on
China–US relations and an exemplary internationalist. The
article
postulates that the battlefield of international politics has
shifted
from geographical and physical levels to cultural and
communication levels with modern media playing a crucial role
in
perceptions and image-making. Consequently, we are
increasingly
removed from experience and becoming overly dependent on the
representations of reality that come to us through media. We
have often lost our place within an actual community and our
touch with a particular natural landscape that had always
grounded us. The article therefore posits that a new paradigm
and an ethical way of communicating across cultures for mutual
dialogue, respect, and dignity are required if we desire to move
toward a more equitable and just global community. We must
learn to seek out and intentionally create expectations of
morality

and conduct especially at the international level. As Snow
understood long before it became clear to most anyone else, the
Western concept of reductionist science and its linear and short-
term communication approach to our environment also need to
be augmented by the holistic and organic notion of
communication and science emanating from the East.
ARTICLE HISTORY
Received 5 March 2015
Accepted 17 March 2015
KEYWORDS
China–US relations;
communication technology;
culture; Edgar Snow; global
communication; international
relations
Edgar Snow (1905–1972) lived in a vastly different world than
what we find ourselves in
today. Yet issues in international relations are set in a strikingly
similar framework of inter-
action between the political realm and developments in
international communication.
Gratefully, we have heroes of the past who, by their example,
can help guide the
course of the future and what we contribute to it. We can not
only commemorate the
life and work of one pioneering writer and internationalist but
also think together
about what shape our world is taking. We can look at how
international communication
and international relations interact to inform us of how we can
better reflect the principles
and priorities that Edgar Snow worked so hard to promote. An
examination of the current

international setting, and the communication realities that
emanate from and shape this
setting, will show the importance of understanding the role of
international
communication.
© 2015 Taylor & Francis
CONTACT Hamid Mowlana [email protected]
JOURNAL OF MULTICULTURAL DISCOURSES, 2016
VOL. 11, NO. 1, 84–96
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17447143.2015.1032296
mailto:[email protected]
http://www.tandfonline.com
International communication as a process has occurred ever
since people organized
themselves into communities and began to exchange ideas and
products. Yet, inter-
national or global communication, as we discuss here, is a
twentieth-century phenom-
enon. There are many factors that have contributed to the
emergence and progression
of international communication as an important area of public
policy as well as academic
study (see Fortner 1993; Frederick 1993; Mody 2003; Mowlana
1990a, 1996, 1997a, 2012;
Tehranian 1997, 1999; Thussu 2006; Weaver 2014). In
international relations and in inter-
national communication disciplines, our conceptual sterility has
often been the conse-
quence of a failure to seek out new evidence, fearing that it may
cause psychological
discomfort to some of our set theory. Consequently, in the area

of international and inter-
cultural relations, the technical, political, and economic aspects
of the field, which are
rightly important areas of investigation and discussion, have
overshadowed cultural and
human components of international and societal relations. Many
alternative perspectives
in the study of international relations and international
communication still remain
untapped (see Acharya 2011, Acharya and Buzan 2010; Asante
2014; Chin 2004; Chitty
2010; Gunaratne 2009, 2013; Mowlana 1990b, 1991, 1994a,
1994b, 2003; Tehranian
2014; Thussu 2012, 2013; Yin 2007a, 2007b).
Culture, communication, and society in transition
For all human history, societies were built predominantly on
physical foundations of tan-
gible objects and assets. Geography, mountains, rivers, oceans,
mineral resources – all
these protected and defined the reach of a society. Physical
infrastructure – such as
libraries, file cabinets, newspapers, and archives – served as a
second important layer,
acting as a mechanism of information storage and transmission
of knowledge. But some-
thing unique and very profound has happened during the last
several decades. Society’s
physical foundations have been gradually eroding as intangible
assets such as knowledge,
information, and especially data, have become more and more
dominant. New technol-
ogies, which have led to a huge increase in data storage
capacity, may be paradoxically
producing a society without memory. We know that the

invention of writing and the
spread of literacy led to an obvious leap forward in collective
memorization. But we do
not know if the same will be said of the more recent
technological advances we are wit-
nessing. And there are numerous other changes and challenges
brought about by the
characteristics of today’s information age (see Fortner 1993;
Frederick 1993; Mody 2003;
Mowlana 1996; Tehranian 2014; Thussu 2006).
Two decades ago, the industrial and business worlds did not
know that the little known
technology of the Internet would be the central concern of
global communication experts
and information users. Perhaps most importantly, Internet
technology was created by the
government rather than industry and business. In academia,
including some of the major
universities around the world, professors paid little attention to
the emerging technology
of the Internet that was going to revolutionize the way we
gather and disseminate infor-
mation and run our bureaucracy, mediacracy, democracy, and
commerce.
Today, information infrastructure and the information society
are a part of every major
global agenda. In both developed and developing nations, a
satisfactory communication
system is considered a necessary prerequisite to re-accomplish
the world’s economic
balance. It is also seen as a catalyst for fresh possibilities for
education, participation,
JOURNAL OF MULTICULTURAL DISCOURSES 85

