How Korean-Pop Conquered Japan....and Then the World

My TA informed me about the article on John Mearsheimer published in this month's Atlantic since my students recently read his take on realism and liberalism. However, my eyes wandered over to a photo and an article about K-pop breaking into the U.S. market. Apparently the group Girl's Generation (SNSD) is getting a gig on Letterman tomorrow night



From that article, I spotted another link to a related headline in the Atlantic: How Korean-Pop Conquered Japan. The headline is catchy because it a) it speaks of all sorts of ironies about Japan's colonial (or Korea's colonized) past; b) it takes the idea of Japan and "network power" - particularly in the domain of pop culture - and turns it on its head; c) it means the indignation I've felt about all the media hype in Korea about K-pop spreading globally (France and UK most recently) has been misplaced.

What's really interesting is how K-pop has "innovated" much faster than J-pop, and in doing so, has built its own latitude of soft power in Asia. Korea may actually be beating out Japan in its own game. Is the future with Samsung, Hyundai, LG rather than Sony, Toyota, and Panasonic? And will the transmission of Asian pop-culture outside its own region diffuse out of Seoul rather than Tokyo, Beijing, Hong Kong, or Shanghai?

The Brits and Transnational Activism on North Korean Human Rights

One of my activist friends posted a set of articles this morning (as he does every morning) on North Korean human rights (NKHR). I've been focusing primarily on U.S. or South Korean activism and NKHR but it's good to be reminded that the push for NKHR is a transnational phenomena. Raising awareness in the UK, British Parliamentarians have spoken out against human rights abuses in North Korea. Interestingly, it appears that conservative members take the lead in NKHR like their counterparts in the US Congress.

To what extent is human rights and humanitarian aid politicized under the backdrop of ongoing security problems. This is a question a former student and I are currently investigating in North Korea and Iran. Leaders are driven by principled beliefs - but how do they interact with strategic beliefs and how does this lead to politicization?

Are Protests Contagious?

I stole the title from David Meyer's blog entry where he explores the spread of protests. With protests popping up all across the globe and in the U.S. the past year, I've been asking myself the very same questions about "contagion" and movements. I won't rehash all of David's remarks on how/why protests are contagious. But I'll try to summarize his points, mixing his layman's description with more precise SM jargon.

1) Initial protests create a bandwagon or cascading effect. More people join protests as the perceived "costs" of protesting are lowered. Costs are lowered since the initial collective action problem has already been solved by others and one only need to show up without investing in "organizing" - and b) individuals usually find safety in numbers. Others may join b/c a a protest may look "fun", "trendy", or get swept up in the euphoria (or rage).

2) The (positive) effects of protest movements begets what Meyers calls a demonstration effect. In SM, we refer to this as movement diffusion most likely through a process of "emulation." Protest tactics, or repertoires of contention are mimicked: i.e. tents in Zuccotti Park and tents in MacPherson Square.

3) Other smaller movements with similar grievances may learn from existing larger, more successful movements and follow suit. They may see a window of opportunity for protests and "adapt their demands and their tactics to their own situation." Here we may see processes of emulation and brokerage (linking two previously unrelated movements). We should also see the adoption/diffusion of movement frames - how activists pitch and sell their argument to the public. i.e. college campuses beginning their own Occupy movement aimed at tuition hikes.

4) As protests are met with success, money, attention, and more people, protests become more organized. This helps sustain and prolong movements. Of course, formalization of a movement may place movements at a cross-roads with some factions desiring to work through more formal political channels rather than protests.

5) The success of movements may trigger counter-movements. For instance, anti-Occupy protests, pro-regime protests etc...

Observing, learning, imitation, emulation occurs across movements. This is easy to trace in something like the Occupy type movements in the US or Iraq War protests globally when the issue or geographic span is narrow. Sarah Soule's article on the diffusion of Shantytown protests across college campuses is an example of good empirical work on diffusion. But it's much more difficult to empirically prove that one movement influenced another when the movements appear unrelated (i.e. different issues) or across borders. To what extent are the protests of 2011 coordinated or coincidental? Are we trying to draw lines where dots can't really be connected?