Blending East-West philosophies to Metatheorize Mediatization and revise news paradigm

Blending East-West philosophies

to Metatheorize Mediatization

and revise news paradigm

SHELTON GUNARATNE

Minnesota State University Moorhead

ABSTRACT

This chapter puts forth the case for developing a

universally acceptable metatheory that researchers worldwide

could use as a framework to derive more realistic hypotheses

on phenomena such as globalization, mediatization,

modernization, and the like. It suggests that the Buddhist

doctrine of dependent co-arising (Paticca Samuppada), could

provide the rudiments of such a metatheory, which explicates

the bhavacakra (the wheel of becoming) and samsara (cyclic

existence) in terms of 12 interdependent, interconnected,

and interactive nidanas (underlying links). Systems

characteristics are embedded in this theory. It asseverates

that nothing is independent.

This chapter also suggests that journalism could use the

Paticca Samuppada (PS) paradigm, which explains the dynamics

of the Four Noble Truths to develop a Buddhism-based news

paradigm to foster news as a social good. The

American/Western news paradigm, currently used in the world,

has made news a commodity. The Asian Buddhist Communication

Network in Singapore has already begun this project.

2

Foreword

My current thinking on global communication (Gunaratne,

2002; 2005c), systems theories (Gunaratne, 2003d; 2004a;

2007b; 2008b), world-systems analysis (Gunaratne, 2001a;

2002; 2007c), globalization (Gunaratne, 2006c; 2009a),

mediatization (Gunaratne, 2013), informatization (Ito, 2009;

Gunaratne, 2001b) and other interconnected and

interdependent concepts (Gunaratne, 2005a) evolved over the

last 15 years (1998-2013) after the onset of the Digital

Revolution of the 1980s. The 30 or more journal

articles/chapters/books/ monographs I wrote during this

compressed time (see the list of my work appended to this

chapter) might give the reader the impression that I have

been groping in the dark until I hit upon the idea of

globalization (Gunaratne, 2009a) and de-Westernization

(Gunaratne, 2008a; 2010b).

I got my doctorate in mass communication from the University

of Minnesota in 1972, but sooth to say that late in my

career I got disenchanted with the American/Western

philosophical framework that guided academic discourse at

American universities. The aim of the doctoral program was

to train the students to think and act like scientists and

to revere the scientific method willy-nilly. The pitfalls of

trying to apply the methods of physical and biological

sciences to behavioral and social sciences that produced a

spurious “scientism” (Hayek, 1942; Wallerstein, 2006), not

science, rarely came under discussion. Mass communication

gurus knew very little about Eastern philosophies or the

socio-cultural ways of the people who inhabited the

Eastern/non-Western hemisphere.

However, Raymond Nixon, my mentor in international

communication, drew my attention to the seminal work of

anthropologist Edward T. Hall (1966), the father of

proxemics, which helped me to understand the significance of

cultural space from an American perspective. Although

American universities offered numerous courses in

intercultural and international communication, their aim

invariably seemed to perpetuate American/Western

universalism. As in the case of the Four Theories of the Press,

4

American gurus had the tendency to critique rival ideologies

and cultures as good or bad to the extent they conformed to

or deviated from American norms (Christians, Glasser,

McQuail, Nordenstreng & White, 2009). This syndrome was

widely reflected in the quantitative sociopsychological and

sociocultural traditions of (mass) communication studies,

but not so much in the qualitative traditions identified as

rhetoric, semiotics, phenomenology, and critical.

The quantitative traditions, which emphasized the use of

inferential statistics for interpreting and analyzing data

gathered from field studies, relied heavily on the linear

Newtonian paradigm to claim scientific status. Peter

Westbroeck (2004), a geophysiologist, bluntly expressed his

disenchantment with the presumptions associated with

classical Newtonian approach and its extension to the social

sciences, thus:

Classical science searches for simple rules of general

applicability underlying the multiple phenomena. Its

quest is order, causality, and determinism. It splits

5

the world into elementary components and isolates them

from their environment. It creates fragmentation of the

scientific enterprise into insular disciplines and

ignores the social stratum from which science emerges.

Although its successes are overwhelming, classical

science is incapable of placing problems into their

proper context. As a result, it can only lead to a

mutilated view of the real world, and to technological

applications that are blind, unchecked, and

manipulative. Thus, the old science fails to properly

address the huge problems facing us today—mass

destruction, the environmental problem, global economic

deregulation, the demographic explosion, and social

inequality. (p. 408?)

My disenchantment with the scientific method arose when, out

of curiosity, I read the seminal work of Capra (1975), a

quantum physicist, who drew parallels between the mysteries

of quantum mechanics and the mysticism of Eastern

philosophies. The Murphy Hall faculty who taught me

communication theory and methodology knew very little about

6

the implications of quantum mechanics on the social

sciences. They conveniently ignored systems theory and its

various outgrowths like the general systems theory, chaos

theory, and the complexity theory, as well as world systems

analysis (Wallerstein, 2004; Gunaratne, 2001a).

Because the hypotheses on wholes (like the universe or the

world) were almost impossible to test, they preferred to

research the parts. They were exponents of reductionism who

tossed the idea that the whole was more than the sum of its

parts into the domain of metaphysics.

For three decades after I earned my doctorate, I taught the

classical/American version of journalism and mass

communication to students in three countries—Australia,

Malaysia, and the United States—where I worked. I decided to

change course when I realized that the socio-cultural values

I learned as a child and youth in my country of birth were

noticeably absent from the Western models I learned in

America. As Wallerstein (2006) correctly points out, they

lacked universal universalism, which they confused with

7

Western universalism, a Trojan horse implanted by Western

scholars to confer the status of universalism on Western

thought in hopes of maintaining their supremacy over the

world academic order (Gunaratne, 2010b).

I decided to study Eastern philosophies—particularly

Buddhism, Hinduism, Daoism, and Confucianism—because Capra’s

(1975) work and those of his followers like Goswami (2000)

and Zukav (1979) made me conscious of my ignorance (avijja) of

Asian culture and religions. I felt that my doctoral

education would have been richer had I received directions

to explore the potential of Eastern philosophies (Gunaratne,

2004b; 2005b; 2009d) to enrich communication studies.

Further encouraged by the path-breaking work of Kincaid

(1987), I wrote my first book on communication theory, The

Dao of the Press: A Humanocentric Theory (Gunaratne, 2005a), 33

years after I got my doctorate. 4

Goswami (2000), a quantum physicist from Oregon, concluded

that quantum physics has dismantled the fundamental

principles of materialist-realist science: causal

8

determinism, continuity, locality, strong objectivity,

material monism and reductionism, and epiphenomenalism.

Backed by an array of such incontrovertible evidence, I

wrote The Dao of the Press in hopes of merging Eastern

philosophy and Western science to demonstrate the veracity

of diversity within unity.

In The Dao of the Press, I tried to explicate the Eastern view

of democracy, the congruence of quantum physics with Eastern

philosophy, the emerging theory of living systems, the

obvious West-centrism in the classic Four Theories of the Press,

the potential of linking Eastern philosophy with Western

science, and the connection between democracy and

journalism. Finally, I put together my own theory of

communication outlets and free expression as a substitute

for Four Theories of the Press (Gunaratne, 2005a). However, to my

dismay, I found only a mild interest, more a deafening

silence, among my colleagues in mass communication.

In a review published in JMCQ, Tom Bivins (2007) surmised

that I have advocated a more “humanocentric” theory

9

stressing the interdependence of living systems in place of

the “one-size-fits-all approach of Western democracy and its

concomitant press theories.” Although Bivins conceded that

my book had much to ponder, he complained that the reader

had to “wade through the often imponderable language and the

dense theoretical explication” (p. 634). Bivins’ analysis of

my book was fair. But by disparaging the Chinese yin-yang

metatheory as too simplistic, he revealed his allegiance to

the Trojan horse.

On the other hand, Christians et al. (2009) in their

exemplary inquiry on normative theories of the media,

conceded the Euro-centricity of the Four Theories and their

inadequacy to evaluate the press around the world. Quoting

my own text, they wrote that I had integrated “Western

epistemology with Eastern mysticism into a dynamic

humanocentric theory of communication outlets and free

expression to replace the static, deontic normative theories

of the press” (p. 14).

Purpose of Chapter

10

I started this chapter in the unusual manner of a

braggadocio to establish my credentials for writing on the

touchy subject of Western science and Eastern mysticism.