and understanding within the so-called global village. One
important change brought
about by the constant development of communication
technologies is their relation to
power structures.
The emergence of new communication technologies has given
rise to centralized, pyr-
amidal, hierarchical systems or super systems with an inherent
risk of manipulation and
total control. On the other hand, because of the development of
group and network tech-
nologies, decentralization, pluralism, and participation are also
favored (Tehranian 1997,
1999). In short, international communication developments
during the last several
decades have altered existing power structures. The most
important question now is:
Whose interests are served by the new infrastructure and
environment of international
communication?
Power issues also are seen in how communication factors
influence the global
economy. Communication and economic factors can be broken
into two categories:
those that occurred before and those that occurred after World
War II. Communication
technologies that emerged at the end of the nineteenth century
and the beginning of
the twentieth century, such as the telephone, the telegraph,
photography, wireless ser-
vices, radio, and mass media, helped European hegemony. Their

use of communication
technologies increased the global power of the industrial
countries, especially to maintain
colonies and empires. Industrialization, combined with
communication institutions,
resulted in Western influence over Africa, the Middle East,
Asia, and Latin America (Gunar-
atne 2009; Mowlana 1998; Thussu 2006). The growth of the
earliest international organiz-
ations such as the International Telecommunication Union,
Universal Postal Union, and the
World Intellectual Property Organization further legitimized
international communi-
cations. European and American news agency growth, the
spread of competing political
and economic ideologies, the revolutionary movements around
the world, and the rise
of international propaganda and public opinion, combined with
acceleration in modern
transportation such as railroads, all made international
communication a new phenom-
enon in world politics and international development (Frederick
1993; Mody 2003; Tehra-
nian 1999). Since World War II, other contributing factors
further altered the shape of
international communication with the growth of new
technologies such as television, sat-
ellite, computers, and the Internet, the increased numbers of
nation-states in the global
sense, as well as the emergence and the collapse of the cold war
as an ideological and
communication system.
International tourism has become a major channel of
interpersonal contact between
and among nations, cultures and peoples (Mowlana 1997a). It

not only has become the
number one business item of volume and expansion, but also
one of the main factors
in our understanding, perceptions and misperceptions of other
people. According to
UNESCO estimates, international tourism will reach one billion
tourists by the end of
the current year, and will increase to one billion six hundred
and two million tourists by
the year 2020 with 80% of the total tourists coming from 28
mostly industrialized
nations. Economic growth, financial conditions, and trade
development have had pro-
found impacts on the quantity and patterns of tourism. For
example, China and the
USA, the two leading recipients of tourism in the coming
decades, were at the bottom
of the list of international tourism three decades ago. It is also
interesting to note that
Hong Kong and the Czech Republic, with fairly small
populations and economic bases
are among the leading tourist destinations.
86 H. MOWLANA
Let me summarize the three important developments that are
shaping the current and
future states of international communication. First, the growth
of human movement
across national boundaries and around the globe has led to a
major development in
the area of communication. The revolutionary nature of the
global economy, the changing
nature in geopolitical structure, the redefinition of virtually all

social institutions, all have
altered our perceptions about the world in which we live. The
so-called communication
revolution has meant the spread of technology and systems
innovation, and increased
speed and quantity of messages. However, the real revolution is
seen in a quest for satis-
factory human communication, rather than a communications
revolution viewed through
the lens of technological and institutional spread and growth.
This new revolution shares
an alternative vision of human and societal development. It
seeks dignity through dialo-
gue. It is the quest for dialogue that underlies the current
revolutionary movements
around the world (Mowlana 1984a, 1992b, 1997a).
Second, I doubt whether the so-called globalized economy and
society that is evolving
will necessarily be a homogenous one. I see many more
challenges ahead of us. If the
‘communications revolution’ and the ‘explosion of information’
are undeniable, their
nature, causes and consequences are less certain.
Thirdly, at least two opposing viewpoints have been prevalent
during the last half-
century (Mowlana 1984b). The first sees the development of
modern communication tech-
nology and the international flow of information as ordinary and
evolutionary processes,
similar to the process through which Western societies have
frequently passed in this
century. The second view is more pessimistic. It sees the
current crisis of the world, not
only as the death agony of the dominant industrial powers, but

also as the less industri-
alized countries totally dominated and overtaken by the
industrialized world. Both of
these diagnoses are incomplete and rather simplistic. Contrary
to the optimistic view,
the present crisis is not ordinary but extraordinary. Unlike the
second view, the present
crisis is not merely an economic or political maladjustment. It
simultaneously involves
nearly all the main sectors of industrialized culture and society.
The point is that the fundamental form of industrial culture and
society, dominant for
centuries, is now in a stage of transition, as well as being a
basically transitory and pene-
trating force in less industrialized societies. What we are
witnessing may be one of the
turning points of human history, where one fundamental form of
culture and society is
declining and a different form is emerging. The Western
concept of reductionist science
and its linear, short-term communication approach to our
environment need to be aug-
mented by the holistic and organic notion of communication and
science emanating
from the East (see Dissanayake 1988, 2009; Gunaratne 2009,
2010, 2013; Kincaid 1987;
Kumar 2014; Miike 2009, 2010, 2014; Mowlana 1991, 1992a,
1994b, 2014a; Nordstrom
1983; Shi-xu 2009, 2013, 2014; Yin 2009).
Edgar Snow as a bridge between China and the West
This is something that Edgar Snow understood far before it
became clear to most anyone
else. He recognized the differences that existed between the

