From   Latin   America :     Diversity ,   Globalization   and   Convergence        

This paper will consider new ways in which digital technologies emerge as possible narratives of citizen empowerment, and explores the notion of convergence as digital connectivity and cultural interaction. Before appearing in the field of technology, the idea of convergence was known in the cultural sphere through the idea of interculturality, which refers to the impossibility of cultural diversity understood from above. Interculturality is desired or regulated on the fringes of processes of communication between different cultures and interactions between local organizations, national institutions, global information flows and decision‐making processes. If communication proves to be asymmetric, it implies not only new forms of political and cultural hegemony, but also new forms of political and cultural resistance and reinvention.


ThoughtsfromLatinAmericaontheRelationshipbetweenTechnologyandCulture
Between fundamentalist entrenchment and commercial homogenisation there is room for studyinganddebatingwhatcanbedonefromtheperspectiveofpoliticalcultureinorderto ensurethateconomicalliancesdonotserveonlytosecurethefreecirculationofcapitalbut also of culture.Latin American culture is not a destiny revealed by the earth or by blood.Rather, many times it has been a frustrated project.Today it is a relatively open and problematicallypossibletask.(GarcíaCanclini,2002) In the new Latin American context a strongly encouraging feature has come to the fore over the last few years, namely, the return of politics to centre stage after almost 20 years of suffering a distortedsituationwheretheeconomy-disguisedassciencepureandsimple-actedastheonly and uncontested protagonist.The macro economy supplanted political economy and not only relegated politics to a subordinate position in the decision-making process but also contributed greatlyinLatinAmericancountriestoasymbolichollowingofpoliticsinsofaraspoliticslostthe abilitytobringustogetherandmakeusfeelasone.Thisinturnhasademoralizingeffectinthe formofagrowingfeelingofhumiliationandsenseofpowerlessness,bothatanindividualanda collective level.The kidnapping of politics by the macro economy also contributed to the delegitimization of the state, turning it into an intermediary carrying out the orders of the InternationalMonetaryFund(IMF),WorldBankandWorldTradeOrganization(WTO)inrelation toanincreasinglyunequalandexclusivesociety,withgrowingpercentagesofthepopulationliving below the poverty line and millions forced to emigrate to the US and Europe.For, upon setting itself up as the agent responsible for the organization of society as a whole, the market seeks to redefinetheverypurposeofthestate,anddoessobymeansofareformwhichnotonlysetsgoals of efficiency (which has its notably quantitative and short-termist roots in the private business model) but also throws it off balance, not in the sense of causing a deepening of democracy but ratherinthesenseofweakeningdemocracyasthesymbolicbringeraboutofnationalcohesion.It isbecauseofallofthisthatthereturnofpoliticsbreathesfreshlifeintotheatmosphere,expanding the horizons not only of action but also of thought, which has also been stifled by the alliance between 'pensamiento unico' (one-track mindedness or single-track thinking) and technological determinism.Politicsreturnswithalltheinertiaandemptinessthatitentails,butalsowithefforts torechargeitwithsymbolicdepthandtobeonthealertfornewanglesandwaysofthinkingabout itanddescribingit.
Thinking about the relationship between technology and culture from a Latin American perspectiveinvolvesstandingback,asRaymondWilliamspointsout,fromtheillfatedcombination of technological determinism and cultural pessimism, a tendency adopted by several European thinkersofthestatureofthepoliticalscientistGiovanniSartoriortheliterarycriticandcultural analystGeorgeSteiner.ThecriticalthinkingoftheBraziliangeographerMiltonSantoswho,inthe lastofhisbookspublishedinhislifetime (Santos,2004)traceshisdefiantvisionofglobalizationas bothperversityandpossibility,agiddyparadoxthatthreatenstoparalyseboththethoughtandthe action capable of transforming its course, rises up to counter that tendency.On the one hand, globalization invents the enslaving process of the market, a process which, at the same time as homogenizing the planet emphasizes differences at a local level and causes increasing disunity.
Hence the systemic perversity that brings with it and brings about an increase in poverty and inequality,inthenowchronicunemployment,indiseasessuchasAIDSwhichbecomedevastating epidemicsinthecontinentsthatarenotthepoorestbutthemostravaged.
However,globalizationalsorepresentsanextraordinarycombinationofpossibilities,changesthat arenowpossiblewhichrelyuponradicallynewfacts,ofwhichtwoinparticularstandout.Oneis theenormousanddensecombinationofpeoples,races,culturesandtasteswhichoccursonevery continenttoday-albeitwithgreatdifferencesandasymmetries-acombinationthatispossible only to the extent that other world visions emerge with great force and throw into crisis the hegemonyofWesternrationalism.Theotherliesinnewformsoftechnologythatareincreasingly beingappropriatedbygroupsfromlowlysectors,makingsocioculturalrevengeoraformofsocio cultural return match possible for them, that is, the construction of a counter-hegemony all over theworld.
