Prompt: International marketing is sometimes seen as invasive and an intrusion into the country in question. Others argue that it is a necessary and economical form of education in addition to spreading ideas, language and culture. Discuss both sides and give your opinion.

In the recent decade, the debate regarding international marketing has been raised. Some people see that multicultural marketing is an invasive method in our community. However, Other people claim that it is an essential part of our society in order to gain new ideas, language and culture. I believe that international marketing is an innovation tool and its pros outweigh the cons. Ċ Firstly, some people argue that the new marketing methodology is destroying our society values. As a consequence, we can see more and more teenagers are trying to mimic the western lifestyle. For Example, they are trying to buy the same clothes and shoes, and pay too much attention to materialistic things. In addition, the new international marketing is not considering our national interests. Consider the example of marketing for products that are competitive to our national products. Ċ On the other hand, some people view global marketing as a tool to understand other people cultures and languages. As a result, we will learn more knowledge and skills. Furthermore, we can learn new ideas and innovations in order to implement them in our country. This will enrich our economy. For instance, we can learn more about new construction solutions available in the world market then implement them in our region. Ċ In conclusion, global marketing is a great new marketing strategy, that has a great benefit to our economy. As it gives us an innovative idea to implement in our homeland. Despite, other people claim that it is a threat to our national products as well as to our social values. I believe that international marketing has advantages more than its disadvantages.