USA and China. He pro-
ceeded from the reality of the situation, working to narrow the
gap of perception and per-
spective. Snow was able to reconcile his values to the situation
he witnessed in China by
accepting practical solutions to the political situation instead of
demanding that China
copy the USA in its pursuit and enactment of democratic rule.
His understanding of news
events was greatly aided by his decision to immerse himself in
Chinese arts and literature.
This helped him understand current events in their historic
context, giving him a richer
framework through which to write. Reading the scholars behind
then current Chinese poli-
tics helped Snow convey a more accurate and encompassing
picture of the direction
Chinese society was headed, and likely contributed to his
prescience and insight in accu-
rately predicting many major events in Chinese history. In
China, Snow was regarded as a
bridge between the Chinese people and the West. The Chinese
Communist leadership
considered him ‘the greatest of foreign authors and our best
friend abroad.’ He risked
his life and defied difficulties to increase understanding,
friendship, and cooperation
between the American and Chinese peoples.
Along with his extreme dedication to understanding the Chinese
people, Snow was also

tremendously concerned with making his articles about China
intelligible and interesting
to American audiences. He worked tirelessly to defend his
reputation against being
labeled a communist in order to retain credibility with American
news outlets. But
despite concerns about his reputation in America and political
pressure in China, Snow
was not willing to curb himself in reporting flaws of the ruling
government. Nor would
he censor himself when other journalists refused to report that
the united front was dete-
riorating and their ineffective strategy was losing the battle
against Japan. Snow deeply
desired American acceptance, but not by temporizing his views.
He wanted Americans
to see what he saw in China, and so he worked harder at
explaining himself even
though this persistence isolated him from Americans as US
sentiment shifted against
the Chinese revolutionaries.
After China was closed to Westerners, Snow continued trying to
help Americans under-
stand China. He sought to provide perspectives that Americans
were unable to find for
themselves, and to tip the scales of perception into balance. But
with the sentiment of
the day he found this very difficult. He once wrote to friends
that spanning ‘the ocean
of prejudice and lack of interest at home’ was ‘terrible.’ And
yet he fought on to do just
that. Because of Snow’s unbending support of the Chinese
people in an unfavorable pol-
itical climate, his books (Snow 1933, 1936, 1938, 1941, 1944,
1947) were removed from

many libraries and stores in America, and he could find little
outlet for articles he wrote
during the 1950s and 1960s. This caused him significant
financial difficulty. He eventually
moved to Switzerland and purchased a home there-half way
between the USA and China –
where he lived until his death. He described himself as a citizen
of the world, revealing
both his sense of estrangement and the worldview he had
developed since leaving Mis-
souri as a young man. He was a friend of Mao Tse-tung, and
simultaneously a sought-after
adviser in the American government. He was interested in
thinking globally when other
Americans were unwilling to apply their ideals abroad. He
sought international under-
standing, and was able to grasp the main stream of historical
development.
Snow’s original meeting with Mao came about because the
Chinese revolutionaries
sought him out, trusting the independence of his reporting to be
fair, and trusting his
reputation for independent reporting to gain a good audience for
his reports. Snow’s
careful reporting is evidenced in the infrequency of errors found
in his work (see Snow
1957, 1958, 1962, 1970, 1972), which is a testament to his
judgment and cautious journalist
instincts, and to his independence. He believed that writing
justifies itself when ‘its results
add even a very small net contribution to man’s knowledge,’
and that this could not be
88 H. MOWLANA

done without ‘advancing the interests of the poor and oppressed
of this world, who are
the “vast majority” of men.’ He understood the revolution in
China in terms of the
needs of the Chinese people, as an expression of a historic need,
long suppressed and
denied, to live free from oppression.
Snow’s professional integrity and dedication, along with his
personal investment in the
needs of those around him, are a standard to which modern-day
journalists should aspire.
In Snow’s reporting, he sought truth in facts, giving both praise
and criticism. He was, from
the very beginning of his time in China, not willing to curb his
reporting to bow to political
or social pressure. He left the safety and comfort of port cities,
going where foreigners had
not established themselves, as he sought out the true experience
of the Chinese people –
under Nationalists, under Japanese Imperialists, as well as
under the Communists – in
order to report it to the world. At the height of his popularity,
Snow refused a number
of prestigious positions with domestic news organizations and
government posts that
would have kept him from going out and doing his own
investigating and reporting.
He wanted to be the one telling the story, not interpreting or
analyzing it from the
comfort of an American radio studio or office. He frequently
put himself in situations
that others considered too dangerous to venture into themselves.
Surely his quest for