The purpose of this chapter is to elucidate how the putative

esoteric philosophies of the East, particularly Buddhism,

could be applied to improve the theory and methodology of

what is loosely called communication studies. My aim is to

de-Westernize our field of studies to establish universal

universalism, not to establish Asia-centrism (yin/anti-

particle) in place of West-centrism (yang/particle) but to

blend them where possible.

In short, I am engaged in helping Eastern philosophy to rise

up from its jaramarana (decay and death) stage in its

bhavacakra (wheel of becoming) so it could be reborn into its

next cycle of existence in samsara (cyclic existence).

First, I shall explain how the fundamental Buddhist doctrine

of dependent co-arising (Paticca Samuppada) could serve as a

rudimentary metatheoretical framework or paradigm to

determine the chain of factors/links (nidanas) instrumental

11

in causing/processing a particular phenomenon. Systems

characteristics are embedded in this theory. It asseverates

that nothing in the universe is independent.

Second, I shall elucidate how the application of the Noble

Eightfold Path (NEP), an essential part of the dynamics of

the Paticca Samuppada (PS) principle, could be applied to the

West-centric news paradigm currently in vogue to improve the

quality of journalism in the world.

Part A: Paticca Samuppada and Mediatization

Early Buddhism used the causal law outlined in the Paticca

Samuppada (PS) paradigm to explain every phenomenon, e.g.,

the evolution and dissolution of the world-process; natural

occurrences like drought, earthquakes, and cycle of plant

life; and the unfolding of human personality. They also

applied the same causal law to explain psychological

processes, as well as moral, social, and spiritual behavior.

Thus, past scholars have used the PS paradigm to unfold

processes well beyond the limits of spiritual behavior. In

my opinion, the PS paradigm and the Daoist Yijing paradigm

12

are the precursors of modern systems theory, although West-

centric scholarship has failed to acknowledge it. I believe

that the PS paradigm, together with the yin-yang principle

embodied in the Yijing paradigm, could provide the

architecture necessary to build a formidable metatheory to

derive hypotheses in all the sciences, as well as the

humanities, covering all three dimensions of Western

philosophy—epistemology, ontology, and axiology.

For the sake of word economy, I shall use the Sanskrit/Pali

terminology to refer to the key concepts borrowed from

Eastern philosophy because English lacks the ability to

capture the exact meaning of concepts such as dukkha (often

translated as suffering though it could also mean

disappointment, unsatisfactoriness, sorrow or any other

physical or mental affliction), anatta (often translated as

no-self or asoulity to convey the meaning that no living

being has a permanent soul), and anicca (often translated as

impermanence though it has the wider meaning of ongoing

change applicable to all physical, biological, and

psychological phenomena). These three concepts constitute

13

the ti-lakkhana (three marks of existence).

What is Paticca Samuppada?

The crux of Buddhist philosophy is the Four Noble Truths:

1. Dukkha: The truth of dukkha—that existence is

suffering.

2. Samudaya: The truth of the origin of dukkha—that avijja

(ignorance) and tanha (desire/craving) are the major

causes of suffering.

3. Nirodha: The truth of the cessation of dukkha—that a

path exists to eliminate suffering.

4. Magga: The truth of the path to liberation from dukkha—

that path is the Noble Eightfold Path.

Buddha did not intend these to be propositional truths. They

are experiential truths that every sentient being could find

out for itself. The term dukkha, in the above sense,

indicates a lack of perfection, a condition that never

measures up to anyone’s standards and expectations.

Concerning the quest for truth, Buddha told his followers:

14

“Do not believe religious teachings just because they

are claimed to be true, or even through the application

of various methods or techniques,” Buddha said. He

commended direct knowledge grounded in one's own

experience. He asked people to heed the words of the

wise but discouraged passive acceptance. He encouraged

constant questioning and personal testing to identify

the truth because such demonstration enables “you to

actually reduce your own stress or misery….” [Kalama Sutta in

the Anguttara Nikaya as summarized in Wikipedia (2013)].

The following paragraph summarizes the operational dynamics

of the 12 nidanas in the bhavacakra of a sentient being in its

repeated journey through samsara:

With ignorance (avijja) as a condition, formations

(sankhara) come to be; with formations as a condition,

consciousness (vinnana) comes to be; with consciousness as

a condition, name and form (nama-rupa) come to be; with

name and form as a condition, the six bases (salayatana)

come to be; with the six bases as a condition, contact

15

(phassa) comes to be; with contact as a condition,

feeling (vedana) comes to be; with feeling as a

condition, desire (tanha) comes to be; with desire as a

condition, clinging (upadana) comes to be; with clinging

as a condition, being (bhava) comes to be; with being as

a condition, birth (jati) comes to be; with birth as a

condition, aging and death (jara-marana) come to be. The

interaction of these 12 nidanas conditions a sentient

being’s sorrow and lamentation, pain, grief and despair—

this whole mass of suffering (dukkha). This is called the

Noble Truth of the origin of suffering.

As one can see, the preceding paragraph sums up an entire

living system/network bounded by samsara, the eternal cycle

of existence that accommodates the bhavacakra (wheel of

becoming) of all sentient beings. It succinctly explicates

the Buddhist theory of causality. The general definition of

the Pali term paticca samuppada is that everything arises in

dependence upon multiple causes and conditions; nothing

exists as a singular, independent entity. The term is also

16

rendered as dependent co-origination, conditioned genesis,

or conditioned co-production.

In its abstract form, the PS paradigm asserts: this being,

that becomes; from the arising of this, that arises; this

not being, that becomes not; from the ceasing of this, that

ceases.

The Theravada Buddhists (Tilakaratne, 2012) translated the

abstract into the concrete by applying the general principle

to the 12 nidanas (referred to as this and that), which

invariably engendered dukkha in sentient beings trapped in

samsara (“continuous flow”/ cyclic existence) because of

their karma (volitional actions). Buddhists believe that the

karma committed by a sentient being in its journey through

samsara largely conditions its level of dukkha engendered by

the mutual interaction, of the nidanas.

These nidanas denote the causal laws that operate in nature:

physical laws (utu-niyāma), biological laws (bīja- niyāma),

psychological laws (citta- niyāma), etc.

The bold italics in the numbered items listed below are the

Pali terms for the 12 nidanas as given in the Pali cannon.

17

The first five relates to the physical, biological, and

environmental influences on an embryo and its growth; the

next five are psychological factors that an organism could

control to increase or decrease its level of dukkha; and the

last two relates to the birth of an embryo and its

inevitable decay and death.

In the explication below, I have placed the co-arising

nidanas as a cluster of interconnected and interdependent

links, which continuously share feedback with one another

within the overarching boundaries of each living being’s own

bhavacakra (wheel of becoming) and the wider boundary of

samsara. (The operational definitions we attach to each of

the nidanas and the boundaries wherein they operate will

ultimately determine whether our research belongs to science

or scientism. In the following commentary on the component

nidanas of the PS network, I have indicated how one might

adapt or adjust each to investigate the causes, process and

effects of the mediatization/globalization phenomenon).

As explained, the PS paradigm takes us through a single

rotation of an organism’s bhavacakra. The rotation could

18

start at any of the nidanas comprising the wheel and continue

on to its next cycle. Buddha refuted the notion of a first

or last cause.

1. With avijja (ignorance of the globalization and

mediatization dynamics) as condition, saṅkhāra (fuzzy

mental fabrications about mediatization/globalization)

arise.

By avijja Buddha meant ignorance of the crux of Buddhist

philosophy expressed in the Four Noble Truths and the

dependent co-arising doctrine. By saṅkhāra Buddha meant the

form-creating faculty of the mind.

2. With saṅkhāra as condition, viññāṇa (mind/ six types of

consciousness/life force) arises.

The embryo/organism acquires the ability to experience

mediatization through the eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and

intellect.

3. With viññāṇa as condition, nāmarūpa (name and form)

arise.

19

After adding physical form (rūpa) to its four psychological

aggregates (skandha) —sensation, perception, mental

formations, and consciousness—the embryo/organism gets a

better sense of mediatization. The term nāmarūpa refers to

the constituent processes of the sentient being with nāma

standing for the psychological aggregates, and rūpa for the

physical form/matter.