'Exponential competitiveness' between enterprises around the World 'demanding more science, more technology and better organization every day' (Santos, 2004:27-28) is the newtypeofenginepoweringglobalization; • the peculiarity of the crisis that capitalism is facing lies, then, in the continuous clash between the factors of change, which now go beyond the old limits and measurability overspillingterritories,countriesandcontinents; • thatclash,whichistheproductofextremelymobilerelationshipsandgreatadaptabilityon thepartofplayersreintroducesthe'centralnatureofoutlyingareas',notonlyatacountry levelbutalsoatthelevelofsociety,whichhasbeenmarginalizedbytheeconomyandnow resumes a central position as 'the new base in the confirmation of the reign of politics' (Santos,2004:125-126).
Whatourtimeregardsasapeculiarandconditioningfeatureofhowwethinkabouttechnologyis its slender relationship with a globalization which, in terms of the speed and brutality of the changes with which global unification is carried out, exposes some of the most perverse social aspectsofthechangesthatwearegoingthrough.Amongthese,theonewiththegreatestreachis thegrowingseparationofstateandsociety.For,asaresultofbeingshapedandkeptincheckby therulesofplayimposedbyinstitutionsofglobaleconomicunificationsuchastheIMF,theWTO and the World Bank, the state finds it extremely difficult to respond to the needs, demands and dynamicsofitsownsociety.

InterculturalityandCulturalSustainability
Beforeappearinginthefieldoftechnologytheideaofconvergencehadmadeitselfknowninthe cultural sphere through the idea of interculturality, which refers to the impossibility of cultural diversity understood from above, that is desired or regulated on the fringes of processes of exchangebetweendifferentcultures.Today,thatexchangetakesplaceinaspacebeyondthearea defined by national, geopolitical borders and its most profound form was described by Paul Ricoeur (2004)  Especiallyincollectiveterms,thepossibilityofbeingrecognized,takenintoaccountandcounting in the decisions that affect us, depends upon the capacity of our stories to take account of the tensionbetweenwhatweareandwhatwewanttobe.Second,thereistherelationshipbetween telling(narratingandbeingtakenintoaccount)andreckoning,whichhasadoublemeaning.Onthe one hand, this establishes the relationship between recognition and social participation, the capacityforparticipationandinterventionbyindividualsandgroupsineverythingthatconcerns them; on the other hand, it establishes the perverse relationship between telling a story and the market co-opting the (commercial) value of the sense of translation of cultural translations and exchangednarratives.
Likeinterculturality,theconceptofculturalsustainability(VV.AA.,2005)isalsoaconceptunder construction.Havingitsorigininecologicalthinking,theconceptofsustainabilityenteredthefield ofcultureasaconsequenceofanewperceptionsurroundingthedepthoftherelationshipbetween culturaldifferencesandsocialinequality,andconsequentlybetweencultureanddevelopment.In that context, cultural sustainability aims at spelling out explicitly, both in terms of thought and action,thefollowing.First,thelongtermnatureofcultureinsofarasthisrepresentsapermanent contradiction with the increasingly short-term nature of the market and also insofar as the workingsofculturallifehavethingsincommonwithothersocial,community-levelprocesses,with all that that entails in terms of foresight, planning and accompaniment.Second, it aims to take account of the possibilities for social development that cultural creativity generates in its independent,communityspheresandinthedifferentareasofindustrialculture.
Cultural sustainability moves on threebasic vectors.The firstis the awarenessthatacommunity hasitsownculturalcapital.Anawarenessthatuntilrecentlywasrepressed,oratbestavoided,by instrumental, diffusionist cultural policies which saw culture as something totally external to community life, something to which communities had to be given access and not something that those same communities themselves inherit, renew, reproduce and recreate and which, accordingly,issomethingthatbelongstothemandwhichmaintainstiesofbelongingoutofwhich both social and cultural identities are woven.In more general terms this vector represents a massiveturningpoint,onewhichmakes'civiliansociety'andnotthestatethesubjectandthemain player in terms of socio-cultural development, a turning point that forms part of the strategic displacementwhichputspublicmattersintheplace,politically,wherestatematterswereuntilnot verylongago.Butthereisonesignificantdifference,insofarasthestatewasalwaysconsideredto be one whereas the public is clearly plural or, taking it a step further as Hannah Arendt did, Finally, the third vector is the capacity to open up culture itself to exchange and interaction with other cultures in the country and the world.What comes into play here is the twin movement of separationandreintegrationthatlocalculturesexperience,movedbytheflowsanddynamicsof economic and techno-cultural globalization.What should be highlighted in this context is the critically important fact that that exchange, which is necessarily asymmetrical in terms of the movement generated by the globalizing hegemony of today's market, finds in communities not a defensive response in the nature of withdrawal (which, although justified, would be nigh on suicidal)butratheraprojectiveresponse,capableofarguingthesenseofchangeswithoutwhich notevenaminimumlevelofsustainabilityispossible.
