Recently I read an article in the
Nordicom Review by a professor from RUC, Thomas Tufte. I attended a lecture
from him and I couldn’t be happier after it, and now that I had the chance to
read his explanation of the correlation between media and global divides. He
makes emphasis in three cases: Malawi and its rural zones; Brazil and the
telenovela effect; and Denmark as an example of full media access but symbolic
and its cultural divides (Tufte, 2009). I found this article as an epiphany, a
discovery, of two informational paradoxes taking place in Denmark. Why is this
so important? Because Norden -or the Nordic world- represents one of the three
information systems, apart from the Asian one in Singapore and the American one
in Silicon Valley. I’ll start with the painful one and I’ll conclude with the
positive paradox, so if it’s hard to read for some Danes, they could get a happy
ending when they finish reading, if they do it, sure.
Tufte pays attention to Nørrebro’s
case. This is a neighborhood in Copenhagen, in past a former workers zone, and
today a multicultural space where man can find and endless number of languages
spoken amongst the people living there. Tufte makes an excellent description of
what can be a daily situation. “Living in Nørrebro, as a family of say
Kurdish-Turkish origin, or of Pakistani origin, you most likely have complete
access to both radio, TV, including satellite or cable TV, Internet access and
mobile phones. At home, it is likely that the children in the family have a TV
in their (shared) bedroom, and that there is a larger TV screen in the living
room” (Tufte, 2009). The consumption of media is high, there’s no doubt, but
the question is whether this media access is just symbolic.
Many would say that this is the
reality of many places all over the world. Well, I would doubt it. I think one
can find this situation in some specific cases, mainly in Northern Europe.
Tufte highlights the fact that mainly 1st, but also 2nd
and sometimes 3rd generation immigrants consume media in a different
way. They tend to use homeland media, instead of the public service media. The
quid behind this question is that this ethnic minority does not feel representation
or finds misrepresentation in the media (Tufte, 2009). Everyday, they turn on
the TV they can watch stereotyped news with roots in the anger, exclusion and
fear from unfairly associated terrorism acts. Thus, they prefer consuming
culturally closer matters, such as Arab television in Danish, Turkish music,
Latino leisure clubs, or Vietnamese restaurants, rather than the local media.
But, suddenly the other side of the
mirror comes up. Tufte make focus on the example of the musical talent show,
X-factor, “where a large number of the approximately 10 finalists in the Danish
version of the programme where ethnic minority” (Tufte, 2009). In those moment,
for media, terms such as nydansker, or 2nd generation immigrant were
not used anymore, but the finalists were referred to by their first names.
This is the first informational
paradox, which is depicted as “I can have as much as access to the media as I
want, but I don’t give a damn because I don’t find representation or my culture
is mirrored in a wrong way full of stereotypes and sometimes exclusion”. Is
this only a matter from Denmark, not really. It’s more obvious there, but still
an issue in other countries, such as Spain. Differences, here, in Madrid, the
alternative media consumption is not as big as in Denmark. We have some Chinese
newspapers, Latino radio broadcasting and Arab channels, but still far from the
Nørrebro effect. The access to media is more limited.
The second paradox is the
correlation between how much information one can have and the fact that they
don’t use it, as it is other people’s information. This thought came to me the
first time I googled myself when I was living in Denmark. Yes, my whole address
appeared on the screen of my laptop. Postal code, city, street and door’s
number. I also saw that whoever who searched me could send me chocolates or
flowers. That was lovely, but creepy in terms of who knows what kind of people
could find out where I lived. Krak.dk is the website where apparently, and I don’t
still know the reason, many people residing in Denmark appears. Anyways, the
matter is not the surveillance issue or the lack of privacy, but do the Danes
care about the possibility of knowing other people data.
But, there are two more issues about
this access to someone else’s information. I realized that the Danish entry
phones at the gateway have the owners’ last name, instead of just a “1st
floor to the right”, as it’s usual in other countries. So it seems not to be
very difficult to get to know who lives in the building. In addition the lack
of sun entails no curtains, so they can achieve as much light as possible. I
can’t imagine that scene in my home country without someone on the streets
spying what those “shameless Danes” do at home: If they have cleaned the house,
if they invite many people, or if they cook or order food. Nevertheless, the
reality is completely the opposite in Denmark. People can see, but they don’t
look. Looking involves paying attention. Thus, as a Dane, I can accidentally
see someone’s room from the streets, but I’m will not take a main role in
Hitchcock’s ‘Rear Window’ spying what others do. The same applies to the names
on the entry phone at the gateway. It can be a “look, my last name is Petersen
and here another Petersen lives” but never a “let’s see who resides in the
third floor”.
The access to personal information
is widely easier in Denmark than in other countries, but under the law of “mind
your own business”. It’s a matter of respect for privacy. That means a lot from
that Danish culture before information.
