Individualism and collectivism are concepts that are expressed differently in various cultural traditions. Individualism is mainly expressed in the West, while collectivism in the East. Both approaches attribute their roots to religious and philosophical thoughts that have evolved over time in these regions of the world.

The Western Approach

Most Westerners based this belief on Greek philosophy and Judeo- Christianity. In the Bible an emphasis is placed on the significant roles of spiritual leaders and their vertical relationship with God. Some of these figures are Moses, Abraham, Noah of the Old Testament, John the Baptist, Mary and the twelve Disciples (later apostles) in the New Testament.

The views expressed of their societies were not flattering. Egypt that held Israelites in bondage was seen as a pariah. Sodom and Gomorrah was reduced to rubble. Pharisees and Sadducees were engaged in debates that attempted to justify their social structure. Many societies were depicted worshiping man-made idols, false gods and images. It would take an omnipotent and omniscient God and his appointed to endeavor to set things straight.

Concerning the true meaning of life and the role of the mass media and an individual’s relationship to God, some prominent individuals focus on the imperative of Divine truth in the scheme of all things. Such a religious leader of Catholic persuasion was Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274).

The mass media could provide hope for individuals. Many stories could focus on how citizens in a democracy are capable of rising to their fullest potential in a secular world. Still relevant today are the critical ideas expressed by the French aristocrat Alexis De Tocqueville (1805-1859) on democracy and the American experience (Mayer 1988).

In the West journalists emphasize “objectivity” in news coverage. This evolution resulted from the combination of two Schools of Thought: 1) Those philosophers that believe that knowledge could be acquired without experience and 2) Empiricists that implicitly subscribe to the basis of their knowledge on observation borrowed from the natural and physical sciences. Using a “dialectic approach” journalists try to present both sides of a story leaving the reader or viewer to draw his own conclusions. The American public has become accustomed to opinion polls during electoral and other processes.

On the other hand editorials are free to express their opinions. They argue for a particular point of view that is supported by facts and analysis. These mainly come from the ranks of seasoned journalists with many years of professional experience. They are media specialists i.e. of science, business, politics, etc. These are respected in the editorial pages for their incisive analyses. Editorialists consider their positions to be pearls in the journalism field.

In the mass media the love of freedoms inherent in a democracy come through loud and clear. At the present time there are continual debates by many individuals that are bent on exploring or restraining the limits of those freedoms. Such explorations would always call for challenges in America’s democratic Republic.

With freedoms there could be no absolutes. With limitations all freedoms have to be viewed in a cultural context. In times of war and terrorism the

1st Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of a religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

of abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of people peaceable to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

U.S. Const. Amend. I (1791)

is tempered by national security interests. Since 9/11, London’s bombings of 7/7 and the ongoing war in Iraq, many around the world would attest to the fear of potential terrorists’ attacks. These incidents had grave effects on the travel and tourism industries. Today at airports passengers are subject to searches and having their luggage screened. At one time, not even liquids, gels and shaving cream were allowed on planes. Such developments impacted the way stories are covered.

Should Middle Eastern males be subject to further searches because of their ethnicity? Should they be perceived as potential threats although they are American or British citizens? Through the media Western audiences became well aware of origin of the individuals from Britain in connection with their attempted August 2006 to blow up some 10 aircrafts bound from England to the United States.

The Federal Communications Act of 1934 provides provisions for censorship of programs that are unsuitable for audiences that are at risk. Some parents are also concerned about their freedoms inherent in the communication any Internet user experiences. Children are viewed as particularly vulnerable and ought to be protected.

However, as we examine our social environment, the adage of “love your neighbor as yourself’ still rings true, but is missing. Political parties bicker. Democrats and Republicans have their own agendas and often root causes are overlooked on health care, immigration, the war in Iraq and inflation. Simple explanations are emphasized. Root causes are not addressed because they are unpopular. No one wins votes by them.

Spirituality is always a double-edged sword. Where there is good evil always lurks. Journalists have to be committed to counter it. Past experience shows that this is never easy. Nothing could be taken for granted. Should an American question the necessity of the Patriot Act? Some might say that by so doing an American is unpatriotic. They argue that America is at war. Does such an Act fit our present circumstances by having sweeping effects on our liberties?

