According to Michael Curtin (2003), media capitals are considered to be “sites of mediation, locations where complex forces and flows interact”. Curtin (2003) places emphasis on understanding media capitals as meeting places where local specificity arises out of migration, interaction and exchange. With that said, media capitals are places where things come together and, consequently, where the generation and circulation of new mass culture forms become possible. The study of media capitals directs our attention to complex interactions among of range of flows; including economic, demographic, technological, cultural and ideological, which therefore operate at local, national, regional and global levels.
As for the global context, Curtin (2003) highlights that Hollywood television embraced an international rather than a transnational logic. It is a well-known fact that Hollywood has dominated the film and entertainment industry since the early 19th century. Although the industry itself is always changing and evolving, Hollywood’s status as a global media capital remains, but the conditions of its dominance has been altered dramatically. As the culture logic of American television has remained the same, producers are still focusing on national audiences, therefore somewhat disregarding local and global audiences.
Hong Kong’s emergence as a ‘media capital’ is a result of the influences exerted by migrations of cultural institutions and creative talent. Instead of disregarding their ability to express local concerns, the influx of refugees enhanced and strengthened the creative resources of the Hong Kong film industry. Overall, Hong Kong’s rapid embrace of television was a result of its mediated relations between the East and West, between traditional and modernity, and between immigrant and indigenous populations. It’s because of this that Hong Kong has become one of the emerging media capitals competing against the dominating Hollywood industry.