adventure helped motivate this, but a desire to see and share the
truth was certainly
the overarching goal that drove him.
Snow sought to use his access to Chinese leaders and years of
experience in the country
to go beyond reporting the Chinese, to explaining China. It was
his natural inclination to
‘write the long perspective’ instead of focusing on immediate
politics, knowing that the
character of a nation is more important than current events. He
saw his role as one of span-
ning the ocean of prejudice and lack of interest between the two
countries. Snow argued
against seeing the world in strictly East–West terms. Snow
himself became a symbol of
international dialogue. He had been the last American journalist
in China before the Cul-
tural Revolution, and he was the first to return. The Washington
Post reported that the visit
signaled Chinese interest in developing contacts with the USA.
The American consul in
Hong Kong cabled Washington that the visit was a ‘favorable
portent for Sino–USA
relations.’ The Chinese used Snow’s presence as a visible
symbol of interest in renewing
Sino–USA relations.
Edgar Snow’s role and significance in China–USA relations
Edgar Snow’s influence arose in part from his emergence onto
the journalistic scene
during such a significant time of development for international
communication. He was
a central node amidst the expanding network of information
flow between the East

and the West. Snow became the unofficial mediator and go-
between for those interested
in visiting China or involved in political issues with the
country. While he considered his
influence marginal and preferred writing about China to
mediation between Americans
and China, his name itself was able to open doors, and he did
what he could to make a
difference. He also saw himself as an unofficial envoy, the eyes
and ears of average Amer-
icans. He agonized over the responsibility, asking people in
both American and foreign
governments what he could do to help the situation. Snow said
that he had tried to
avoid power throughout his career and that he could not speak
for the American govern-
ment. At the same time, he acknowledged that, ‘No one can
entirely avoid responsibility
for power.’ His actions, and the seriousness with which he
approached his work, reflect this
acknowledgment.
Edgar Snow used his own influence to try to tip the balance of
the powers that were
toward a healthier more realistic understanding of each other,
and to serve the interests
and needs of the people. Snow cared deeply about the Chinese
people’s struggle against
both foreign and domestic oppression, and he believed that
unfettered capitalism had
undermined democracy in China’s treaty ports, creating a

situation in which socialist revo-
lution was very positive. He used his position as a journalist to
try to benefit the situations
in which he found himself. He used his role as a journalist, a
significant aspect of inter-
national communication, to affect the power structure of his
time. Because he had such
extraordinary access to Chinese sources, Snow’s writing took on
a great deal of authority.
He felt an enormous sense of responsibility for his status as the
foremost authority on
Chinese Communism. His work was given serious consideration
by President Roosevelt
and the American Embassy in China. President Roosevelt’s
Secretary of the Interior
Harold Ickes stayed up all night reading Red Star Over China,
and brought the book to
the President’s attention. Snow was a celebrity in the USA,
meeting with movie stars
and political figures, including Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt,
to promote his ideas for
effective US policy toward Asia. During the Vietnam War, he
was asked to meet with
various US Senators and other government officials to advise
them on relations with
the Far East.
Edgar Snow’s role and significance in Sino–US relations
emanates largely from his pos-
ition as a member of the news media. The news media not only
transmit information news
but also frame and interpret messages, operating within the
contexts of shared cultural
meaning just like other social actors (Mowlana 1997b). Despite
the fact that the media
reflect and have functional relationships to public controversies,

both within and
among nations, their role in conflict management is, at least, a
tenuous one. The crucial
question in the analysis of the media in USA– China relations
during the cold war was
not so much what the media could or should have done but
rather how the media did
operate under certain structural conditions and in response to
particular environmental
factors.
Such an issue arose in 1956 when the Chinese government
invited 15 American corre-
spondents to visit Mainland China for the first time since US
correspondents had been
evicted from the People’s Republic on 8 October 1949, 1 week
after its founding. The
debate which ensued was unique because it directly pitted the
mass media, which
wanted to accept the invitation, against the Department of State
and its strong-willed Sec-
retary, John Foster Dulles. This foreign policy issue and the
way Dulles handled it was all
the more interesting because it struck two very sensitive nerves
within the American
polity: freedom of the press and the stated US government post-
war policy on ‘free
flow of information doctrine,’ and the blatant use of the media
as an instrument of the
cold war. At a time when the Chinese were in a seemingly
amenable mood, Dulles main-
tained a stubborn opposition to what, in the words of one
foreign policy observer, ‘might
otherwise have become a significant breakthrough in Sino-
American relations’ (Dulles
1972, 169), and another expert called it, ‘one of the great

diplomatic tragedies of our
time’ (Greene 1964, 294).
American perceptions of Chinese enmity hardened over time
and the lobby of pro-Tai-
wanese congressmen and supporters discouraged any positive
move toward China.
90 H. MOWLANA
Extreme anti-communists received wide support by the political
moods generated with
McCarthyism, leaving scars particularly on the State
Department. The subservience of
the media before the Eisenhower administration was
inapplicable in that context since
those invited to and asking to go to China represented the most
prestigious news organ-
izations in the USA: the New York Times, the Associated Press,
the Christian Science Monitor,
U.S. News and World Report, NBC, CBS, International News
Service, the New York Post,
United Press International, and the New York Herald Tribune.
Even though the majority of the American people at the time
were still behind non-recog-
nition of the People’s Republic, George Gallup reported in July
of 1956 that a majority of the
American people were in favor of allowing US journalists to
visit Mainland China (Ashe 1967,
23–24; Guhin 1972, 104). This controversy should also be
viewed as having two levels. The
initial issue was the US policy toward China and the desire of
journalists to accept the