Within Latin American communities current communication processes are perceived as both a formofthreattothesurvivaloftheirculturesandatthesametimeasapossiblemeansofbreaking with exclusion, an experience of interaction that carries risks but also opens up new possibilities forthefuture (seeAlfaroetal.,1998;QuinteroRivera,1998;SanchezBotero,1998).Thisinturnis leading to a situation where the dynamics of the traditional communities themselves are overstepping the boundaries of comprehension elaborated by folklorists and many anthropologists.Inthosecommunities,thereislessnostalgiccomplacencyabouttraditionsanda greaterawarenessoftheindispensableandsymbolicreworkingthattheconstructionoftheirown futuredemands.

DigitalConvergenceinCulturalCommunication
Virtual exchanges shape new cultural features to the extent that those exchanges densify and expand towards a growing range of spheres of people's lives.In this respect people speak increasingly of 'virtual cultures' in order to refer to changes in communicative practice as a result of interactive, distance media, which alter subjects' sensibilities, their ways of understanding the world, relationships with others and means of classifying and understandingtheirsurroundings.Virtualculturesareawayofmediatingbetweenculture andtechnology,theyrepresentsystemsofsymbolicexchangebymeansofwhichcollective meaningsandwaysofrepresentingrealityareformed.(Hopenhayn,2001) Theintellectual,yethegemonicviewoftherelationshipbetweencommunicationandcultureisstill onethatseparatesthehighplaneofculturefromandsetsitupinoppositiontothemundaneand commercial space of communication.A form of purism, made worse by the trivialization of communicationandthewickedcommercializationofcommunicationmediaonamassivescale,is turningcultureintoabare,symbolicregion,asifthatspherehadnotalwaysbeencrisscrossedby the heavy darkness of the social exchange that links creation to production and to exercise of power.Perhapsthebestexampleoftheunavoidablehybridizationofcultureandcommunicationis foundnowadaysintherelationshipbetweenmusicandsensitivitiesamongyoungpeople (García Canclini,2002).Partofthemostlucrativeandbiasedformofmediabusiness,musicformspartof young people's most expressive experience of appropriation, cultural creativity and, at the same time,socialempowerment.
However,communicationmediaarestillregardedwithsuspicionnotonlyamongtheelitebutalso in the management of cultural institutions, as a consequence of a cultural complex-reflex that is based more on nostalgia than history.This, in turn, is preventing the heterogeneity of symbolic production (Lahire, 2004;Maigret and Macé, 2005) Corroborating that overlap between culture and communication, two processes emerge that are radicallytransformingtheplaceofcultureinLatinAmericansocieties,therevitalizationofidentity and technical revolution.Globalization processes are reviving questions of cultural identity, whether ethnic, racial, local or regional, to the point of turning cultural identity into the leading aspectofmanyofthemostviolentandcomplexinternationalconflictsofrecentyears,yetatthe same time aspects of cultural identity, including gender and age, are reshaping the force and meaningofsocialtiesandthepossibilitiesofcoexistenceatanationalandlocallevel.Moreover,as far as the process of inclusion/exclusion on a global scale is concerned, globalization is turning cultureintothestrategicspaceforcompressionoftensionsthatripapartandreconstitutetheact of 'being together', and into the place where political, economic, religious, ethnic, aesthetic and sexualcrisesallcometogether.Fromthisstemsthefactthatitisintheculturaldiversityofstories and territories, experiences and memories that one not only resists but also negotiates and interactswith,andwillenduptransforming,globalization.Forwhatmakesidentityafightingforce is inseparable from the demand for recognition and meaning.And neither the one thing nor the otheriscapableofbeingformulatedinpurelyeconomicorpoliticalterms,forbothformpartofthe veryheartofcultureintermsofbelongingandsharing.Thisiswhy,today,identityconstitutesthe forcethatismostcapableofcreatingcontradictionsinthehegemonyofinstrumentalreason.

WhenTechnologyBecomesStructural
What technological convergence makes us think of is, first, the emergence of a communicative reasonwhosedevices(fragmentationwhichdisplacesanddisorientates,flowthatglobalizesand compresses,connectionthatdematerializesandproduceshybrids)bringaboutthefuturemarket for the whole of society.In the face of the consensus with which Habermas (1989) identifies communicative reason, free of political contradictions that technological and commercial media bring,whatweneedtodecipheristhecommunicationalhegemonyofthemarketbringingabouta newmodelofsocietyinwhichcommunication/informationendsupbeingthemosteffectivedriver 50 in terms of excluding or including cultures, whether ethnic, national or local, into/from market space/time.But globalization is not simply a manifestation of the economy and the market but rather a movement which, by making communication and information the key to a new model of society, pushesallsocietiestowardsanintensificationofcontactsandconflicts,exposingallculturestoone anotherasneverbefore (Appadurai,2001).Today,eventhenomadiccommunitiesoftheAmazon, who flee violently from contact with others, frequently encounter those modern nomads who sponsor'ecologicaltourism',thatformofanti-tourismthatleavesitsownworldpreciselyinorder to go and meet others, in search of the experiences of others!The anthropological shaping achievedbytherelationshipbetweencultureandcommunication,isaccentuatedwhensomeofthe most decisive cultural transformations arise as a result of changes that the technological framework of communication is going through, affecting perceptions that cultural communities haveofthemselvesandtheirwaysofconstructingidentities.
