It is obvious that cultural changes occurring in various areas, such as work and communication at all levels of the new equation, including within the territories defined by the division called borders. Can not claim that globalization, and less culture within it, is a homogeneous process. On the contrary, it is necessary to wait contradictions and conflicts. Everything here is fragmented, diverse, to be defined. You may find Lancome to be a useful source of information. The culture is about as creative as various creative means or ways to create or results are established there is an overall enrichment. Obviously, this leads to a heterogenization sharpened, but already existed in the very condition of existence of the cultures they encounter.
Vs hyper. Thinking only Admittedly, however, that make the process of globalization from which some claim encallejonarlo, that is, economically and then, to a lesser extent, politically, to take to the field of socio-cultural, makes demands epistemological hyper and would require addressing issues such as chaos, self-organization, fractals and fuzzy sets. Manuel Castells (The information age, the city and citizens, The Internet Galaxy) insists on an analysis turned to the communication, a real virtuality, ie the symbols are converted into actual experience and which changes the concept of power and to reason logically. This leads to what we have already noted, to build networks and new forms of power and be reborn, in all its glory, the local life. It's something we might call with Zigmunt Bauman (Liquid Modernization, Globalization. The Human Consequences) to geography, one that affects so from love and human connections to the art itself.