Chinese offer. The second level was more general, yet held
philosophically greater importance
to the media. Did the State Department actually have the right
to control freedom of the
press, as the media saw it, by controlling travel? Could the
government use the media as
an instrument of foreign policy? A government lawyer struck a
particularly troubling note,
as far as the media were concerned, by maintaining that freedom
of the press involved
freedom to publish, not freedom to gather what was to be
published. He backed that up
with Supreme Court rulings. As a lobby on this important legal
issue, the media were
wholly ineffective. At the end, American mainstream media, as
it is often the case, shared
the same worldview and general perception about American
foreign policy as did the Amer-
ican political and governmental elites. Edgar Snow was an
exception to that rule (see
Mowlana [1992c] for the role of the American media during and
after the cold war era).
Toward a new paradigm of global communication
In light of the developments and trends in the information and
communication realities
since Edgar Snow’s time, what kind of ‘international
community’ or ‘world society’ do
we live in? The international system today is the
conglomeration of a large number of
state systems and is thus far from being an international
community or world society. A
community is not formed by the submission of its members to
the coercive demands
of artificial or superficial authority, but rather by their

voluntary conformity to and accep-
tance of approved canons of conduct. In this sense, today’s
international arena more
closely resembles a primitive and anarchical society than a
developed and well-interpreted
civilization. Although many members of this international
system preach democracy, there
is hardly a sign of democracy at the international level. Most of
our international organiz-
ations are undemocratic and hierarchical, and their members do
not enjoy full equality. As
the complexities of the modern world have grown, it has
become fashionable in the media
to apply a variety of terms to the world stage, such as
‘international community’ or ‘inter-
national society.’ However, it is doubtful whether aggregation
of states itself can create
common values and assumptions which are, by definition, the
essential conditions of a
community, and whether or not the working of world
community is in some way
similar to that of any mechanical system.
In the absence of communal morality, the conduct of nation-
states, especially the super-
powers, is regulated by impersonal communication, inadequate
international agencies,
national bureaucracies, mass media commentators, and those
attempting economic and
political profiteering. No higher symbols, supreme loyalties, or
emotional attachments exist.

Nor are there any cultural pressures that can govern the conduct
of international actors
beyond limited territories of action. In short, there are no
international flags, no world
society anthems, and no divine or supranational authorities to
respect and obey. Communi-
cation facilities, socialization processes, and regional
agreements are all instruments of the
state apparatus to either legitimize the status quo or maximize
selfish interest under the
guise of nationalism and national interests. In such an
environment, it becomes especially
important that we learn to seek out and intentionally create
expectations of morality and
conduct at the international level (Chin 2004; Mowlana 1984b).
Individuals, such as Edgar
Snow, who see themselves as world citizens instead of falling
into nationalist propaganda,
are a light of hope in the difficult reality in which we live.
During the last decades and since World War II, we have seen
national movements,
revolutions, and anti-imperialism in many parts of the world.
We have witnessed
diverse nationalities in quest of self-determination, and the
emergence of a new world
order as militarily weak nations confront the major powers with
increasing success
(Mowlana 1994a). In response, the great powers have moved
from territorial conquest
to establishing, restoring, or supporting governments that are
politically compatible
with their strategic, military, and economic interests. This
period also has witnessed the
development of new technology and weapon systems and the
world-wide spread of

modern communications. In short, the battlefield of
international politics has shifted
from geographical and physical levels to cultural and
communication levels, with
modern media playing a crucial role in perceptions and image-
making (Mowlana 1996).
Modern communication has separated us from reality; not only
do we deal with each
other and our environment through intermediaries, but whether
we realize it or not, we
tend to accept the copy as the original. We are increasingly
removed from experiences,
becoming overly dependent on the representations of reality that
come to us through
the media (Asante 2013; Mowlana 1992c; Yin 2007a, 2007b).
Thus, we have often lost
two things that had always grounded us: our place within an
actual community and our
touch with a particular natural landscape. The implications of
newer communication tech-
nologies are political and social; the questions they pose are
indeed ethical, and the risks
they entail are unpredictable. Rules and norms will only be
effective if we recognize that an
entirely new code is necessary today. It must be more
appropriate to the world we live in
than what we have built up over the past 200 years. The
formation of an accepted body of
doctrine of this type could have effect only if widely publicized,
but this is not yet the case.
One reason has been the emphasis on the centrality of
Europeans and North Americans in
the contemporary international system over the past 100 years.
The international relations
and communication of the southern half of the globe is usually