The current reshaping of indigenous, local and national cultures is above all a response to the strengthening of communication and interaction between those communities and other cultures in the country and the world.From within local communities current communication processes are increasinglyperceivedasanopportunityforinteractionwiththerestofthenationandtheworld.
The very place that culture occupies in society changes when communication technology media ceasetobepurelyinstrumental,deepenandbecomestructural.Today,technologyrefersnotonly (and not so much) to the newness of devices but also (rather) to new modes of perception and language, to new sensitivities and writings.Increasing the sense of separation produced by modernity, technology dislocates knowledge, modifying both cognitive and institutional rules of conditionsofknowledgeandfiguresofreason (Chartron,1994),whichinturnleadstoasignificant blurring of the boundaries between reason and imagination, knowledge and information, nature andartifice,artandscience,expertknowledgeandprofaneexperience.So,atthesametimeaswe face a growing wave of technological fatalism coupled with the most radical political pessimism, wefindourselvesfacingtechnologicalchangethathascometoshapeacommunityecosystem.An ecosysteminwhichaudiovisualexperiencethrownintoconfusionbythedigitalrevolutionpoints towards the shaping of a cultural visibility which is today the strategic setting for a decisive politicalbattleagainsttheoldandexclusivepoweroftheletterwhich,foroveracenturyandahalf, hasfailedtorecognizethedifferenceandtherichnessoftheoralandvisualelementsofculture, those same elements that now link their memories to virtual imaginings in order to give new meaningandnewformtoculturaltraditions.

From Convergence as Communicative Transparency to Convergence as Connectivity and Cultural
Interaction Digitalconvergenceisthenewnameforaprocessandamodelwhich,whenitfirstappearedinthe late 1980s, was known as 'communicative transparency'.It was a fully integrated model (in the sense that Umberto Eco has given to that word) given that what was really proposed was the ideology that 'everything is communication'.This, translated into information terms, came to legitimize the logic behind deregulation of the markets in a quite shameless fashion.So, the political importance of that first form of technological convergence is no more and no less than technical justification for economic concentration.In the redesign of Latin American states by neoliberal policies, the decentralization encouraged by new forms of technology has served as ideological cover for the most shameless concentration of media in oligopolies that would have been unthinkable a few years ago.From the purchase of Time-Warner by AOL in the US and the merger between Vivendi-Seagram-Canal+ in Europe, hyper connectivity (TV-internet-mobile phones) involves the same level of intensification in terms of economic concentration as digitalizationwithoutboundariesinvolvesinthetechnicalfield.
Butthiswholeprocessofconvergence/concentrationofmediapowercannotcauseustoblockout or devalue its other aspect, namely, the strategic impact of technological change that has strengthened and deepened the new communicative ecosystem.Thrown into confusion by the digitalrevolution,theculturalandaudiovisualexperiencepointstowardstheestablishmentofnew kinds of community (whether artistic, scientific or cultural) and a new public sphere.Both are linkedtotheemergenceofaculturalvisibilitywhichisthesceneofadecisivepoliticalbattle.That battle is going through a displacement (in Spanish, deslocalización) of knowledge, upsetting old, yet still overbearing hierarchies (Mignolo, 2001), disseminating the spaces where knowledge is produced and the circuits along which it travels, and making it possible for individuals and communitiestointroducetheireverydayoral,soundandvisualculturesintonewlanguagesand A critical view provides us with a sound warning of the risks involved in current technological developmentinitscomplicitywithmarketlogicandprocessesthataggravatesocialexclusion.And itispreciselybecauseofthisthatourinclusioninnewglobaltechnologycannotbethoughtofasa sociallyinevitableautomatismofchangebutratherasaprocessthatisheavilyweigheddownwith ambiguities and contradictions, a process of advances and setbacks, a complex set of filters and membranes (Manzini,1991)thatregulateselectivelythemultiplicityofinteractionsbetweenold andnewwaysofinhabitingtheworld.Infact,technologicalpressureisitselfprovokinganeedto find and develop other rationales, other paces of life and relationships with objects and people, relationships in which physical and sensory depth become of fundamental value once again.The searchforalternativemedicinesorattemptstoreconnectwithourownbodiesandthoseofothers speakofthis,reinstatingcontactandimmediacyincommunication.