Thus, the nidanas are not mutually exclusive because the

panca-skandha overlap with two nidanas already listed. The

Buddhist view is that mind and body are interdependent,

interconnected and interactive.

4. With nāmarūpa as condition, saḷāyatana (six sense gates

related to mediatization) arise.

The interaction of these two nidanas together with the

joint interaction of the preceding nidanas signifies the

infusion of the socio-cultural dimension into the

mediatization process of the embryo/individual/organism.

The sixfold saḷāyatana are the eye (vision), ear (hearing),

nose (olfaction), tongue (taste), skin (touch), and mind

(thought).

20

5. With saḷāyatana as condition, phassa/sparsa (actual and

nominal contacts) arises. Phassa occurs at the coming

together of the sense organ, the sense object and sense

consciousness.

Researchers could use the initial nidanas as approximations

to demarcate the expansion of the digital world, and other

forms of mediatization.

The next five co-arising nidanas— phassa, vedana, trsna,

upadana, and bhava—belong to the realm of psychology. In the

context of widespread prevalence of avijja, the five links

listed in this paragraph play a crucial role in conditioning

the effects of globalization/ mediatization on the

embryo/organism/individual.

6. With phassa as condition, vedanā (feelings/sensations

related to mediatization) arise. Pali literature mentions

some three to 108 types of vedana although Buddha

referred, in general, to three modes: sukha (pleasant),

dukkha (unpleasant), and atydukkham-asukhā (neutral).

Mediatization could engender six classes of vedana

associated with sight, sound, smell, taste, touch, and

21

thought. This is the equivalent of dukkha that an

individual must suffer through in his samsaric existence.

Mediatization has made it possible for people to have

access to information/matter that could vitiate their

morals and ethics, etc.

7. With vedana as condition, tanha (“thirst” for more

mediatized conveniences) arises.

Ignorance of the global architecture of mediatization

could increase the craving of the

embryo/organism/individual for more mediatization.

Moreover, it could become excessively selfish and

obsessed with ceaseless accumulation of profits with

little regard for ethics and morals. Kama-tanha (craving

for sensual objects), bhava-/tanha (craving to be) and

vibhava-tanha (craving not to be) could make the highly

mediatized system a hotbed of dukkha.

“Thirst” refers to the “craving or desire to hold onto

pleasurable experiences, to be separated from painful or

unpleasant experiences, and for neutral experiences or

feelings not to decline” (Wikipedia).

22

8. With tanha as condition, upādāna (clinging or

attachment to objects related to mediatization) arises.

Tanha and upādāna are the two primary nidanas for a

sentient being’s dukkha. Buddha identified four types of

upādāna: sense-pleasure, wrong-view, rites-and rituals,

and self-doctrine. Cessation of upādāna is vital to escape

dukkha in the wheel of mediatization and attain nirvana.

Information overload engendered by mediatization has

increased the level of dukkha in the globe.

9. With upādāna as condition, bhāva (becoming) arises.

The Buddhist interpretation of bhāva is the desire for

further life and sensation; it is the condition for the

arising of living beings in particular forms, through the

process of birth. Whereas saṅkhāra refers to tendencies

from past lives that act on the present, bhava refers to

the creation of new mediatization habits and karmic

tendencies that will come to fruition through future

experiences. In the nidana chain, tanha creates the “fuel”

23

for continued bhāva (burning or becoming). Mediatization

supplies much of this “fuel.”

10. With bhāva as condition, jati (birth) arises.

Buddhism acknowledges four forms of birth: from an egg

(reptiles, birds and fish), from a womb (mammals and some

worldly devas), from moisture (like maggots), and by

transformation/ miraculous materialization (like most

devas).

Mediatization, a product of embedded ignorance in the

Buddhist sense, has much to do with the desire of many

people to prolong their samsaric existence.

11. With jati as condition, jarāmarana (aging and dying)

arise.

Jarāmarana refers to the inevitable end-of-life suffering

of all beings prior to their punarbhava (rebirth in the

samsaric cycle).

Before we commence the next cycle again with avijja, we can

implicitly presume that the preceding cycle moved into a

24

new cycle where: With jarāmarana as condition, punarbhava

(re-becoming/rebirth) arises.

What is mediatization?

So far, we have used mediatization as an abstract term

embedded within the broader concept of globalization.

Western, particularly European, communication researchers

have recently shifted their interest from globalization to

mediatization. In the preceding explanation, I used the

terms mediatization and globalization as the logical substitutes

for bhavacakra (as inner boundary) and samsara (as outer

boundary), which encircle the network of the 12 nidanas and

oversee its operational dynamics.

I chose these two terms from a number of similar terms I

found in communications literature going back to more than a

half-century—urbanization, modernization, individualization,

commercialization, and informatization—for the reasons

explained below.

25

Modernization is a social evolution theory linked closely with

urbanization and industrialization. It signifies the

transition of an individual/ group/ society from traditional

to modern in the process of becoming urbanized, literate

media consumers with the ability to rationalize and

empathize (Lerner, 1958).

Informatization (johoka in Japanese), “in its broadest

definition, refers to the development, increase in, and

diffusion of information throughout society” (Ito, 2009, p.

315). Japanese communication scholars have used the term

since the 1960s. This concept absorbs the developments

related to the digital revolution, e.g., the Internet and

the World Wide Web, as well as the emergence of social

media, such as Facebook and Twitter. Globalization is a much

broader concept that emphasizes the role media and

communication technologies play in the “mediation” of the

processes of bringing the world closer. Although there is no

interdisciplinary agreement on what globalization means,

Gunaratne (2009a) asserts that it is a mere extension of the

Western theories of modernization and development intended

26

to perpetuate Western universalism. From the Buddhist point

of view, “globalization is an ongoing dynamic process

involving the entire environment in which humanity is only

one actor” (p. 60). Thus, just like samsara, globalization

is a never-ending circular process.

Mediatization, then, could be understood as an extraction of a

key component embedded in the complex globalization theory.

Therefore, mediatization (just like bhavacakra) co-arises

with globalization (just like samsara). They are

interconnected, interdependent and interactive as the

network overseers of the multi-nidana system. From the

perspective of Eastern systems thinking, we can immediately

see that globalization and mediatization have functioned as

co-arising nidanas resembling the yin-yang properties of the

Yijing paradigm (see Gunaratne, 2006b). Applying the PS

paradigm, we can hypothesize that:

With globalization as condition mediatization arises.

Thus, the PS metatheory enables the researcher to assess the

relative importance of the variables that constitute the

27

system to be investigated; to understand the mutual

causality of all components of the system; to be cautious of

research findings based on the independent-dependent

dichotomy of variables; to reject the use of the ceteris

paribus (other things remaining constant) ploy because

everything is in a state of flux (anicca); and to accept

systems thinking because all elements are interdependent,

interconnected, and interactive (as implied in the concept

of anatta).

By focusing on the nidanas in the PS metatheory, scholars

could identify the most important links/variables pertaining

to the rapid expansion of mediatization and hypothesize its

nonlinear effects. They would concede that measurability/

testability should not be the sole criterion for selecting

the nidanas considering that both material/physical and

psychological/mental nidanas are essential to explain the

operational dynamics of a living system at any hierarchical

level-–macro, meso, or micro. They would also concede that a

living system has no beginning or end because a system is an

ongoing process having the attributes of bhava (becoming),

28

jati (birth) and jaramarana (decay and death). Systems

thinking embedded in the PS paradigm would enable us to

select the hierarchical level we want to explore out of the

eight proposed by Miller (1978) in his theory of living

systems (Gunaratne, 2010a).

Scholars using the PS paradigm should be very careful about

the operational definitions they attach to the selected

variables. Do they stand up to universal universalism? Also,

do the definitions (in terms of ti-lakkhana) warrant their

replicability? Where quantitative studies are more likely

to fall into “scientism,” would a qualitative study be a

better choice?

Mediatization, as a review of related literature shows

(Finnemann, 2011), is a concept that “tries to capture long-

term interrelation processes between media change on the one

hand and social and cultural change on the other” (Hepp,

Hjarvard & Lundby, 2010: p. 223). Some scholars point out

that the media shape and frame the processes and discourse

of political communication, as well as the society in which

29

that communication takes place (Lilleker, 2008). Researchers

have focused on two strands: medium theory (e.g., Meyrowitz,

1995) and media effects (e.g., Rosengren, 1994).