cast in terms of develop-
ment and regional conflict management. But that is now
changing and a new paradigm
and way of communicating is required if we desire to move
toward a more equitable and
just international system (Mowlana 1994a, 1998, 2001).
One characteristic of our age is that non-Western nations and
their peoples, more than
ever, are challenging the hegemony, intrusion, and interference
of the old powers in their
domestic and regional affairs (Asante 2014; Shi-xu 2014;
Tehranian 2014). They are thus
generating a new set of communication and media rules and
norms that in many
instances are contrary to the notion of ‘international political
order’ that was formulated
by the great powers over the last century. At the same time, a
number of world powers
92 H. MOWLANA
are seeking to defy these new developments in such countries as
Brazil, China, India, and
South Africa (Mowlana 1998; Thussu 2012, 2013). In reaction
to their relative but steady
decline of influence and economic powers, they are now, more
than ever, violating the
principles of international law and security which they helped to
formulate, especially
during the post-World War II period. It can be argued that
because the major powers
have a high stake in the maintenance of the international
system, and because they

must satisfy their domestic, military, and economic elites, they
have little interest in any
fundamental, revolutionary changes in the international
relations structure that we now
know. Because the existing world communication system is
vital to their interests, they
also have little involvement in altering the current trends in
mass communication and
image-making.
In such a system of international relations, control of agenda-
setting is the main source
of power. In the last several decades, national, cultural,
political, and regional movements
around the world have constantly challenged, and in some cases
even reduced, the mon-
opoly of the great powers’ agenda-setting system. The agenda-
setting of today – what to
table and what to think about – has become more important than
what positions one takes
on these issues. The conflict is equally as much over the
priority and primacy of the issues as
over their nature. Thus, control over information flow and
communication must accompany
access to material and natural resources. It is only under a
powerful communication and
information system that one can determine the parameters of
national security debates.
In short, conceptualization, definition, and elaboration of world,
regional, and national pro-
blems are the basis of political, economic, and military
mobilizations (Mowlana 1997a).
Elsewhere, I have argued that the process of information and
technological innovations,
as it relates to communication between human beings and their

environment, and among
peoples and nations, can be explained by what can be called the
unitary theory of com-
munication as ecology (see Mowlana 1992a, 1993, 1996, 1997a,
2014b). I use the term
ecology here in a broad sense to include all the symbolic
environments in which human
and technological communication takes place. Extending this to
modern international
relations, or, to use a better term, world society, it justifies and
encourages new
approaches to international and intercultural communication.
The limitations of traditional
approaches to communicating across and between cultures are
apparent when one views
contemporary history (see Asante 2006, 2014; Chin 2004;
Dissanayake 1988, 2009; Gunar-
atne 2009, 2010; Kumar 2014; Miike 2009, 2010, 2014;
Mowlana 1991, 1992a, 2001, 2014a;
Shi-xu 2009, 2013, 2014; Thussu 2012, 2013; Yin 2009). The
insurgencies and revolutions in
many parts of the world are actually efforts by individuals to
communicate their need for
dialogue, and for respect and dignity. In short, there is more at
stake in this world than the
traditional fight for territories and material goods. Transcending
these limits would benefit
not only individuals and institutions interested in humanistic
sharing of values, but also
those with political, economic, and technological concerns.
Acknowledgment
An earlier version of this article was presented as Keynote
Address at an International Symposium in
Commemoration of the Centenary of Edgar Snow’s Birth on the

theme, ‘Understanding China—
Communicating across Cultures: Edgar Snow as an Example,’ in
the School of Journalism and
Communication at Peking University in Beijing, China on 19
July 2005. The research assistance and
contributions of Leanne Cannon in the preparation of this article
is greatly acknowledged.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
Notes on contributor
Hamid Mowlana is a Professor Emeritus of International
Relations and Founding Director
of the International Communication Program in the School of
International Service at
American University, Washington, DC, USA. He is the author
of numerous books on inter-
national relations and international communication. He is the
recipient of the International
Studies Association’s Distinguished Senior Scholar Award and
has served as President of
the International Association for Media and Communication
Research.
References
Acharya, A. 2011. Dialogue and discovery: In search of
international relations theories beyond the

West. Millennium: Journal of International Studies 39, no. 3:
619–637. doi:10.1177/03058298
11406574
Acharya, A., and B. Buzan, eds. 2010. Non-Western
international relations theory: Perspectives on and
beyond Asia. New York, NY: Routledge.
Asante, M.K. 2006. The rhetoric of globalisation: The
Europeanisation of human ideas. Journal of
Multicultural Discourses 1, no. 2: 152–158.
doi:10.2167/md054.0
Asante, M.K. 2013. The Western media and the falsification of
Africa: Complications of value and
evaluation. China Media Research 9, no. 2: 64–70.
Asante, M.K. 2014. Facing South to Africa: Toward an
Afrocentric critical orientation. Lanham, MD:
Lexington Books.
Ashe, J.W. 1967. The China news ban (Unpublished master’s
thesis). West Virginia University,
Morgantown, WV.
Chin, C.N. 2004. Communication and the human condition
(Re)calling Adam Smith in the 21st
century? Journal of International Communication 10, no. 2: 67–
89. doi:10.1080/13216597.2004.
9751975
Chitty, N. 2010. Mapping Asian international communication.
Asian Journal of Communication 20, no.
2: 181–196. doi:10.1080/01292981003693377
Dissanayake, W., ed. 1988. Communication theory: The Asian

