Tony Bennett, Differing diversities - Council of Europe

Reasearch position paper 6available in Bombay, Leicester, and Toronto; do diasporic media become aeuphemism for non-western media moguls? And do these media help perpetuatethat sense of diasporic “similarity” across boundaries against a process of slowacculturation toward each different host culture? There are many implied dynamicsand attitudes that are often not fully articulated in research: making themexplicit and the driving force of research would be appropriate.Diasporic media are an expansion of the televisual field, and to be welcomed andsupported and developed further. Rather than thinking defensively about the “protection”of cultural identities, both those of the new minorities now living inEurope and that of the “national cultural space” into which they are entering, thenotions of dynamic cosmopolitanism can give the entire process a more fluid andpositive valence. “Multikulti” might be seen as a real strategy, not reproducing afragmented reinforcement of single ethnic identity but actually trying to constructa “cultural living together” (the slogan of Radio Multiculti in Berlin, as describedby Vertovec, 2000). Difference could be seen as an interesting invitation; Robinsand Aksoy (2000: 4) provocatively ask what could the possibilities of (Turkish)transnational media open up in Europe? Given that the latest count is of 3 243satellite channels around the world, delight rather than defence against differenceseems to be the order of the day. 1 This, of course, suggests looking at the changingforce-field of the “host culture”, not just at the diasporic media, to see whether,what and how the “new” and “different” is taken up within the European culturalspace. Population trends suggest an ageing European population that barelyreplenishes itself; many immigrants are young. Media are manifestations of muchdeeper global shifts, and can be useful ways toward asking questions that are evenmore significant than the media themselves!We live in an epoch of changing spatial imaginaries, or new definitions of communitiesas succeeding “generations” create new cultural mixtures and find new waysof living. We need a vocabulary that allows for multiple affiliations, “both/and” not“either/or”, and that can cope with heterogeneous cultural environments. I have asense that this area of research and theorising is only just beginning.ReferencesAitchison, Cathy, 1999, Tuning in to Diversity, Utrecht: OnLine/More Colour inthe Media.Appadurai, Arjun, 1996, Modernity at Large. Cultural Dimensions ofGlobalisation, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Bulck, Hilde van den and Luc van Poecke, 1996, National language, identity formationand broadcasting: the Flemish and German-Swiss communities, in S.Braman and A. Sreberny-Mohammadi (eds.), Globalization, Communication andTransnational Civil Society, New York: Hampton Press, pp. 157-178.__________1. For more information: (30.07.00).165