Thespeedwithwhichmobiletelephonesandinternetaccesshavespreadtothepooreststrataof
Latin American countries marks an unexpected process of connecting the majority to the digital network,whointhiswaycometoinhabitthenewcommunicationalspacewheretheycanconnect places to which people have emigrated with places in their own country, exchanging music and photoswiththeirrelativesandfriendsontheothersideoftheAtlanticandtheworld.
One particular and pioneering experience of cultural convergence that is achieved through digitalization, which is still not being given all the attention it deserves from an academic perspective,isthatofteenagersandyoungpeople.Forthem,thecomputerisnolongeramachine but rather a cognitive and creative form of technology (Barganza and Cruz, 2001;Dede, 2000;Scolari, 2004).Of course teachers have every right to wonder what happens to the body when someonespendssomanyhoursinfrontofascreen,buttherealproblemisnotwhatthecomputer doestothebodybutratherhownewmethodsofinhabitingthebodyandnewknowledgeabout thebody,thatistosay,techno-biologyandgenetics,affectthebody,bothintermsofpossibilities andperversions.This is the question that Donna J. Haraway (1991) had the audacity to ask herself when she thought not about the possibilities for transforming the body cosmetically but rather about the possibilitiesofthecyborgbody,thathybridthatterrifiesalltheadultsofmygenerationbecauseit Regulatory frameworks that will only come out of a negotiation between public, private and independent players, from national, international and local spheres.multiplying the number of legal ties on their ability to function and expand.For this reason, in addition to the enormous gap between countries in North and South America, we find the most brutal indices of inequality in the largest and economically strongest countries in terms of opportunities for connecting to networks.According to the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC): 'in 2003 the highest income group in Brazil reached a connectivity rate of 82% while the national rate was just 12%' (CEPAL/ECLAC, 2003).For the 'digital divide' is really a social divide, that is, it does not relate simply to the effect of digital technologybutrathertotheorganizationofsocietyinsuchawaythatthemajorityisprevented fromaccessingandmakinguseofICTnotonlyphysicallybutalsoeconomicallyandmentally.
Ontheotherhand,wealsocomeacrosscertainsituationsinLatinAmericathatprovideasetting for strategic, public policy intervention, situations that are particularly appropriate for putting digitalconvergenceattheserviceofexchangeandempowermentofculturaldiversity.
The most revealing scenario is the strategic potential already represented by digital networks whichweavesocioculturalintegrationintheLatinAmericanspace mobilizingscientificresearch, artistic experimentation and community radio and TV media.From small rural towns to large urban neighbourhoods, popular sectors, whether through young people or in certain indigenous communities, we face an intensive community appropriation of radio and TV to put local communities in touch with one another and with others in the world, with the objective of reworkingthecollectivefabricofmemoryandcounter-information,mobilizingtheimaginationto participateintheconstructionofwhatispublic.Finally, a fourth scenario constitutes the growing awareness that rights to information and knowledgeareanintegralpartofhumanrights.Werefertotherightofcitizensandsocialgroups to have access to information not only as receivers but also as producers; and also the right to participateofandinknowledge.For,ontheonehand,thehypervaluationofinformationiscausing aseveredevaluation of traditional knowledge thatisnotcapable of beingcomputerized, such as peasantsurvivalstrategies,thelifeexperiencesofimmigrants,theculturalmemoryoftheelderly andsoforth.Thismeansthatultimately,inLatinAmericancountries,'informationsociety'comes to mean the expansion of a society of ignorance, that is, a failure to recognize the plurality of knowledge and cultural competences which, whether shared by the popular majority or indigenousorregionalminorities,arenotbeingincorporatedassuchintomapsofsocietynoreven theireducationsystems.

VirtualLiteracy
Justaswefindtechnicalinfrastructureatthepointofgettinginformationintosociety,inorderto make use of the benefits of ICT Latin American countries are going to have to acquire a new cultural base which provides the majority with proper access to the various uses of ICT and its creativeproduction.MakingthatculturalbaseavailabletoLatinAmericansocietiesasawholewill involve a project that is just as demanding, and involves just as much, if not more, effort as the provisionofphysicalinfrastructure.Wecallthatprojectvirtualliteracy,andweunderstandittobe made up of a set of mental skills, operational habits and interactive spirit without which the presenceoftechnologyamongthemajorityofthepopulationwouldgotowasteorbetwistedby theusetowhichitisputbyaminorityfortheirownbenefit.Justas,atanotherpointinitshistory, the whole of Latin America set itself the basic social project of achieving adult literacy, a project designedbyPauloFreire,sonowLatinAmericansocietiesfindthemselvesinneedofanewproject ofvirtualliteracynotforaparticulargroupbutratherforthepopulationasawhole,fromchildren to the elderly, from urban communities to rural and indigenous communities, including workers andtheunemployed,thedisplacedandthedisabled.
