Chgo & the NY/LA relationship, globalization, & media

Chgo & the NY/LA relationship, globalization, & media Ouch! That's a mouthful! What in the #@@#(!@(_?@ is he talking about? It's one of those questions, guys. And one for which I have no answer. It is based on the following assumptions: • our world becomes more "global" all the time, and thus moves (slowly) away from the primacy of the nation state • American culture becomes less important to us in time as we become more tied in with the larger world OK, enough background. Here's the issue. New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles are America's great metropolises. They are major players in world trade, commerce, culture. They each have advantages in a number of different categories. Although they are all great cultual centers, NY and LA exceed Chicago in a field that is high visibility. I'll call it media/entertainment. Its high profile is usually associated with glamor. But much of the cmedia/entertainment aspect of NY and LA economies is still localized in the sense that it is being pitched to the US. This is particularly true in media, but also to a degree in entertainment (although Hollywood film and t.v. is exported and enjoyed world wide). Still, as time goes by and we start relating to the whole world more than we do, the particular glamour of US media/entertainment becomes less of a factor, since so much of that glamour is generated by our attachment to American culture. So as world cultures become more flattened and the national cultures promoted by places like NY and LA become less, does Chicago's visibility become greater vis-a-vis the other two super metropolises? If our concept of places like Hollywood and Broadway weaken as our focus goes from nation to globe, does some of the glamour fade with it and flatten the playing field for Chicago visibility? (based on another assumption: neither NY, LA, or any city is able to keep its media/entertainment high profile up tot he same degree globally as it operates nationally.)>