Search results

The situated appropriation of the content of globalization by Navajo people and institutions in their unique U.S. Southwest context is the focus of this chapter. The local is transforming the content of the global for local ends; this conversation narrative posits situated cultural exchange rather than a conversion narrative that implies a uni-directional mode of cultural assimilation. Reflections on cultural change in both formal and non-formal educational contexts based on the author's years of experience in the Navajo Nation provide data to freshly examine a conceptual framework for explaining cultural change amid contemporary globalization. The concepts of situated appropriation, adaptive intelligence, and mutual appropriation are employed in the analysis of cultural conflict and change in this chapter.

The question of how to address copyright's insufficiencies with respect to Native American creative production is at the center of an ongoing legal debate; however, more important is whether Native American oral forms should be protected by copyright. Although some late twentieth-century court decisions have opened the door for courts to consider including intangibles within intellectual property law, copyright is not the answer to the problem of protecting Native American oral traditions from appropriation. Expanding the scope of copyright to envelop Native American oral traditions is antithetical to the creation and function of these forms within their host communities and would do more harm than good.

By celebrating tourism destinations through cruise collections, luxury brands open to new influences. They may develop deeper connections with certain geographical areas, but may also challenge the quintessentially national dimension of luxury brand culture. The best example of synergies between a luxury fashion brand and tourism destinations are the Christian Dior cruise collections with Maria Grazia Chiuri at the helm. This chapter is to understand how cruise collections may enhance luxury fashion houses' brand culture through the connections they develop with tourism destinations. Further, the chapter assesses the extent to which destinations can benefit from the exposure provided by luxury fashion brands' cruise collections.

This chapter applies recent theoretical developments linked to the concept of culture to the field of public relations research and practice, notably through the prism of creativity as a vector of cultural change.

The chapter is theoretical in nature and draws on relevant scientific literature in the field of public relations research, but also the social sciences more generally, and illustrates the issues being discussed with reference to relevant public relations campaigns.

While the field of public relations has moved beyond simplistic models of cultural values and characteristics, it is argued that more complex visions of culture have been neglected. Specifically, drawing on structuration theory, culture can be seen as a ‘system-generating mechanism’ relying on creativity to uphold and renew cultural references and norms. In this perspective, public relations is both producing/reproducing culture and being produced by culture. It follows that the concept should be apprehended not as an ontological category but as a social construct, as the source of heuristic and discursive categorisations.

A call is issued for public relations to also question the ideological underpinnings of the production of symbols in which practitioners partake on a daily basis.

While the chapter fits into an emerging body of work discussing the cultural dimension of public relations, the link with creativity and the use of structuration theory to conceptualise this link contribute to its originality.

This chapter asks the questions of whether traditional marketing tools and practices are sufficiently reflexive to deal in the international environment and how we might refine our understanding of cross-cultural environments. Starting from the vantage point that “international” occurs within national boundaries rather than across them, this chapter conducts a qualitative ethnographic study of Arabic and North African people who participate in a visible “street culture” on the streets of France. This ethnographic project models consumption habits in these groups. It asks why they consume certain things, what value or meaning discourses are articulated through these things within their group, and what cultural, social, or personal relevance or symbolism this kind of consumption represents. It also unravels the broader social discourses spun out of these symbolisms and “meaning-makings.” Based on the data discussed, a conceptual model is then offered to explain the process the marketing message undergoes and how meaning is transformed when taken from one cultural context to another. Some conclusions are drawn on how postcolonial analysis provides a new tool for our understanding and practice of international marketing.

This chapter is an exercise in speaking, letting individuals speak for themselves insofar as possible. As Marx famously put it, “they cannot represent themselves, they must be represented.” The “they” were peasants, potato farmers in 1840s France, and by extension peasants, workers, and other lower class groups, not to mention women and minorities who rarely made it into the historical record, and even more rarely in their own words. To give “voice to the voiceless,” as the now old new social historians of the 1960s and 1970s put it, I consciously include here numerous speakers, arranged in two sets of different voices: quotes in the text and endnotes to further document and amplify points. With this plethora of voices, the aim is not to complicate but to speak clearly, listen carefully, and engage respectfully. To multiply the speakers speaking is the single best way to make two primary points concerning what is most important about the Chief Illiniwek mascot controversy: that the sheer number of individuals speaking out is in itself significant, and that this community colloquy all comes down to identity – who we are, individual identity, communal identity.