This concerns a form of literacy whose principal peculiarity lies in being interactive, that is, learning takes place through the very process of using technology.A use that can and, in certain cases, must be orientated, but which cannot be supplied by mere conventional knowledge or wisdom.There is undoubtedly a convergence to be established between literacy and virtual literacy,sothattheformerisintegratedintothelatterasadynamicfactorintheprocess,butinthe knowledge that virtual culture reorders the symbolic media on which formal culture relies by repositioningseveralofthetime-spaceboundariesthatthelatterinvolves.Surfingisalsoreading butnotfromlefttorightortoptobottomandnotbyfollowingtheorderofpagesbutratherby crossingorpassingthroughtexts,imagesandsoundsthatareinterconnectedbyextremelydiverse methods of articulation, simulation, shaping or play.These are means of virtual articulation that formanindispensablepartoftheknowledgethatisincreasinglyrequirednowadaysbytheworlds ofworkandculture.
Theinfrastructureofpubliclibrariesmustbecomeastrategicspace,apointofbasicaccessforthe massesbothtonetworksandtovirtualliteracy.Convergencebetweentraditionalservicesandnew services, which introduce virtual networks, must be accepted as an educational and social challenge given that convergence plays out the strategic relationship between information, creativeinteractionandsocialparticipation.

ResearchintoMeansofAppropriatingTechnology
Along with the new literacy, the inclusion of Latin American countries in the challenges and possibilitiesofdigitaltechnologyinvolvesasharedresearchprojectsurroundingthewaysinwhich localcultures,whethertowns,ethnicgroupsorregionsaremakinguseoforappropriatingvirtual culture,thatis,themeansofinteractionwithinformationnetworkswhichcommunitiesselectand develop, the transformations that their usage introduces into community life and the new resources, both technical and human, that are required in order to render those interactions socially creative and productive.It is precisely because new ICT results in the cutting loose of territorialcultureanditsinclusionintherhythmsandvirtualitiesofcyberspacethatoursystemof educationandcultureneedstomonitorcloselyandcontinuallythewaysinwhichvariousterritorial cultures process changes, and to take account of differences in age and gender and distinguish betweensmallandlargecitiesandrural,industrialandunderdevelopedareasforthatpurpose.

DigitalizingourHeritage
Today, putting our heritage onto a digital network offers a strategic possibility both in terms of conservationandindemocratizationofitsuses.Theformerneedsnofurtherargumentgiventhe fragilityofmanydocumentsandotherculturalitemsandthefragmentaryandprecariousnatureof a number of utensils.Digital conservation not only makes it possible to protect items but also facilitatestheirstudyandpermanentactivation,byputtingthemintouchwithothers,whetherin chronological,thematic,generalorspecializedterms.
Likewise,digitalizationmakesitpossibletoachievelocalandglobalvisibilityofourheritage,and especiallythesharingofdiversenationalandlocalLatinAmericanheritage.Ontheonehand,itisa case/question of democratizing, that is of bringing the cultural heritage of Latin American countries to their own citizens for their knowledge and enjoyment, and for the preservation of 'real' historical memory that is not official or homogeneous but plural, and enabling its appropriation by even the remotest of generations and populations.On the other hand, it is a questionofanewwayforourculturestoexistintheworld,showingtherichnessofhistoryandthe creativityofthepresent,debunkingclichésandexoticstereotypesandattractingtourism.Andthis is possible in the multiple ways in which hypertext today permits, that is, in fixed and moving images,insoundtracksandmusic,codicesandtexts.Orthroughdatabases,images,oralnarratives, music,songs,thematicbackdropsorvirtualexhibitions.Thisishowtheconvergenceofculturalnetworks (Finquelevich,2000;Molina,2001;VV.AA.2002) operates,thenewestandpossiblyoneofthemostfertileformsofculturalconvergencecurrentlyin existence.It is spurred on, on a daily basis, by artists and administrators, trainers, municipal in the relationship that it bears to the changes that everyday cultures are going through, and, second, in ensuring that the democratization of our societies reaches the cultural world of the majority, making it possible for people to appropriate new knowledge, languages and writings fromtheirowncultures.

ExpandingCreativitytotheNet
as the meeting point of irradiation between cultures, which are configured in networkstrue possibilities and also the limits of any form of exchange between cultures.Translationrepresentsadeparturefromtherejectionoftheoutsideworld,ofallthatisforeignor differentthatisafeatureofawidevarietyoflanguages.Forwhatthelonghistoryoftranslation itself has shown is, first, the translatability of all languages (take, for example, the disconcerting caseofEgyptianhieroglyphs,whichwerebelievedtobeuntranslatableforcenturies)and,second, theemergenceofculturalhybridizationasaproductinandoftranslation.Inthefaceofthefailure of a long-held belief in the existence of a common parent language, which would spare us the arduous path of bringing cultures 'face to face' with each other, history tells us to ,1990seealsoMarinas,1995),thatis,theideathatevery identityiscreatedandconstitutedintheactofbeingrelated,intheprocessofbeingtoldtoothers.ThisiswhatthepreciouspolysemyoftheSpanishverbcontar(meaningtorecountorrelate)tells us.For'contar'meanstotellstoriesbutalsotobetakenintoaccountbyothersandalsoreferstoa formofreckoning.Inthissingleverbwefindtwoconstituentrelationships.Inthefirstplace,the relationship between telling stories and counting in the opinion of others or being taken into account.Thismeansthatinordertoberecognizedbyothersitisessentialstotellourstory,since thenarrativeisnotonlyexpressivebutmakesuswhatweare,bothindividuallyandcollectively.
