981418

Critical Review ʻPower and Interdependence in the Information Ageʼ - Keohane &

Nye

Keohane and Nye define ʻcomplex interdependenceʼ as the reciprocal effects among

actors as a result from ʻinternational transactions: flows of money, goods, people and

messages across international boundaries.ʼ (Keohane & Nye, 1989, pp.8-9). So in the

concept of interdependence it creates a ʻstate of affairs where what one actor does

impinges directly upon other nationsʼ (Rosecrance, 1977, p.426)

This essay will argue against the solely neoliberal institutionalist approach used by the

authors first, on the claim that the basis of institutionalization in neoliberalism does not

hold in the Information Age. Secondly, this essay will question Keohaneʼs and Nyeʼs claim

that the creation of informational content and technologies lies primarily in the Western

world. By showing that their facts and ideas are outdated today this essay will show a

bigger spread of informational influence outside the Western world. And last, this essay will

critique the democratic advantages states are claimed to have in the Information Age

according to Keohane and Nye and offer an assessment of globalization through their

article.

The assumptions Keohane and Nye make about the Information Age and power relations

in modern times are still heavily based on neoliberal theories. Main focus remains the

institutionalization in international relations. However, as Rogerson explains:

GATT has been considered the institutionalization of a trade … regime. But, as of

yet, there is no similar institutionalization of information. In fact, many
organizations … claim a stake in these issues. (2000, p.419)
So it is questionable to what extent institutionalization - and thus neoliberalism - can

actually be applied to information and the Information Age, since only one institution is

seen as an ʻinstitutionalization of informationʼ.

1
981418

Now anyone with a computer can be a desktop publisher, and anyone with a
modem can communicate with distant parts of the globe at a trivial cost. Earlier
transnational flows were heavily controlled by large bureaucracies like multinational
corporationsʼ (Keohane and Nye, 1998, p.83)
and institutions. Since ʻinformation transmission has opened the field to loosely structured

network organizations and even individuals.ʼ (p.83) the need for formal institutions has

clearly diminished.

Secondly, Keohane and Nye view the informational technologies and content as primarily

based in the West. But the sheer fact that ʻthe number of Internet users in the country

[China] reached about 253 million last month, putting it ahead of the United States as the

worldʼs biggest Internet market.ʼ (Barboza in New York Times, July 26 2008) points us in

another direction. It is not so surprising that many of Keohaneʼs and Nyeʼs analyses do not

hold these days, since their article is already 10 years old. Major actors like Google can

not have been taken into account in this article, for they only ʻbrought Google to life in

September 2008ʼ (Google Corporate Information, on December 5 2008).

Keohane and Nye expect ʻthe dominant American market share in films and television

programs in world markets … to continue.ʼ (1998, p.88) However, when we look at the

exact numbers again ʻin 2001, a total of 1,031 films were made in India, compared to 739

in Hollywoodʼ (Blackwell, 2004, p.156). So, if the number of movies made in India already

exceeds the number of movies made in Hollywood, the total amount will be even more

convincing when we also look at e.g. China, Russia and Latin America. Although, in China

we see different barriers to ʻthe dominant American market shareʼ (Keohane and Nye,

1998, p.88) because ʻChina limits the release of Hollywood movies to just 20 a

year.ʼ (Owyang & Brown, 2004, p.223)

It is clear that ʻthe West has enjoyed a period of dominance linked to the development of

modernity, which now seems to be drawing to a close with the rise of East

2
981418

Asia.ʼ (Featherstone, 1995, p.83) And not only East Asia, but also region such as Russia

and Latin America. Keohane and Nye were too focussed on the developments and future

of the West that they underestimated the developmental pace of other regions and

players.

Finally, this essay will look at the supposed advantages democratic states have over other

states in the Information Age. Keohane and Nye explain that these ʻsocieties are familiar

with the free exchange of information, and their institutions of governance are not

threatened by it.ʼ (1998, p.93) Or at least the perceived free exchange of information.

Because perception, interpretation and discourse play a significant role in making

assumptions about societies and information. Keohane and Nye also describe how

context, ideology and discourse can create a truth or ʻframe the issueʼ:

When Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990, the fact that CNN was an American company
helped to frame the issue, worldwide, as aggression. Had an Arab company been
the worldʼs dominant TV channel, perhaps the issue would have been framed as a
justified attempt to reverse colonial humiliation. (1998, p.91)
Keohane and Nye do not offer a definition of what ʻfree exchange of informationʼ exactly is

and therefore avoid the difficult question ʻis information and the value of information the

same for everyone - irrespective of your cultural, religious or economic background?ʼ

Keohane and Nye mention that ʻglobalization is far from universalʼ and ʻa large portion of

the worldʼs people will not participate.ʼ (1998, p.82) Although these claims about

globalization are subject to a lot of dispute they do leave space to explain that

ʻglobalization and its impact are faster, broader and deeper than ever before.ʼ (Wiarda,

2008, p.3) These claims therefore pose an interesting caveat that sums up previously

made critique. Globalization being universal or not, having everybody involved or not,

3
981418

ʻmany who do not participate in the information revolution are still subject to the effects of

decision made by those who do.ʼ (Rogerson, 2000, p.432)

Word count: 953

4
981418

Bibliography

Barboza D., ʻChina Surpasses U.S. in Number of Internet Usersʼ, New York Times,
Shanghai, July 26 2008
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/26/business/worldbusiness/26internet.html (viewed on
December 5 2008)

Blackwell F., (2004), India: A Global Studies Handbook, Danbury: ABC-CLIO

Featherstone M., (1995), Undoing Culture: Globalization, Postmodernism and Identity,

Minneapolis: SAGE Publications

Google Corporate Information, official Google website

http://www.google.com/corporate/execs.html (viewed on December 5 2008)

Keohane R. & Nye J. Jr, (1989), Power and Interdependence (2nd ed.), Boston: Little,
Brown

McChesney R., (1998), Capitalism and the Information Age, New York: Monthly Review
Press

Owyang S & Brown J.D., (2004), Frommerʼs Shanghai, New York: Frommerʼs

Rogerson K., (2000), ʻInformation Interdependenceʼ, Information, Communication &

Society 3:3, pp. 415-436

Rosecrance R., Alexandroff A., Koehler W., Kroll J., Laqueur S. & Stocker J., (1977),
ʻWhither Interdependence?ʼ, International Organization, Vol. 31, No. 3, pp. 425-471

Wiarda H.J., (2008), Globalization: Universal Trends, Regional Implications, New York:
Northeastern University Press