TV viewers are bombarded with pictures and arguments for the battle of our minds. Viewers saw graphic footage of the war in Palestine between Israel and Hamas. On TV programs they witnessed rockets and bombing raids by Israel against Hezbollah. With a rising body count and destruction the nations of the world scrambled to make deals for peace.

Although a peace was brokered there have been violations of Lebanon’s airspace by Israel. The Middle East continues as the 21st century’s battleground for atrocities in the fight for democratic processes.

Western-Profit Motives

In an individualistic society of the West the profit motive is glorified. Advertising, situation comedies and even news stories and documentaries show the extent the major networks like ABC, CBS, NBC and CNN go to make profits. Through scientific research techniques, gratuitous sex and violence between individuals are promoted to entice audiences to gain the type of ratings advertisers like. The core of the mass communications industry is a multi-billion-dollar-per-year enterprise. Print, the electronic media and the Internet especially the tabloids tend to pander to the lowest common denominator.

The messages in the media are worrisome. In many American companies profit motives are their main priority. Americans are entrusted with the responsibility to love and care for their various sectors as guardians. Reports of studies of environmentalists show that there are ever great concerns about the ozone layer, water and air pollutants, the chemicals used in our foods, the trees in our forests and the dwindling of our fish and animal populations. “We are not alone.” There has to be some realistic balance. What will be our legacy for our children? Are we going to be the cause of our own demise? Some prophets of doom feel so. We are blessed with the necessary tools to turn these doomsday scenarios around before it is too late. Are the mass media in cahoots with negative developments? After all they receive advertising dollars from some corporations that are seen as the culprits that are not doing enough.

The Eastern Approach

In the East “collectivism” is more emphasized. The ancient Chinese philosopher Confucius recognized a hierarchal structure (Kipfer 2001). In the West everyone is thought of as being equal. In the 1800s this only referred to white males. This concept has radically changed over time. The Bible and the American constitution support the notion of equality of all persons.

With Confucius the harmony of all individuals in a society was stressed. Persons are viewed as different players of instruments like in an orchestra. Each person like an instrument would have a specific role. Confucius believed that it was in a citizen’s interest to realize this. By so doing a citizen would understand his role in society.

In this “collectivist approach” competitiveness is not stressed. There is nothing that says, “Be first.” “Pull yourself up by your bootstraps.” “I can make it to the top.” It might say, “ Be the best you can in your team.” A worker would simply see himself as a team player whose motivations were shaped by the group. This “group think” mentality is largely responsible for the success of the Japanese automobile industry and their other technological fields.

Generally speaking, Chinese citizens whose lives depend on the State are most concerned in achieving State goals. Such incentives lead to workers toiling long hours without extra compensation. The State is viewed as supreme in their lives. Western critics raise opposition to such conditions. Orwell, in his classic book 1984, provides an exposition of how such control would have devastating
consequences on societies.

Orwell’s paradigm has much to say about government’s intrusion in the personal lives of citizens. This is a major problem in a collectivist society where institutions and companies are government-owned and controlled. What news and information citizens receive are censored by their governments to reflect the government’s party views and State goals. To put it another way news, information and directives are managed. Such State policies could be best summed up as “the ends justifying the means.”

In such cultures some form of Marxism exist with a blend of democratic principles. Such societies claim that ideologically they are adherents to social democratic values or some variation of it. Such is the case of Russia today.

Unlike a democracy Marxism like in Cuba would look at the relationship of class distinctions in an economic context as being paramount in State policies. Social democracy then would embody democratic principles in combination of a Marxist approach that their proponents hope would better reflect the economic, cultural and social goals of their nations.

There has to be a balance between the “individualistic” and the “collectivist” approach. It would not be prudent to simply dismiss one system in favor of another.

In instances the emphasis on the individual would be necessary. In a Rwanda genocide story of 1994, it took individuals from the Red Cross and journalists that were willing to remain behind to bring the world the atrocities that pervaded that nation. This they did this at their own risk. The United States and the European governments and UNESCO were not going to be further involved.

In other situations, teamwork is important. “Individuality” could be a necessary bedfellow with “collectivity.” One important consideration is when best and under what conditions must such an approach’ be used? There would never be an orchestra that stressed playing as one likes. It would be chaos. For a journalist or individual, it would best be to determine what is productive as opposed to what is destructive.