, as represented by culture today, from being takenonboardfullyinawaythatfacilitatesaresponsetonewculturaldemandsandenablesthe logicoftheculturalindustrytobefacedwithoutfatalism.Thisinturninvolvesassumingthatthe intervention of politics in communication and culture brings into play something that does not have to do simply with the management of certain institutions or services, the distribution of certaingoodsortheregulationofcertainfrequenciesbutratherwithproducingasenseofsociety anditsmeansofrecognitionamongcitizens.Therearesomeoutdatedconceptsofcommunication outthere,whichcontinuetofailtorecognizethecommunicativecompetenceofcitizens(seeAlfaroet al., 2005;Winocourt, 2002).So, communication in culture ceases to take the form of intermediarybetweencreatorsandconsumersandtakesonthetaskofdissolvingthatsocialand symbolicbarrier,decentralizinganddeterritorializingtheverypossibilitiespresentedbycultural productionanditsdevices.
newwritings.InLatinAmericaneverwasthepalimpsestofmultipleculturalmemoryofthepeople more likely to take possession of the hypertext in which reading and writing, art and science, aestheticpassionandpoliticalactioninterweaveandinteract.Technological convergence means, then, the emergence of a new cognitive economy governed by displacementofthestatusofthenumberwhich,frombeingasymbolofdominionovernatureis becoming the universal mediator of knowledge and technical/aesthetic operation, which in turn comestosignifytheprimacyofsensory-symbolismoversensory-engine.Fordigitalizationmakes possible a new form of interaction between the abstract and the sensible (i.e.what is capable of beingsensedorperceived),completelyredefiningtheboundariesbetweendiversityofknowledge andmeansofacting.
keep episteme and techne, knowledge and technique, in separate worlds, endowing the former with all the positivity of invention and reducing technique to a mere instrument or tool.This has fundamentally affected our ability to think of the constitutive relationshipsthathavealwaysexistedbetweenscienceandtechnologybutthathavenevermade themselvesapparentuntilnow.Hencetheexistenceoftechnosciencechallengesustothinknotof the'worldoftechnology'inthesingularbutrather,asHeidegger(1997)noted,thetechnologyof the world, that is, technology as a constituent dimension of humanity.Efforts to think of technologicalconvergenceasanenvironmentandacommunicativeecosystem,asstrategicinsocial termstodayasthenaturalecosystem,areaimedatmeetingthischallenge.Digitalconvergenceintroducesintoculturalpoliticsafar-reachingrenewalofthecommunication model, for we have moved from the one-way, linear and authoritarian information transmission model to the network model, that is, to a model ofconnectivity and interaction which transforms mechanical forms of communication at a distance into an interface of proximity.This is a new modelwhichfindsitsforminapolicythatfavourssynergybetweenmanysmallprojectsoverthe complicatedstructureoflarge,heavyequipmentbothintermsoftechnologyandoperation.TowardsPublicPoliciesofCulturalConvergence Atthemoment,culturaldiversityisgoingthroughaverystrangesituation.Ontheonehand,digital convergence represents two crucial opportunities.First, the opportunity presented by digitalization, making it possible to put data, texts, sounds, images and videos into a common language, dismantling the rationalist, dualist hegemony that, until now, set what was capable of being understood against what was capable of being sensed or felt through emotion, set reason againstimagination,scienceagainstart,cultureagainsttechnologyandbooksagainstaudiovisual media.Second, the formation of a new public space shaped by social movement, cultural communitiesandcommunitymedia.Bothopportunitiesaremadeupofanenormousanddiverse pluralityofplayerswhoconvergeonanemancipatingcommitmentorpledgeandapoliticalculture in which resistance forges both initiatives and alternatives.On the other hand, a growing awarenessofthevalueofdifference,ofdiversityandheterogeneityinthefieldofcivilizationandin ethnic, local and gender culture, is confronting a powerful movement to standardize the social imaginary in terms of ways of dressing, musical taste, bodily forms and expectations of social success,innarrativesinvolvingawideraudiencesuchasthecinema,televisionandvideogames.The market has resolved that tension by converting cultural difference into a stratagem for re territorialization and personalization of social differentiation practices.As David Harvey wisely observes, the mechanism works by means of 'the paradox that the less decisive that spatial barriersbecomeregulatory frameworks which have a global and a local reach, being the two strategic spaces in which not only the economy but also technology and culture move today.
