Strictly speaking, the term "Global Village" is an oxymoron. What are some ways today's international communication system is different from that in a traditional village? Is there another metaphor that is more appropriate?.
Theoretically, the world's mass communication system is far from being a village. It has the capacity to reach every corner of the globe at the click of a button via the internet and the technology advances with the television and radio. This new system seems far from complex but differs from previous closed communication systems.
In a traditional village, in regards to early newspapers, only the upper class or upper middle class had the opportunity to read and learn about international events. The price for knowledge with previous times was far too expensive for a lower to middle class person. In comparison to today's communication system, it is easily accessible at low prices. For example, the internet can be found at any public school or library as well as the number of computers in the homes.
The internet also opened to door for many other dimensions of the global village. It has allowed many different mass communication agents to be compacted into this low price (as mentioned above). On the internet you can find newspapers, book reviews, radio stations from all around the world, as well as song's and movies to download and watch, to name only a few. The combination of all of these agents into one place is an innovation that will never be matched. Traditional villages had the means to access only one or two of these agents a day. In regards to television news, once a day at a certain time. News on the internet is updated many times during a day.
I think calling the media today a "Global Village" is a intelligent view. Today's communications are global. They can stretch to any border and be broadcasted live if intended. While a village refers to a smaller group of people interacting, the world is a group of people interacting.