Early communication researchers (e.g., Lerner, 1958; Rogers

& Svenning, 1969) associated the development of media as an

important aspect of modernization. However, the digital

revolution in the modern world has placed the communication

media over the power of other influential institutions

(Hjarvard, 2008). Some scholars have theorized that this

process of mediatization has caused the subordination of

institutions and whole societies to depend on mass media

(Mazzoleni & Schulz, 1999).

Mediatization has become more and more a core concept to

describe present and historical media and communicative

change: If media become part of “everything,” we can no

longer see them as a separate sphere but must develop an

understanding of how the increasing spread of media

communication changes our construction of culture and

society (ECREA, 2012). In such a perspective, mediatization

30

is used as a concept to describe the long-term process of

spreading different technical media and the linked

interrelations between media-communicative change and socio-

cultural change.

Krotz (2007) has suggested that the framework for empirical

work on mediatization and related variables should start

with the conceptualization of broad theories, which start

with “different forms of mediated communication” (e.g.,

mass, interpersonal, and interactive), rather than with a

single medium. Of particular interest to him are changes to

“the different fields of everyday life, culture and society”

at macro, meso, and micro levels.

If mediatization constitutes a global process of change,

scholars could locate where the inequalities and

dissimilarities of this process exist. Additionally, it can

be expected that mediatization is not the same everywhere.

Both differences and similarities are likely to occur

between cultures and nations in the process of

mediatization.

31

Thus, mediatization becomes part of comparative media and

communication research, both in a current and in an

historical perspective: We must think about what the (trans-) cultural

and (trans-) national differences are and how to compare them. Also there is a

need to do this in a postcolonial and non-western perspective. And, finally, there

is the challenge of doing comparative work to separate out different aspects of

mediatization.

The samsara and bhavacakra have no beginning or end. Each

nidana constituting the cycle could co-arise as the

conditional link (yang) or its complement/opposite (yin). The

yin could then co-arise as the yang with the next link as the

yin, and so on. Although the nidanas appear as a sequential

list, the process can start randomly from any link none of

which can be singled out as the first or the last. This is

because the cause becomes the effect and the next moment

that effect becomes the cause to produce another effect.

Although the chain of nidanas interacts in nonlinear fashion

to figure out each organism’s due share of dukkha, this chain

can only condition, not determine, the organism or individual

32

(Jayatilleke, 1974, p. 198). Also, because dukkha is the

hallmark of samsara, the only way to escape dukkha is by

attaining nirvana (state of non-existence). By substituting

mediatization (for bhavacakra) and globalization (for

samsara), researchers could develop insightful hypotheses.

Thus, Eastern philosophy offers a plausible platform to

build a metatheory of global mediatization. Mediatization

scholars could become the pioneers of merging and adapting

the philosophies of the Orient and the Occident by

incorporating the PS paradigm and the Chinese yin-yang

principle embedded in the Yijing (I-ching) paradigm as an

epistemologically sound foundation for improving medium

theory and designing effects studies (see Cheng, 1987;

Gunaratne, 2006b).

I submit that the original Buddhist PS paradigm built on the

foundation of the Yijing model would provide us the framework

of a powerful systems-oriented metatheory to analyze the

process of mediatization and other nidanas associated with it

33

in scholarly discourses on the velocity of globalization

(Gunaratne, 2008a, 2009a) and of mediatization.

By using the PS paradigm to do mediatization research,

scholars could improve on what we have already learned

through the three waves of West-centric systems theories

(e.g., structural functionalist, general systems and chaos,

and complex dynamical) to develop a plausible metatheory of

globalization /mediatization (Gunaratne, 2010b; Ray, 2012).

Because the PS paradigm encompasses all significant nidanas

through a single cycle of a living being’s existence

(punarbhava) in the bhavacakra/samsara, it alerts us to the

type of variables to look for in analyzing any process

within the eightfold hierarchical system that Miller (1978)

has outlined. Mediatization researchers could use the PS

paradigm as a guide to trace the history and effects of the

multi-faceted system of global mediatization.

Mediatization scholars could further fine-tune the PS

paradigm I have outlined to trace the impact of

34

mediatization on children, organizations, nations, and the

entire world-system.

They could implant the ingenious aspects of the Yijing

paradigm: e.g., the split of the One into yin and yang and

how they gave rise to the complex system of 64 hexagrams

that could explain the origin of any complex situation such

as that of mediatization. Mutual causality in the PS

paradigm, in which the cause-effect variables arise together

to produce nonlinear outcomes, operates in similar fashion.

Others could integrate Miller’s eightfold hierarchical

living system with the PS paradigm by demonstrating how the

operational dynamics of Miller’s concept of 20-subsystems

per system fits in with mutual causality (Gunaratne, 2010a).

The PS model provides a sound explanation of the natural law

of mutual causality to show that existence is dukkha. We

could apply the same hereditary/ psychological/

environmental links used in the PS paradigm to show that our

existence in a globalized and mediatized world also leads to

unavoidable dukkha (unsatisfactoriness/ disappointment).

Globalization, like the ineluctable Dao, is the one that

35

alternates between Wuji and Taiji balancing both unity and

diversity in the globe we inhabit. Thus globalization is an

endless process that goes back to the emergence of our globe

(Gunaratne, 2009a).

Benefits of PS paradigm

The PS paradigm warns the Western mediatization theorists

and social/behavioral scientists:

To recognize the distortions engendered by

disregarding the mutual interdependence of

variables. However, this requires a change in the

very nature of West-centric theory and methodology.

To recognize the distortions they engender by

disregarding the anicca (impermanence) concept.

Familiarity with Eastern philosophy would enable

them to drop the ceteres paribus ploy and heavy reliance

on linear models.

To recognize that operational definitions,

replication, or convergence cannot confer independent

status on any factor. Familiarity with the three

36

signs of existence—anicca (impermanence), anatta

(asoulity), and dukkha (unsatisfactoriness)—will warn

them to be wary of these ploys.

The need to challenge the view that science is

independent of philosophy and theology while

conferring scientific status on the Big Bang theory.

The need to understand the world/universe as a

network of systems, and to follow the innovative

procedures of sociocybernetics.

Mediatization scholars could collaborate with

sociocybernetics scholars, who are working on a new systems

approach, which focuses on interaction between living

systems and their environment. Sociocybernetics theories no

longer generate hypotheses about bivariate distributions

(Van der Zouwen & van Dijkum, 2001). Concurrently,

sociologists themselves have been experimenting with

artificial societies to study social emergence using multi-

agent systems (Sawyer, 2005).

37

Part B: Paticca Samuppada and News Paradigm

I shall now elucidate how we could extract 15 normative

principles from the Four Noble Truths that would change the

perception of news as a commodity to that of a social good.

The NEP, which constitutes the fourth Noble Truth, shows the

way out of samsara (cyclic existence) to attain nirvana

(state of nothingness). The PS paradigm illustrates the

operational dynamics of conditioning the bhavacakra of every

sentient being trapped in samsara, where dukkha never ceases.

The 12 nidanas, which are not mutually exclusive, have been

used in the past to explain many natural phenomena like

climatic change, water crisis, animal welfare, and the Asian

tsunami.

Principles/Goals of Buddhist Journalism

All branches of Buddhist philosophy—Hinayana, Mahayana, and

other offshoots—agree on the crux of Buddhism I have

reiterated in the preceding paragraph. Therefore, the 15

principles/goals of Buddhist-oriented journalism (BJ) I have

extracted from the crux of Buddhist thought should be

acceptable to all Buddhist communities in the world:

1. Concede that everything is subject to ongoing change

(anicca), the first of the three characteristic of

existence (ti-lakkhana), and assume the role of

constructive change agent rather than that of the

defender of the status quo.

2. Concede that asoulity (anatta) is the reality of

existence, and refrain from over-emphasizing

individualism, which has a causal link with egocentrism

(e.g., celebrity pitfalls). Focus more on cooperative

efforts highlighting mutual interdependence at

different levels— international/global, national, or

local.

3. Understand the reasons for the existence of dukkha

(unsatisfactoriness), and desist from using journalism

to knowingly promote attachment to tanha (desire).

4. Understand the significance of mutual causality for

journalistic interpretation and analysis. Refrain from

39

extensive use of linear cause-effect reasoning. Keep

in mind that feedback loops condition both “causes” and

“effects” and blur the conventional distinction between

the two. Therefore, analyze problems and solutions

within “articulated integration” (Macy, 1991, p. 185)—

the middle path between atomism and holism.

