I also used to think that ubiquity was some sort of evidence of superiority. However, as was briefly mentioned upthread, you realize that often ubiquity has more to do with consumer products and the monopolies that capture markets. And ubiquitous consumer products often do not achieve that status due to superior design, but actually superior profit margins, which in the realm of manufactured consumer products, means the most efficient design for the most efficient manufacturing method. You realize that the manufacturing process can influence the design. The most ubiquitous door, urinal, toilet, and hand dryer are often not the most aesthetically pleasing or even, design-wise, most sensibility designed, but just the cheapest to purchase, most efficient to manufacture, or the only option.
So to answer your question, we typically call the latter in cultural studies capitalism.
I don't think we should conflate ubiquity with superiority, but it is easy to see how the latter often leads to the former. Perhaps Western movies are indeed considered very good, even by people from other cultures, which is why they decide to watch them. Or perhaps the cars invented last century, first developed in the West, already found some optimal designs that are simply more efficient, and therefore will be widely adopted.
Your implied explanation is rather bleak, as it seems that capitalism is independent of consumer wants or needs in this perspective.
So to answer your question, we typically call the latter in cultural studies capitalism.