They are calling it the new colonialism. The growing tide of information - predominantly television - that is sweeping from the rich countries of the north to the poorer south. According to some, it is threatening the stability and cultural integrity of the developing world.

No sooner had developing nations reasserted their independence from the old colonial powers, international satellite television channels began beaming in Western pop music, Western political perspectives and advertisements for Western products.

In Asia and the Middle East, there have been attempts to restrain the growth and influence of these stations. Some countries like Iran have tried to ban satellite channels. Others like India have tried regulation.

But does the satellite and digital revolution really threaten these countries? Are traditional values being undermined?

Can such programming be stopped or controlled? Or does the popularity of western services merely reflect the lack of faith people have in their own media?

Next stop... the Internet

The story is now being replayed on the Internet.

Within 48 hours of the release of the controversial Starr report containing lurid details of President Clinton's sex life, millions of people around the globe read the story on the Net.

Pornography - readily available on the Internet - is a concern for countries like Saudi Arabia, which is embracing the Internet this year. So too the web sites of political exiles.

So is new technology really a "threat to totalitarianism", as media mogul Rupert Murdoch once famously declared? Or it it rather a means of cultural imperialism?

What do you think?

Should western media be controlled?