5. Advocate the need for humanity to work in harmony

with Nature, including all its flora and fauna, because

everything is functionally interrelated, and nothing is

entirely independent. “There is no aspect of ‘I’… that

is not conditioned or not interconnected with at least

something else” (Kasulis, 2005, pp. 398-400).

6. Discourage conspicuous consumption “since

consumption is merely a means to human well-being” and

our “aim should be to obtain the maximum of well-being

with the minimum of consumption” (Schumacher, 1973, pp.

47-48).

7. Follow the Middle Way, and avoid the extremes on any

issue. Journalism should convey the idea that people

40

mattered—the approach that Schumacher (1973) proposed

for economics more than three decades ago.

8. Follow the path of right understanding/view (samma

ditthi): the knowledge of the Four Noble Truths (that is,

the understanding of oneself as one really is).

“Buddhist’s intimacy orientation says I am moral when I

am most truly myself” (Kasulis, 2005: 301).

9. Follow the path of right thoughts/conceptions (samma

sankappa) in its threefold form: thoughts of

renunciation as opposed to those of sense pleasures;

kind thoughts as opposed to those of ill-will; and

thoughts of harmlessness as opposed to those of

cruelty. This involves a commitment to ethical and

mental self-improvement.

10. Follow the path of right speech (samma vaca):

abstinence from lying, divisive speech (e.g., biased

opinion writing), abusive speech (e.g., defamatory

writing), and idle chatter (e.g., gossip writing).

[However, Asanga, the fifth-century author of several

Mahayana texts, maintained that a Bodhisattva will lie

41

to protect others from death or mutilation (Harvey

2000, p. 139).]

11. Follow the path of right action (samma kammanta):

abstinence from taking life (e.g., harming sentient

beings intentionally), stealing (including robbery,

fraud, deceitfulness, and dishonesty), and sensual

misconduct. [Some Mahayana texts, e.g., Upāya-kausalya

Sūtra, justify killing a human being on the grounds of

compassion in dire circumstances” (Harvey 2000, p.

135). Similarly, a Bodhisattva may break the precepts

of stealing and celibacy on compassionate grounds].

12. Follow the path of right livelihood (samma ajiva)

by personally avoiding and discouraging others from

activities that may harm others (e.g., trade in deadly

weapons, trade in animals for slaughter, trade in

slavery, and trade in intoxicants and poisons). Some

may include public relations and advertising also as

harmful to the extent that they are seen “as

encouraging greed, hatred and delusion, or perverting

the truth” (Harvey, 2000, p. 188).

42

13. Follow the path of right effort (samma vayama),

which has four steps: the effort to (a) discard evil

that has already arisen, (b) prevent the arising of

unrisen evil, (c) develop the good that has already

arisen, and (d) promote the good that has not already

arisen.

14. Follow the path of right mindfulness (samma sati),

which has four foundations: reflection relating to the

body (kāya); feeling (vedanā)—repulsive, attractive, or

neutral; thought; and ideas (dhammā) pertaining to the

experienced phenomena. (Such reflection enables one to

overcome covetousness and discontent.)

15. Follow the path of right concentration (samma

samadhi), which consists of the attainment of the four

preliminary stages of contemplation, which culminate in

the development of unprejudiced perception or

equanimity with regard to what is perceived. (This is

also considered a middle standpoint in the way in which

we perceive ourselves in the world.)

43

Gunaratne (2009b) has explained in detail how he extracted

the 15 principles of Buddhist Journalism (BJ) from each of

the Four Noble Truths (elucidated in Part A in regard to

their relevance to build a nonlinear PS paradigm as a guide

to mediatization research). He drew the first three

principles from the first Noble Truth: that existence is

dukkha; the next three principles from the second and third

Noble Truths: that avijja and tanha are the major causes of

dukkha; and that a path exists to end dukkha). The last eight

principles came from the fourth Noble Truth: that NEP is the

path to liberate from dukkha.

American journalist Doug McGill (2008) says that a

journalism grounded in Buddhist morals is most likely to

produce (1) a journalism of healing because the goal of Buddhism

is achieving the end of “suffering,” which connotes many

facets of existence, and (2) a journalism of timely, truthful, and

helpful speech based on the NEP, which focuses on three

functionally interdependent areas for practice: paññā

(wisdom), sila (virtue or ethical conduct), and samādhi

(concentration or mental development).

44

The principles of journalism extracted from the paññā

component of the NEP (i.e., right understanding, and right

thoughts) attempt to ensure that a journalist is committed

to ethical and mental self-improvement. Wisdom means a

thorough understanding of the Four Noble Truths and their

operational dynamics explained in the PS paradigm.

The principles extracted from the sila component of the NEP

(i.e., right speech, right action, and right livelihood)

complement the moral code of the Decalogue.

The principles extracted from the samadhi component of the

NEP (i.e., right effort, right mindfulness, and right

concentration) show the emphasis Buddhism places on

meditation—a potent therapy for treating the communicative

pathologies of the modern lifeworld (Habermas, 1984).

Journalists trained in meditation are most likely to perform

better as practitioners of BJ.

BJ and Mainstream Journalism

Because BJ follows the middle path between capitalism and

socialism, a comparison and contrast of Buddhist

goals/principles with traits of the West-centric mainstream

45

news paradigm seems quite appropriate. Although goals are

normative while traits reflect performance with warts and all,

yet finding out the discrepancies between the two is

necessary to ascertain the strengths and weaknesses of the

current news paradigm because the society at large possesses

underlying but transformative beliefs and values, which

engender normative journalistic goals.

The three signs of existence—anicca (impermanence), anattā

(asoulity), and dukkha (suffering/sorrow)—imply that a

perfect journalism is not attainable. However, the Middle

Path points out the multiple pathways available to

practitioners to aim at reaching the ever-elusive

equifinality. One should note that the Buddhist approach

requires the journalists to improve (or purify) their minds

through the paths of paññā (wisdom) and samādhi (mental

development).i The presumption here is that journalists with

“impure” minds would produce “impure” journalism that would

increase dukkha (suffering/sorrow) no matter what awards

they receive.

Traits of Mainstream Journalism

46

Hoyer (2005) analyzed the mainstream news paradigm in terms

of five elements: the event, news value factors, the news

interview, the inverted pyramid, and journalistic

objectivity. For analytical convenience, we will

sequentially examine each of these elements in relation to

Buddhist goals.

The event: The mainstream paradigm thrives on “newsworthy”

events, which must fit the 24-hour news cycle (gradually

adopted by the wire services). News is ephemeral because an

event is not a fixed entity.

The news paradigm (Stensaas, 2005) and the Buddhist

perspective both recognize that news is anicca because

the elements of a “newsworthy” event change every

moment. The two approaches differ to the extent that

the news paradigm treats the event as a fixed entity

whereas the Buddhist approach sees it as a continuing

process, which becomes increasingly complex as it

reciprocally interacts with other factors.

47

News value factors: These are the criteria that journalists

apply to determine “newsworthiness” of events and processes.

Mencher (2006) lists eight news values: impact or importance

(the predominant factor), timeliness, prominence (of the

people involved), proximity (to the audience), conflict, the

unusual, currency (or the sudden interest people have on an

ongoing situation), and necessity (a situation the

journalist feels compelled to reveal).

The first factor, impact, relates to events that are likely

to affect many people. Mencher (2006) says, “The more people

that are affected by the event, the bigger the story” (p.

59). Although this criterion per se does not contradict

Buddhist goals, the doctrine of dependent co-arising

requires placing it in context with the other co-arising

factors. An event by itself is a news “atom” that does not

explain the ongoing interaction and interdependence of

relevant factors behind the event.

The second factor, timeliness, relates to events that are

immediate or recent. Mencher (2006) says that timeliness is

48

important in a democracy because the public has to react

quickly to the activities of their officials. Mencher adds

that timeliness is also important because “media are

commercial enterprises that sell space and time on the basis

if their ability to reach people quickly with a perishable

commodity” (p. 58). The Buddhist perspective sees news as a

social good, not as a commodity serving the profit-

maximizing desire of businesses. The Buddhist approach,

which is more concerned with process, does not see the need

for immediacy at the expense of accuracy and analysis of the

functional interaction of co-arising factors.

