Suchergebnisse

AbstractThis study applies Tam and Kim's 2019 taxonomy to alumni data for the Global Korea Scholarship in order to segment key foreign publics and understand their communication behaviors toward South Korea in the context of public diplomacy. In this study, key foreign publics refer to groups of foreign publics who are positioned to impact the public diplomacy goals of a nation. They have a direct behavioral relationship with a foreign host country and maintain communication and relationships with those in their home country. The findings of this study provide empirical results that identify four types of foreign publics, showing that the new segmentation taxonomy of foreign publics by Tam and Kim is applicable in public diplomacy. The results also indicate that each public type acts differently in terms of positive megaphoning, negative megaphoning, and likelihood of recommending of South Korea, further supporting the typology's behavioral descriptions.Related Articles in this Special IssueAyhan, Kadir Jun, and Nancy Snow. 2021. "Introduction to the Special Issue—Global Korea Scholarship: Empirical Evaluation of a non‐Western Scholarship Program from a Public Diplomacy Perspective." Politics & Policy 49(6): 1282–1291. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12440.Hong, Moon Suk, Minjeong Jeon, and Kadir Jun Ayhan. 2021. "International Scholarship for Social Change? Re‐contextualizing Global Korea Scholarship Alumni's Perceptions of Justice and Diversity in South Korea." Politics & Policy 49(6): 1359–1390. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12435.Tam, Lisa, and Kadir Jun Ayhan. 2021. "Evaluations of People, Affection, and Recommendation for a Host Country: A Study of Global Korea Scholarship (GKS) Recipients." Politics & Policy 49(6): 1292–1307. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12438.

In 1939, as the UK was barreling towards war with Germany, the King and Queen of England visited the United States and toured five states with President Roosevelt. On March 13, 2015-- two weeks before a closely contested election in Israel-- Prime Minister Netanyahu traveled to the United States to address Congress. Why spend such significant time and resources on these trips? While many dismiss this public diplomacy as strategically insignificant, I argue that leaders can use these seemingly low-cost appeals appeals to foreign audiences to indirectly influence either the government of the foreign country or their own domestic audience.Because most citizens form their policy opinions based on elite cues, low-cost statements from leaders can sometimes shape the conversation surrounding a policy issue in another country. By influencing the political discourse and public opinion in a foreign country, leaders can place strategic political constraints on the leaders of those countries. First, I collect data on international trips made by 11 G20 leaders along with daily internet searches to test when foreign leaders can garner attention abroad. Next I use detailed case studies and public opinion data to examine when leaders can persuade a foreign audience or use a foreign backlash to build domestic support. I match micro-level trade exposure data with survey data from the UK to demonstrate that Obama had a significant influence on the Brexit debate during his 2016 visit. Additionally, I combine the geographic route of the British royal couple in 1939 with survey data to show that they had a measurable effect on American public opinion on intervention into WWII.Furthermore, political leaders often require both domestic support and cooperation from other countries in order to achieve foreign policy goals. Rather than merely limiting a leader's policy options, I argue that this tension can be exploited by a leader to help him communicate credibly to his domestic audience. Leaders can leverage an international backlash to signal alignment with their domestic audience and increase their domestic support. I develop a formal model to identify the conditions under which a leader can benefit from this counter-intuitive strategy.

This book presents the first-ever close and up-to-date look at how American diplomats working at our embassies abroad communicate with foreign audiences to explain US foreign policy and American culture and society. Projecting an American voice abroad has become more difficult in the twenty-first century, as terrorists and others hostile to America use modern communication means to criticize us, and as new communication tools have greatly expanded the worldwide discussion of issues important to us, so that terrorists and others hostile to us have added negative voices to the global dialog

This book presents the first-ever close and up-to-date look at how American diplomats working at our embassies abroad communicate with foreign audiences to explain US foreign policy and American culture and society. Projecting an American voice abroad has become more difficult in the twenty-first century, as terrorists and others hostile to America use modern communication means to criticize us, and as new communication tools have greatly expanded the worldwide discussion of issues important to us, so that terrorists and others hostile to us have added negative voices to the global dialogue. It analyzes the communication tools our public diplomacy professionals use, and how they employ interpersonal and language skills to engage our critics. It shows how they overcome obstacles erected by unfriendly governments, and explains that diplomats do not simply to reiterate set policy formulations but engage a variety of people from different cultures in a creative ways to increase their understanding of America.

Against the background of China's increasing political and economic influence and the Chinese government's efforts on public diplomacy, this article examines the extent to which the publics in various countries are interested in news about China as well as the national- and individual-level factors that explain audience interest in China. Drawing upon a cross-national survey conducted in 10 countries in 2009 and 2010, the analysis shows that China has attracted a level of global public attention comparable to other regional powers in the world. Consistent with studies about the determinants of foreign news content, the interest in news about China is stronger in countries that have closer economic connections with China. At the individual level, people with higher levels of education and income, as well as people who are more interested in the international political economy when consuming foreign news, are more likely to express an interest in news about China. The findings and analysis illustrate how the rising economic and political influence of China in the international arena is shaping the world's interest in the country. (China/GIGA)

Presidents increasingly engage in public diplomacy, especially traveling to other nations. Often presidents target the public in the visited nation, with the aim of improving the opinion climate there and then using that improved opinion climate to further U.S. policy goals in the visited nation. To a degree, then, foreign travel resembles presidential domestic going public. This article tests one important linkage in the process from a presidential trip to foreign public opinion, whether trips can focus public opinion in the visited nation on the president. Analysis uses a pooled cross‐sectional time series analysis of weekly Google Trends data for forty‐two nations during Barack Obama's first term in office. Results suggest that presidential trips lead to impressive increases in searches on the president, an indication of increased attention to the president. The conclusion places the findings into two literatures, presidential going public and public diplomacy, and suggests directions for future research.

The current study builds on previous knowledge of international public opinion by examining the role that the evaluation of a nation's leader may have on evaluations of the nation by a foreign public. More specifically, the study examines the impact of the so-called Obama effect on attitudes toward the United States in the nation of Pakistan. The study analyzed a large subset of data ( N = 1,254) from the Pew Research Center's Global Attitudes Project. The results of the analysis point to significant relationships among confidence in Obama's leadership, approval of Obama's foreign policies, U.S.–Pakistan relations, and favorability toward the United States. The study discusses the theoretical implications of the findings along with the contextual implications on U.S. public diplomacy.

<p>This article examines the role of European think tanks in public diplomacy efforts of the EU. It builds on Bourdieu's field theory and concept of capital using data from EU official documents, website materials, and semi-structured interviews with representatives of think tanks from Brussels, France, Slovenia, and the United Kingdom, as well as their networks and the EU institutions. The article argues that EU institutions provide financial support for think tanks to obtain political capital in the form of internal and external legitimacy. The European Commission mobilises think tank academic capital by funding their educational activities, which helps to deal with the "democratic deficit" and plays the role of intellectual "soft power" by training current and future policymakers in Europe and beyond as potential allies in competition with other regions. Due to the particularity of the EU public sphere, characterised by the lack of outreach mass media, the European Commission tries to improve its capacity to shape public opinion at the European and global levels by using think tank publicity capital in its communication activities via new media platforms, distinguished by direct access to wider audiences. The European Commission benefits from think tank social capital, encouraging them to create transnational networks regarded as contributing to the promotion of integration within the EU, building relations with candidate countries, and strengthening its position in multilateral negotiations. Although the citizen's dimension is not always at the core of practices of European think tanks, this article demonstrates their effectiveness as a channel of public diplomacy towards transnational publics.</p>