One topic covered in Divya McMillin’s “Curing Taste: Lifestyle Television and the Globalizing Subject” lecture that I found very interesting is the concept of soft power (2013). She went by Joseph Nye’s definition of soft power as, “the ability to get what you want through attraction rather than coercion or payments.” Nye continued that, “soft power rests on the ability to shape the preferences of others… through shared values and purposes” (2004, Soft Power). I have never heard of this specific term used before, but it seems like a familiar idea and something that is quite obviously occurring.
Joseph Nye is credited for initially proposing the idea of soft power, and he regarded culture, political value, and foreign policy as the staples of soft power. Li Lin later provides an interesting analysis of the relationship between soft power and hard power, that they are different yet can supplement and depend on each other. He states that soft power can only work well when hard power has been established to support it. He explains that much of America’s soft power comes from the democracy and human rights ideals that America’s hard power has been built on, which also provide political value and attractiveness, an example of the dynamics between soft and hard power (Lin 2012).
I love this explanation of power. To me, it is a genius definition and explanation of a concept that was previously difficult to define, visible or not, and this definition makes it visible to scholars who may have known something was going on, but weren’t sure how to describe the situation in simple terms. McMillin discussed the specific soft power of lifestyle television and the effects it is having in India. It seems that the same ideals that young adults, teens, and children have been adapting in American culture have been becoming more and more prevalent in foreign countries. This doesn’t really come as a surprise given the extreme growth and globalization of American media and corporations, and the fact that young minds would be the most effected. She spoke about the conditions of sweatshop workers, and I thought it was a very powerful example of the extensive reach of this American soft power (or perhaps corporate soft power would be a better way to put it?) when she explained that malls and beauty salons were commonly popping up around these sweatshops and other areas, often extremely close to each other, and the young girls would take from their very low pay to enjoy these salons and malls. The main thing I take away from the lecture, with this fresh idea of soft power in mind, as well as with my own knowledge and experience, is worry. Globalization, powered by ever more powerful and far reaching communications technologies, seems to be profit driven almost to the point now that regulation is the decider of what is right and wrong, with ethical concerns not in the interest of individual businesses or corporations, but in the hands of lawmakers.
Works Cited
Lin, L. (2012). The Application and Revelation of Joseph Nye’s Soft Power Theory. Studies in sociology of science (1923-0176). 3 (2). p. 48.
McMillin, D. (2013). Curing Taste: Lifestyle Television and the Globalizing Subject. Pockrass Lecture. Lecture conducted from Foster Auditorium, Paterno Library, University Park.
Nye, J. S. (2004). Soft power: the means to success in world politics. New York: Public Affairs.