For, as evidenced by the GlobalForumsatDavosandPortoAlegre,andespeciallythepreparatorymeetingsfortheWorld Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), those players now have bodies, organizations and associationscapableofrepresentingthedifferentinterestsinplay.Thismeansthatthepresenceof Information and Communication Technology (ICT) is having an effect around the world that can onlybecomprehended,orpredictedpolitically,throughanintegralorallembracingvisionthatis capable of placing the impact and the potential of that technology in the context of processes of socio-economicdevelopmentandpracticesinvolvingdemocraticparticipation.The above contrasts with the absence of the public sector in the carrying out of technological change,anabsencemarkedbytheleapfromlegalisticandstubbornpoliciesduringthe1970sand 1980stothepurestandsimplestderegulationwhichinthe1990sleftthemarketfreetomarkthe logicanddynamicsofICTtransformation.Oneparticularobstaclelayinthefactthat,atthesame timeasderegulationoccurredinthefieldoftelecommunicationsandlarge-scalemedia,thestate steppedupmassivelytheregulationofsmall-scalemedia,suchasradioandlocalTVbroadcasters, 56 emigrants in Spain who communicate in Quechua, to Mexicans in the US surfingthenetintheirowninimitable'Chicana'styleorthenet-artofvisualartsandmusic,working lives.The most far-reaching changes brought about by the information society are concerned with the new mental skills required for new roles or offices, new ways of learning, whether formal or informal, and new forms of relationship between work andplayorbetweenourdomesticspaceandtheworkplace.
'works'andblurs the uniqueness of the artist, displacing the axes of the aesthetic towards interactions and events, thatis,towardsatypeof'work'thatispermanentlyopentothecollaborationofcreativesurfers.A metaphorfornewwaysofsocializing,creationonthewebpermitsaestheticperformativitiesthat virtual media open up not just for the field of art in particular but also for social and political participationrights of the author, which involves reducing the intellectual to what can be appropriated commercially,arightthatisdefinitivelyco-optedbytheideaofpatentanditspseudocommercial jurisprudence.We need to bring out into the open the way in which and the extent to which scientific knowledge and aesthetic experimentation are subjugated by the dismantling of the multiple forms of regulation that prevented the spread and invasion of property to fields of knowledge, practices and services previously considered public and which the internet today transformsintocommonproperty.
institutions and local communities.An enormous gain stems from the fact that one of the tasks assumedbymanyofthenewplayersisthatofoverseers,intentuponsupervisingtheprojectsand decisionsthattheytakepartin,moneymattersandthetypeofexchangethatispromoted.Cultural networks have become the new public space of intermediation between different players in the same country; between players in the same sphere -for example of politics, management or training-indifferentcountries;ormobilizingcross-disciplinaryfactorsfromthefieldofpolitics thatenrichacademicworkorfromthefieldofartisticcreationthatenrichthefieldofpolitics.We face the historic possibility, not only in terms of technology but also in social terms, of fundamentally renewing the political framework of interculturality, weaving networks that increasingly connect the world of artists and cultural workers with the world of territorial institutions and social organizations.And we are going to need that framework for only by bolstering and empowering the network of social and institutional players in our cultures to the maximumextentpossible,andcreatingthemostfar-reachingalliancespossibleallovertheworld, willwebeabletoconfronttheoffensiveofpoliticalapathyandculturalmanipulationthathasbeen setintrainbytheglobalizationoffearandthenewsecurityindustries.I cannot bring this reflection to a close without linking it to the 'reasons for my hope' (of which BorgesspokeinanearlybookentitledEltamañodemiesperanza'(whichinEnglishmeans'The Measure of My Hope'), which are the link between research and the political action described herein.I refer to the 'second chance' (García Marquez) which, for those who have lived through 100 years of solitude, can involve convergence between their oral cultural traditions and new formsofvisualandcyberwriting,ifliteralcultureswillpermittheirauthoritariandidacticismtobe transformed into performative social mediation.For the subordination of oral tradition, sounds andvisualexperiencesofthemajoritytotheexclusiveorderofeducatedliteracyiscurrentlybeing erodedinawaythatwasunforeseenandthatstems,ontheonehand,fromthedisplacement(in Spanish,deslocalización)andspreadingof'traditionallymodern'channels/circuitsofknowledge and,ontheother,fromthenewwaysofproducingandcirculatinglanguagesandnewwritingsthat ariseoutofelectronictechnology,especiallyontheinternet.Thuswestandbeforeanewcultural andpoliticalstagewhichmayprovestrategic,first,intransforminganeducationalsystemthatis exclusivenotonlyinquantitativebutaboveallinqualitativeterms,andprofoundlyanachronistic