perspective. Singapore: Asian Mass
Communication Research and Information Center.
Dissanayake, W. 2009. The desire to excavate Asian theories of
communication: One strand of the
history. Journal of Multicultural Discourses 4, no. 1: 7–27.
doi:10.1080/17447140802651629
Dulles, F.R. 1972. American policy toward Communist China,
1949–1969. New York, NY: Crowell.
Fortner, R.S. 1993. International communication: History,
conflict, and control of the global metropolis.
Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Frederick, H.H. 1993. Global communication and international
relations. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Greene, F. 1964. A curtain of ignorance: How the American
public has been misinformed about China.
Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
Guhin, M.A. 1972. John Foster Dulles: A statesman and his
times. New York, NY: Columbia University
Press.
Gunaratne, S.A. 2009. Emerging global divides in media and
communication theory: European uni-
versalism versus non-Western reactions. Asian Journal of
Communication 19, no. 4: 366–383.
doi:10.1080/01292980903293247
94 H. MOWLANA
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0305829811406574
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0305829811406574
http://dx.doi.org/10.2167/md054.0

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13216597.2004.9751975
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13216597.2004.9751975
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01292981003693377
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17447140802651629
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01292980903293247
Gunaratne, S.A. 2010. De-Westernizing communication/social
science research: Opportunities and
limitations. Media, Culture and Society 32, no. 3: 473–500.
Gunaratne, S.A. 2013. Go East young ‘man’: Seek wisdom from
Laozi and Buddha on how to
metatheorize mediatization. Journal of Multicultural Discourses
8, no. 3: 165–181. doi:10.1080/
17447143.2013.837052
Kincaid, D.L., ed. 1987. Communication theory: Eastern and
Western perspectives. San Diego, CA:
Academic Press.
Kumar, K.J. 2014. Theorizing about communication in India:
Sadharanikaran, rasa, and other tra-
ditions in rhetoric and aesthetics. In Communication theories in
a multicultural world, eds. C.
Christians and K. Nordenstreng, 160–175. New York, NY: Peter
Lang.
Miike, Y. 2009. New frontiers in Asian communication theory:
An introduction. Journal of Multicultural
Discourses 4, no. 1: 1–5. doi:10.1080/17447140802663145
Miike, Y. 2010. An anatomy of Eurocentrism in communication
scholarship: The role of Asiacentricity
in de-Westernizing theory and research. China Media Research
6, no. 1: 1–11.

Miike, Y. 2014. The Asiacentric turn in Asian communication
studies: Shifting paradigms and chan-
ging perspectives. In The global intercultural communication
reader, eds. M. K. Asante, Y. Miike,
and J. Yin, 2nd ed., 111–133. New York, NY: Routledge.
Mody, B., ed. 2003. International and development
communication: A 21st-century perspective.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Mowlana, H. 1984a. Communication, world order, and the
human potential: Toward an ethical frame-
work. In The news media in national and international conflict,
eds. A. Arno and W. Dissanayake, 27–
35. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Mowlana, H. 1984b. The myths and realities of the “information
age”: A conceptual framework for
theory and policy. Telematics and Informatics 1, no. 4: 427–
438. doi:10.1016/S0736-5853(84)
80066-0
Mowlana, H. 1990a. Communication and international relations.
In Culture and international relations,
ed. J. Chay, 223–237. New York, NY: Praeger.
Mowlana, H. 1990b. International broadcasting in contemporary
international relations. In Between
understanding and misunderstanding: Problems and prospects
for international cultural exchange,
ed. Y. Sugiyama, 132–144. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
Mowlana, H. 1991. Communication and the state in the Middle
East. Media Development 38, no. 3: 8–
10.

Mowlana, H. 1992a. Ecological dimensions of international
relations: A comparative study of civil
society, information society, and Islamic society. Iranian
Journal of International Affairs 4, no. 3/
4: 568–585.
Mowlana, H. 1992b. The emerging world order: For whom and
for what? Media Development 39, no.
2: 21–23.
Mowlana, H. 1992c. Roots of war: The long road of
intervention. In Triumph of the image: The media’s
war in the Persian Gulf—A global perspective, eds. H.
Mowlana, G. Gerbner, and H.I. Schiller, 30–50.
Boulder CO: Westview Press.
Mowlana, H. 1993. The new global order and cultural ecology.
In Beyond national sovereignty:
International communication in the 1990s, eds. K. Nordenstreng
and H.I. Schiller, 394–417.
Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Mowlana, H. 1994a. International communication research in
the 21st century: From functionalism to
postmodernism and beyond. In Mass communication research:
On problems and policies—In honor
of James D. Halloran, eds. C.J. Hamelink and O. Linné, 353–
368. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Mowlana, H. 1994b. Shapes of the future: International
communication in the 21st century. Journal of
International Communication 1, no. 1: 14–32.
doi:10.1080/13216597.1994.9751779
Mowlana, H. 1996. Global communication in transition: The

end of diversity? Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
doi:10.4135/9781483327518
Mowlana, H. 1997a. Global information and world
communication: New frontiers in international
relations (2nd ed.). London: Sage. doi:10.4135/9781446280034
Mowlana, H. 1997b. The media and foreign policy: A
framework of analysis. In News media and foreign
relations: A multifaceted perspective, ed. A. Malek, 29–41.
Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17447143.2013.837052
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17447143.2013.837052
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17447140802663145
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0736-5853(84)80066-0
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0736-5853(84)80066-0
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13216597.1994.9751779
http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781483327518
http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446280034
Mowlana, H. 1998. Globalization of mass media: Opportunities
and challenges for the South.
Cooperation South 14, no. 2: 22–39.
Mowlana, H. 2001. From medieval to modern times:
Information in the Arab world. Cooperation South
17, no: 1: 139–151.
Mowlana, H. 2003. Communication, philosophy and religion.
Journal of International Communication
9, no. 1: 11–34. doi:10.1080/13216597.2003.9751942

