Engineering:Platform imperialism
 | This article may be incomprehensible or very hard to understand. (September 2024) (Learn how and when to remove this template message) |
Platform imperialism is the domination of a few Western digital platforms, particularly American platforms, such as Google, Netflix, Facebook, and YouTube, throughout the global cultural and technological spheres due to structural power differences between countries.[1] This causes an asymmetrical power balance between a few Western countries as platform owners and many non-Western countries as platform users.[2] Non-Western platforms do not control the global platform markets, and thus cannot change the existing lopsided power relations between Western and non-Western countries.
Platform imperialism has been described by scholars in political economy, critical cultural studies and media studies.[2] The discourse on platform imperialism includes several core areas, such as intellectual property, the global digital divide, free labor, and the nation-state, focusing on the role of the nation-state alongside transnational capital.[2] Digital platforms have been influential in capital accumulation and digital culture in the networked 21st century. Numerous digital platforms, such as smartphones, social media, and OTT (over-the-top) platforms, are crucial because they function as digital mediators.
Background
Template:Citation section Platform imperialism is a digital form of cultural imperialism. Major theoreticians, such as Herbert Schiller, Thomas Guback, and Jeremy Tunstall, argued that a few Western countries controlled the international flow of television programs and films. The dominance of a few Western countries, particularly the U.S., was distinctive, as the robust U.S. cultural industry exerted influence over the cultural life of other nations. However, with the emergence of numerous countries that have developed their own popular cultures, such as Mexico, Brazil, Japan, Hong Kong, and Korea, the one-way flow of popular culture from the U.S. to other countries has waned. Due to the arrival of pluralism, some[who?] argued that cultural imperialism is over. However, with the rise of digital platforms, such as social media, smartphones, and OTT (over-the-top) platforms, the imperialism discourse has resurfaced as the U.S. has become the primary actor in the digital platform field.
Derivative platform imperialism
Sources
- Bannerman, S. (2022). Platform imperialism, communications law and relational sovereignty. New Media & Society, 26(4), 1816-1833.
- Jin, Dal Yong (2025). “Platform Imperialism Theory from the Asian Perspectives.” Social Media + Society 11(1): 1-6.
- Jin, Dal Yong (2015). Digital Platforms, Imperialism and Political Culture. London: Routledge.
- Jutel, O., & Salter, L. A. (2025). Platform imperialism and disinformation in Aotearoa-New Zealand. Platforms & Society, 2.
- Davis, S. (2021). What is Netflix imperialism? Interrogating the monopoly aspirations of the ‘World’s largest television network.’ Information, Communication & Society, 26(6), 1143–1158.
- Ji Hoon Park, Kristin April Kim, Yongsuk Lee (2023). Theorizing the Korean Wave| Netflix and Platform Imperialism: How Netflix Alters the Ecology of the Korean TV Drama Industry. International Journal of Communication 17
- Tanter, M (2024).How Netflix and “Platform Imperialism” Compromise the Korean Drama Industry. In Contemporary Asian Popular Culture
References
 |  |