The third factor, prominence, pertains to events involving

well-known people or institutions. Mencher (2006) says,

“Names make news, goes the old adage, even when the event is

of little significance” (p. 59). Thus, mainstream journalism

is a journalism of personalities. This news value is

antithetical to Buddhist values, which see asoulity (anattā),

impermanence (anicca), and sorrow (dukkha) as the three marks

of existence. Personality journalism signifies individualism

49

or atomism, which breeds egocentrism and sorrow. [Note that

Islam, an Abrahamic religion, also has always considered

individualism as subordinate to the collective community

(Denny, 2005, p. 269)]

The fourth factor, proximity, relates to events that are

geographically or emotionally close to people. Emotional

closeness may arise from ties to religion, ethnicity or

race. Buddhadasa Bhikku’s view (cited in Sivaraksa, 2002, p.

58) that the entire cosmos is a cooperative is clearly

antithetical to proximity as a news value.

The fifth value, conflict, pertains to stories about “ordinary

people confronting the challenges of daily lives,”

“conflicts that divide people and groups,” or strife,

antagonisms, and warfare (Mencher, 2006, pp. 60-61).

Journalists have applied this news value to write narrative-

style features incorporating the three elements of drama:

man vs. man, man vs. self, and man vs. nature. The Buddhist

view on applying this criterion depends on the purpose of

the story. Event-oriented stories on violence, war, and

50

crime—news “atoms” based on conflict—are not an essential

part of Buddhist-oriented journalism. Buddhism holds that an

interdependent society should bear equal responsibility for

the social deviance of an individual whose existence has no

self (anattā). Therefore, reporting conflict-based stories

highlighting individuals is inappropriate. However, process

stories analyzing the co-arising factors for increase or

decrease in crime and violence may be appropriate for

society to take steps to rehabilitate wrongdoers.

The sixth value, the unusual, concerns events “that deviate

sharply from the expected,” or “that depart considerably

from the experiences of everyday life” (Mencher, 2006, p.

61). These include the bizarre, strange and wondrous.

Journalists have applied this news value to write brights,

sidebars, and features. The Buddhist perspective does not

approve the use of this value to project any person, group,

nation, or race in a negative light by deviating from the

path of right speech and resorting to idle chatter. Too much

emphasis on the unusual may mean a higher priority for event

51

reporting (news as a commodity) than for process reporting

(news as a social good).

The last two, currency and necessity, are more recent additions

to the repertoire of news values. When a long-simmering

situation “suddenly emerge as the subject of discussion”

(Mencher, 2006, p.61), the journalist applies the currency

news value to report that situation. The necessity news value

is applied when “the journalist feels it is necessary to

disclose something that s/he has discovered,” which is

essentially a “journalism of conscience” (Mencher, p. 62-

63). These two factors are compatible with the Buddhist

perspective when journalists write process-oriented news as

a social good without the intention (cetana) of deviating

from the eight paths subsumed under sila (virtue), samādhi

(mental development), and paññā (wisdom).

The preceding analysis leads us to the conclusion that:

Buddhist goals and mainstream news values/traits do not

see eye to eye in relation to three factors—prominence,

proximity, and the unusual; are ambiguous in relation

52

to three other factors—timeliness, impact, and

conflict; and are potentially compatible with the last

two factors—currency, and necessity.

The news interview: Schudson (2005) contends that the

journalistic interview was all but unknown in 1865, had

become a common reportorial activity in the 1870s and 1880s,

was widely practiced by 1900, and had turned into a mainstay

of American journalism by World War I. Other scholars claim

that the interview was introduced into tabloids by the 1830s

along with police reports. Today, the interview is used to

update news, as well as to provide multiple views on issues.

Mainstream journalism also uses the interview to create

human-interest stories and to give the hard copy a sense of

timeliness.

Buddhist goals do not encourage the interviews that

promote excessive individualism at the expense of the

collective good. Building up personalities through

journalistic interviews violates the truth of asoulity

linked with impermanence and sorrow. Interviews that

53

elicit group thinking are preferred. Follow the middle

path by not favoring specific sources for regular

attribution

The inverted pyramid: This structure of news writing was

another ploy to sell news as a more profitable commodity.

Some believe that its invention was inadvertent. During the

American Civil War, journalists were forced to file the

essential facts first because of the unreliability of the

telegraph facilities at the time. This practice became

formalized for almost a century later when many readers

showed a preference for the narrative style. Interpreting

this element of the news paradigm, we can conclude that:

Buddhist goals emphasize process reporting to explain

the mutual interaction of multiple factors. By

revealing the essence of the story first, the inverted

pyramid structure encourages people to consume news

very superficially and not read any further thereby

nullifying the purpose of process reporting.

54

Journalistic objectivity: Stensaas (2005) says that the notion of

objectivity is at the core of the mainstream news paradigm.

Objectivity became the shared professional norm of American

journalism in the 1920s (Schudson, 2005). Journalism tried

to achieve objectivity, inter alia, by using the interview to

present all sides of an issue; by conducting scientific

opinion polls on significant issues; by discouraging

reporters from injecting their opinion into their stories;

and by using computer assisted reporting to analyze and

interpret data related to numerous matters of public

interest. How does objectivity fit into a journalism based

on Buddhist values?

Because Buddhist epistemology asserts that the knower

(observer) and the known (observed) are interdependent,

“this causal interplay renders it impossible to claim

or prove an ultimate truth… Data gathering and

interpretation are not value free, but freighted with

emotional predispositions and cognitive preconceptions”

(Macy, 1991, p. 196).

55

Jayatilleke (1963) points out that in Buddhism

“verifiability is a test of truth but does not itself

constitute the truth.” Many truths in Buddhism “are

considered to lie midway between two extreme points of view”

(p. 359). The Buddhist theory of truth, as Jayatilleke

explains, makes it clear that truth and therefore knowledge

is “objective,” as telling us the nature of “things as they

are,” which consists of knowing “what exists as ‘existing’

and what does not exist as ‘not existing’” (p. 428). This is

the highest knowledge. What the Buddha meant by objective

knowledge was experiential knowledge that one could acquire

through concentration and mental development (samādhi) and

wisdom (paññā). This interpretation is far different from

the notions of objectivity and truth in the news paradigm.

Conclusion

A Buddhist-oriented journalism goes well beyond journalism

per se for the journalist must acquire the right

understanding about the functional interdependence and

interaction of mass media with all other social subsystems—

56

legal, economic, religious, educational, administrative,

political, etc. It is incumbent upon the journalist to make

journalism the right livelihood and follow the paths of

right action, and right speech. To do this, and to acquire

inner peace, the journalist must also improve his/her mind

through the paths of concentration and wisdom. The

journalist’s obligation is to promote social well being, not

the capital accumulation of conglomerate media. The existing

strands of journalism pay no attention to building the power

of the journalist’s mind, which cannot be done by

scholarship alone.

The BJ model, as outlined in this essay, provides a

normative model for those who aspire to elevate news from a

commodity to a social good. BJ is incompatible with

advertising-dependence but cyberspace offers it a fertile

ground for goal implementation intended to circumvent

dukkha. The focus of the putative Buddhist newspapers, as

it has been since 1880s when the theosophists kick-started

engaged Buddhism in Japan and Sri Lanka, continues to be on

57

Buddhism and related activities rather than on the

application of process journalism to explain the mutual

causality of co-arising factors related to various phenomena

over time.ii Because of the belief in mutual

interdependence, Buddhism holds both the individual and the

society responsible for an individual’s deviance. It prefers

rehabilitation of the deviant rather than imprisonment and

execution. Thus violence, war, crime, and punishment are not

newsworthy from the perspective of Buddhist philosophy

although explaining these phenomena, as a mutually

interacting process is permissible. It does not pass

judgment on the Occidental news paradigm, which may continue

with event-oriented reporting, as a functionally

interdependent category (or shade) of the continuum of

journalism

BJ cannot depend on revenue from advertising, which is

instrumental in increasing tanhā (craving) and other nidānas,

which are linked to dukkha (suffering/sorrow). Therefore, it

cannot thrive as a competitive private enterprise. It can

58

succeed only as a community enterprise supported by ordinary

people, global civil society, and foundations committed to

Buddhist values. In short, BJ must move on to situate

itself within the framework of interdependence (or no-self),

a vital aspect of Oriental cosmology,

Buddhist nations should be the trailblazers of a Buddhist-

oriented journalism although the “new” Buddhists in the West

have shown a greater interest in using cyberspace, as well

as newspapers, to promote Buddhist views (cf. McGill, 2008).