Mowlana, H. 2012. International communication: The journey
of a caravan. Journal of International
Communication 18, no. 2: 267–290.
doi:10.1080/13216597.2012.709930
Mowlana, H. 2014a. Communication and cultural settings: An
Islamic perspective. In The global inter-
cultural communication reader, eds. M.K. Asante, Y. Miike, and
J. Yin, 2nd ed., 237–247. New York,
NY: Routledge.
Mowlana, H. 2014b. Global communication as cultural ecology.
China Media Research 10, no. 3: 1–6.
Nordstrom, L., ed. 1983. Communication—East and West
[Special issue]. Communication 8, no. 1: 1–
132.
Shi-xu. 2009. Reconstructing Eastern paradigms of discourse
studies. Journal of Multicultural
Discourses 4, no. 1: 29–48.
Shi-xu. 2013. Discourse and culture. Shanghai: Shanghai
Foreign Language Education Press.
Shi-xu. 2014. Chinese discourse studies. Basingstoke: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Snow, E. 1933. Far Eastern front. New York, NY: H. Smith &
R. Haas.
Snow, E., ed. 1936. Living China: Modern Chinese short
stories. New York, NY: Reynal & Hitchcock.
Snow, E. 1938. Red star over China. New York, NY: Random
House.
Snow, E. 1941. The battle for Asia. New York, NY: Random
House.
Snow, E. 1944. People on our side. New York, NY: Random
House.
Snow, E. 1947. Stalin must have peace. New York, NY: Random

House.
Snow, E. 1957. Random notes on Red China, 1936–1945.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Snow, E. 1958. Journey to the beginning. New York, NY:
Random House.
Snow, E. 1962. China, Russia, and the USA: Changing relations
in a changing world. New York, NY:
Marzani & Munsell.
Snow, E. 1970. Red China today: The other side of the river
(Rev. ed.). New York, NY: Random House.
Snow, E. 1972. The long revolution. New York, NY: Random
House.
Tehranian, M. 1997. Global communication and international
relations: Changing paradigms and pol-
icies. International Journal of Peace Studies 2, no. 1: 39–64.
Tehranian, M. 1999. Global communication and world politics:
Domination, development, and discourse.
Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
Tehranian, M. 2014. Ethnic discourse and the new world
disorder: A communitarian perspective. In
The global intercultural communication reader, eds. M.K.
Asante, Y. Miike, and J. Yin, 2nd ed., 431–
444. New York, NY: Routledge.
Thussu, D.K. 2006. International communication: Continuity
and change (2nd ed.). London: Hodder
Arnold.
Thussu, D.K. 2012. India and a new cartography of global
communication. In The handbook of global
media research, ed. I. Volkmer, 276–288. West Sussex: Wiley-
Blackwell.

Thussu, D.K. 2013. De-Americanizing media studies and the
rise of “Chindia.” Javnost—The Public:
Journal of the European Institute for Communication and
Culture 20, no. 4: 31–44.
Weaver, G.R. 2014. The evolution of international
communication as a field of study: A personal
reflection. In The global intercultural communication reader,
eds. M.K. Asante, Y. Miike, and J. Yin,
2nd ed., 35–47. New York, NY: Routledge.
Yin, J. 2007a. The clash of rights: A critical analysis of news
discourse on human rights in the United
States and China. Critical Discourse Studies 4, no. 1: 75–94.
doi:10.1080/17405900601149491
Yin, J. 2007b. The narrative function of news: A comparative
study of media representation and audi-
ence interpretation of China-U.S. trade relationship. China
Media Research 3, no. 3: 33–42.
Yin, J. 2009. Negotiating the centre: Towards an Asiacentric
feminist communication theory. Journal
of Multicultural Discourses 4, no. 1, 75–88.
doi:10.1080/17447140802651660
96 H. MOWLANA
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13216597.2003.9751942
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13216597.2012.709930
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17405900601149491
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17447140802651660
Copyright of Journal of Multicultural Discourses is the property

of Taylor & Francis Ltd and
its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or
posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users
may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.
AbstractCulture, communication, and society in transitionEdgar
Snow as a bridge between China and the WestEdgar Snow's role
and significance in China–USA relationsToward a new
paradigm of global communicationAcknowledgmentDisclosure
statementNotes on contributorReferences

The role of media in contemporary international relationscu.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to The role of media in contemporary international relationscu.docx

Similar to The role of media in contemporary international relationscu.docx (20)

More from arnoldmeredith47041

More from arnoldmeredith47041 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

The role of media in contemporary international relationscu.docx