The state (in Buddhist countries, such as Sri Lanka,

Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand, and Vietnam) could

support BJ through a modest tax specified for the purpose.

Engaged Buddhists, like those in the Fo Guang Shan movement

in Taiwan (Berkson, 2005), can play a major role in

elevating the existing form of BJ to the level of process

reporting. Inasmuch as mutual interdependence is a

verifiable fact, BJ would be an interdependent, rather than

an independent journalism. It would take the Middle Path,

following neither the authoritarian nor the libertarian

59

proclivities. Because diversity and unity are complementary

(as illustrated in the Yijing model of 64 hexagrams),

mainstream journalism should accommodate and support the

practice of BJ.

Adherence to Buddhist goals does not make it a religious

journalism for its allegiance is only to the Buddhist

philosophy. Anyone from any religion could do BJ to promote

the collective good, not individualism or vanity of

celebrities. Its supreme purpose is to create a healthy

environment for all living beings who could live in harmony

with Nature because everything grows together in the manner

of a web (Galtung, Jacobsen, & Brand-Jacobsen, 2000, p. 82).

It cannot be the purveyor of titillating news intended to

arouse the darker side of human beings. Ethical action is

much more important than legal justification as required by

right action, right speech, and right livelihood—paths that

receive endorsement from the Decalogue as well. Last, but

not the least, the purification of human character is more

important than “a multiplication of wants”(Schumacher, 1973,

60

p. 46). The “new” American Buddhists are striking a careful

balance between meditational training and political activism

(Prebish & Tanaka, 1998). Buddhist journalists, both in the

Orient and the Occident, can do the same.

P.S.: The author first presented his ideas on BJ in a speech

at the University of Queensland on March 7, 2006 (Gunaratne,

2009b; 2012). The Asian Buddhist Communication Network

(ABCN) was formed informally in 2012 with the backing of

AMIC in Singapore. ABCN describes itself as “a regional,

non-governmental, non-profit and multi-ethnic organization

devoted to promoting Buddhist ideas, attitudes and cultural

exchanges between Buddhist nations of Asia through media and

other communication channels.”

Author’s Contributions

A comprehensive list of the author’s contributions to de-

Westernize communication theory (1998-2013):

61

Gunaratne, S.A. (1998). Old wine in a new bottle: Public

journalism, developmental journalism, and social

responsibility. In M.E. Roloff (Ed.), Communication

Yearbook, 21 (pp. 277-321). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Gunaratne, S. A. (Ed). (2000). Handbook of the Media in Asia. New

Delhi: Sage.

Gunaratne, S. A. (2001a). Prospects and limitations of world

systems theory for media analysis: The case of Middle

East and North Africa. Gazette 63. 2/3, 121-148.

Gunaratne, S. A. (2001b). Convergence: Informatization,

world system and developing countries. In W. B.

Gudykunst (Ed.) Communication Yearbook 25 (pp. 153-199).

Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Gunaratne, S.A. (2001c). Paper, printing, and the printing

press: A horizontally integrative macro history

analysis. Gazette, 63. 6, 459-479.

62

Gunaratne, S.A. (2002). An evolving triadic world: A

theoretical framework for global communication

research. Journal of World-Systems Research, 8, 3. 329-365.

Gunaratne, S. A. (2003a). Freedom of the press in Asia. In

D. H. Johnston (Ed.), Encyclopedia of International Media and

Communications (Vol. 2. pp. 117-125). San Diego:

Academic Press.

Gunaratne, S. A. (2003b). Status of media in Pakistan and

Bangladesh. In D. H. Johnston (Ed.), Encyclopedia of

International Media and Communications (Vol. 3. pp. 425-438).

San Diego: Academic Press.

Gunaratne, S.A. (2003c). Proto-Indo-European expansion, rise

of English, and the international language order: A

humanocentric analysis. International Journal of the Sociology of

Language, issue 164, 1-32.

Gunaratne, S.A. (2003d). Thank you Newton, welcome

Prigogine: ‘Unthinking’ old paradigms and embracing new

directions. Part 1: Theoretical distinctions.

63

Communications The European Journal of Communication Research, 28.

4, 435-455.

Gunaratne, S.A. (2004a). Thank you Newton, welcome

Prigogine: ‘Unthinking’ old paradigms and embracing new

directions. Part 2: The pragmatics. Communications The

European Journal of Communication Research, 29, 1, 113-132.

Gunaratne, S.A. (2004b). A Daoist perspective of normative

media practice (profile interview by Eric Loo). Asia

Pacific Media Educator, Issue 15, pp. 213-219

Gunaratne, S.A. (2005a). The Dao of the Press: A Humanocentric

Theory. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.

Gunaratne, S.A. (2005b). Asian philosophies and

authoritarian press practice: A remarkable

contradiction. Javnost—the Public, 12. 2, 3.38.

Gunaratne, S.A. (2005c). Public diplomacy, global

communication and world order: An analysis based on

theory of living systems. Current Sociology, 53. 4, 749-772.

64

Gunaratne, S.A. (2006a). Public sphere and communicative

rationality: Interrogating Habermas’s Eurocentrism.

Journalism & Communication Monographs, 8. 2, 94-156.

Gunaratne, S.A. (2006b). A Yijing view of world-system and

democracy. Journal of Chinese Philosophy, 33. 2, 191-211.

Gunaratne, S.A. (2006c). Triadization. In M. Bevir, ed.,

Encyclopedia of Governance (Vol. 2, pp.989-990). Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage.

Gunaratne, S.A. (2007a). Let many journalisms bloom:

Cosmology, Orientalism, and freedom. China Media Research,

3. 4, 60-73.

Gunaratne, S.A. (2007b). Systems approaches and

communication research: The age of entropy.

Communications: The European Journal of Communication Research, 32,

1, 79-96.

65

Gunaratne, S.A. (2007c). World-system as a dissipative

structure: A macro-model to do communication research.

The Journal of International Communication, 13.1, 11-38.

 Gunaratne, S.A. (2008a). Falsifying two Asian paradigms and

de-Westernizing science. Communication, Culture & Critique,

1.1, 72-85.

Gunaratne, (S.A. 2008b). Understanding systems theory:

Transition from equilibrium to entropy. Asian Journal of

Communication, 18. 3, 175-192.

Gunaratne, S.A. (2009a). Globalization: A non-Western

perspective. Communication, Culture & Critique, 2. 1, 60-82.

Gunaratne, S.A. (2009b). Buddhist goals of journalism and

the ‘News Paradigm.’ Javnost—the Public, 16. 2, 5-24.

Gunaratne, S.A. (2009c). Emerging global divides in media

and communication theory: European universalism versus

non-Western reactions. Asian Journal of Communication, 19. 4,

366-383. (Revised and reprinted in Wang, 2011.)

66

Gunaratne, S.A. (2009d). Asian communication theory. In

S.W. Littlejohn & K. A. Foss (Eds.) Encyclopedia of

Communication Theory (Vol. 1, pp. 47- 52). Los Angeles:

Sage.

Gunaratne, S.A. (2010a). Determining the scope of

‘International’ Communication: A (living) systems

approach. In G.J. Golan, T.J. Johnson, & W. Wanta

(Eds.), International Media Communication in a Global Age (pp.

36-70). New York: Routledge.

Gunaratne, S.A. (2010b). De-Westernizing communication

science research: Opportunities and limitations. Media,

Culture & Society, 32. 3, 473-500.

Gunaratne, S.A. (2011). Emerging global divides in media and

communication theory: European universalism versus non-

Western reactions. In G. Wang (Ed.), De-Westernizing

Communication Research: Altering Questions and Changing Frameworks

(pp. 28-49). London and New York: Routledge.

67

Gunaratne, S.A. (2012). From Village Boy to Global Citizen (Vol. 1): The

Life Journey of a Journalist. Bloomington, IN: Xlibris.

Gunaratne, S.A. (2013). Go East young man: Seek wisdom from

Laozi and Buddha on how to metatheorize mediatization.

Journal of Multicultural Discourses, 8. 3, 165-181.

References

Berkson, M. 2005. Trajectories of Chinese Religious Ethics.

In W. Schweiker (Ed.), The Blackwell Companion to Religious

Ethics, (pp. 305-405). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

Bivins, T. (2009). A review of The Dao of the Press: A

Humanocentric Theory. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly,

84. 3, 633-635.

Capra, F. (1975). The Tao of Physics: An Exploration of the Parallels

Between Modern Physics and Eastern Mysticism. Boston:

Shambhala.

Cheng, C-Y. (1987). Chinese philosophy and contemporary

human communication theory. In D. L. Kincaid (Ed.),

68

Communication Theory: Eastern and Western Perspectives (pp. 23-

43). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Christians, C.G.; Glasser, T.L.; McQuail, D.; Nordenstreng,

K.; & White, R.A. (2009). Normative Theories of the Media:

Journalism in Democratic Societies. Urbana, IL: University of

Illinois Press.

Clarke, J.J. (1997). Oriental enlightenment: The encounter between

Asian and Western thought. London and New York: Routledge.

Denny, F.M. (2005). Muslim ethical trajectories in the

contemporary period. In W. Schweiker (Ed.), The Blackwell

companion to religious ethics (pp. 268-277). Malden, MA:

Blackwell Publishing.

ECREA (2012). Mediatization in transcultural and

transnational perspectives. The workshop of the

European Communication Research and Education

Association Temporary Working Group ‘Mediatization,’

held at Goldsmiths, University of London, 30-31 March

2012. Available at http://www.mediatization.eu

69

Finnemann, N. O. (2011). Mediatization theory and digital

media. Communications: The European Journal of Communication

Research, 36. 1, 67-89.

Galtung, J., Jacobsen, C.G. & Brand-Jacobsen, K.F. (2000).

Searching for Peace: The Road to TRANSCEND. London: Pluto

Press.

Goswami, A. (2000). The Visionary Window: A Quantum

Physicists Guide to Enlightenment. Wheaton, IL: Quest

Books.

Habermas, J. (1984). The Theory of Communicative Action. Reason and

the Rationalization of Society (T. McCarthy, Trans., Vol.1).

Boston: Beacon Press. (Original work published in

German in 1981.)

Hall, E. T. (1966). The Hidden Dimension. Garden City, NY:

Doubleday.

Harvey, P. (2000). An Introduction to Buddhist Ethics. Cambridge,

UK: Cambridge University Press.

70

Hayek, F.A. (1942). Scientism and the study of society (Part

1). Economica, New Series 9: 35, 267-291.

Hepp, A.; Hjarvard, S. & Lundby, K. (2010). Mediatization—

empirical perspectives: An introduction to a special

issue. Communications: The European Journal of Communication

Research, 35. 1, 223-228.

Hjarvard, S. (2008). The mediatization of religion: A theory

of the media as agents of religious change. Northern

Lights: Film & Media Studies Yearbook, 6. 1, 9-26.

Hoyer, S. (2005). The idea of the book: Introduction. In S.

Hoyer & H. Pöttker (Eds.), Diffusion of the news paradigm 1850-

2000 (pp. 9-16). Göteborg: Nordicom.

Ito, Y. (2009). Informatization. In S.W. Littlejohn & K.A.

Ross (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Communication Theory (Vol. 1,

pp. 513-515). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Jayatilleke, K.N. (1963). Early Buddhist Theory of Knowledge.

London: George Allen & Unwin.

71

Jayatilleke, K. N. (1974). The Message of the Buddha. New York:

The Free Press.

Kalupahana, D.J. (1995). Ethics in Early Buddhism. Honolulu:

University of Hawaii Press.

Kasulis, T.P. (2005). Cultural differentiation in Buddhist

ethics. In W. Schweiker (Ed.), The Blackwell Companion to

Religious Ethics (pp. 297-311). Malden, MA: Blackwell

Publishing.

Kincaid, D.L. (Ed.) (1987). Communication Theory: Eastern and

Western Perspectives. San Diego, CA: Academic Press

Krotz, F. (2007). The meta-process of `mediatization' as a

conceptual frame, Global Media and Communication, 3.3, 256-

260. 

Lerner, D. (1958). The Passing of Traditional Society: Modernizing the

Middle East. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press.

Lilleker, D. (2008). Key Concepts in Political Communications. London:

SAGE.

72

Macy, J. (1991). Mutual Causality in Buddhism and General Systems

Theory: The Dharma of Natural Systems. Albany, NY: State

University of New York Press,

Mazzoleni, G., & Schulz, W. (1999). ‘Mediatization’ of

politics: A challenge for democracy? Political Communication,

16.3, 247-261.

McGill, D. (2008, February 20). The Buddha, the Dhamma, and

the media. The McGill Report

<http://www.journalismbuddhism.org/> accessed on

January 13, 2009.

Mencher, M. (2006). News Reporting and Writing (10th ed.). New

York: McGraw Hill.

Meyrowitz, J. (1995). Medium Theory. In D.J. Crowley, & D.

Mitchel (Eds.), Communication Theory Today (pp. 50-77).

Cambridge: Polity Press.

Miller, J. G. (1978). Living Systems. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Prebish, C.S. & Tanaka, K.K., (Eds.) (1998). The Faces of

Buddhism in America. Berkeley, CA: University of

California Press.

73

Ray, T. (2012). To de-Westernize, yes, but with a critical

edge: A response to Gunaratne and others. Media, Culture &

Society, 34. 2, 238-249.

Rogers, E. M., & Svenning, L. (1969). Modernization among

Peasants: The Impact of Communication. New York: Holt,

Rinehart & Winston.

Rosengren, K. E. (Ed.). (1994). Media Effects and Beyond: Culture,

Socialization, and Lifestyles. London: Routledge.

Schudson, M. (2005). The emergence of objectivity norm in

American journalism. In S. Hoyer & H. Pöttker (Eds.),

Diffusion of the News Paradigm 1850-2000 (pp. 19-35). Göteborg:

Nordicom.

Schumacher, E.F. (1973). Small is Beautiful: A Study of Economics as if

People Mattered. London: Blond & Briggs Ltd.

Sivaraksa, S. (2002). Economic aspects of social and

environmental violence from a Buddhist perspective.

Buddhist-Christian Studies, 22, 47-60.

Stensaas, H.S. (2005). The rise of the news paradigm: A

review of the scientific literature. In S. Hoyer & H.

74

Pöttker (Eds.), Diffusion of the News Paradigm 1850-2000 (pp.

37-49). Göteborg: Nordicom.

Sawyer, R. K. (2005). Social Emergence: Societies in Complex Systems.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Tilakaratne, A. (2012). Theravada Buddhism: The View of the

Elders. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press. Project

MUSE. Web. 4 Dec. 2012. <http://muse.jhu.edu/>.

Van Der Zouwen, J. & Van Dijkum, C. (2001). Towards a

methodology of the empirical testing of complex social

cybernetic models. In F. Geyer & J, Van Der Zouwen

(Eds.). Sociocybernetics: Complexity, Autopoiesis and Observations of

Social Systems (pp. 223-240). Westport, CT: Greenwood

Press.

Wallerstein, I. (2004). World-Systems Analysis: An Introduction.

Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Wallerstein, I. (2006). European Universalism: The Rhetoric of Power.

New York: The New Press.

75

Westbroek, P. (2004). Gaia, Ockham’s razor and the science

of complexity. World Futures, 60. 5/6, 407-420.

Zukav, G. (1979). The Dancing Wu Li Masters: An Overview of the New

Physics. New York: William Morrow & Co.

76

i Clarke (1997) points out that in recent years meditation has become popular as a

psycho-physiological therapy both at the professional and popular levels. He cites

Gestalt theorists Claudio Naranjo and Robert Ornstein who say, “Oriental meditation

techniques give importance to psycho-physiological factors and to the experience of

everyday sounds, images, movements, and bodily functions” (p. 161).

ii Some examples are Budusarana, a Sinhala weekly (with random articles in English

and Tamil) published in Colombo by Sri Lanka’s state-owned newspaper company; Merit

Times, a daily published in Chinese (in Taiwan) and English (in California) by Fo

Guang Shan Buddhist Order and the Buddha's Light International Association in

collaboration with the Chinese Daily News; and several U.S. publications—the quarterly

Tricycle: The Buddhist Review: the bimonthly Shambhala Sun, and Turning Wheel, the journal of

the Buddhist Peace Fellowship. The Merit Times does not publish news about violence,

war, accidents, and the like; it focuses on Buddhism related events, and

interesting events that occur around the world.