Suchergebnisse

The variable "public diplomacy message strategy" (or "public diplomacy approach") refers to public diplomacy efforts in a given country in order to investigate how and with which goal public diplomacy is strategically communicated in the given context. The variable reflects the communication style of a specific actor (a politician, government, or country). Field of application/theoretical foundation: Analyses of public diplomacy message strategies or approaches mostly build on the taxonomy of public diplomacy (Cull, 2008) or the proposed categories of public diplomacy by Fitzpatrick (2010). References/combination with other methods of data collection: Public diplomacy message strategies can, in addition to content analysis, be analyzed by conducting interviews or surveys with public diplomacy actors, which allow validating the results from content analyses. Example study: Dodd & Collins (2017) Information on Dodd & Collins (2017) Authors: Dodd & Collins Research question/research interest: Comparison between public diplomacy approaches between Central Eastern European (not explicated) and Western countries (Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States) Object of analysis: Twitter content posted by 41 embassy accounts (not explicated) Time frame of analysis: March 2015 Information about variable Variable name/definition: Public diplomacy practices: Communication strategy Level of analysis: Tweet Values: Building on Cull's (2008) taxonomy of public diplomacy: (1) Listening (attempts to collect and collate information about foreign publics and their opinions) (2) Advocacy (activities that promote the country's policies or general interests among foreign publics) (3) Cultural (efforts to promote cultural resources and achievements of a country) (4) International (activities that involve sending national actors abroad or receiving international actors to strategically manage the international environment) (5) News (use of radio, television and digital media to inform and involve foreign audiences) ...

"Public Diplomacy" published on by Oxford University Press.

Modern international relations are in the process of constant transformation. Since the appearance in the political discourse, public diplomacy has undergone a great evolution. If initially this term was understood as a propaganda euphemism, today it implies a developed multi-channel system of bilateral communication between societies of different countries. In connection with the evolution of the global communication context (the cheapening of communication technologies, the spread of the Internet), the great powers are no longer the only actors capable of disseminating information around the world.

This article draws one of tools of public diplomacy is NCOs directed to create an information environment

Deglobalization is a current phenomenon. The downturn in global trade, the rise of populism and nationalism, and the new barriers to cosmopolitanism have led to the need to redefine the dynamics and scope of public diplomacy. Using Cull's taxonomy, it is possible to observe how deglobalization is affecting different public communication strategies, deinstitutionalizing the profession, and jeopardizing best practices. Accordingly, this article attempts to explain why, because of growing mistrust and suspicion, these are complicated times for public diplomacy, whose ethos has been distorted by the political structures of deglobalization, and to confirm a basic trend: the growing relevance of global political communication for international relations.

Countries struggle to find ways to be perceived as trustworthy by people around the world because trust is linked to efficiency, business opportunities and political influence. This paper is based on case studies of five Public Diplomacy activities: Iranian President Hassan Rouhani's letter in The Washington Post (2013); Denmark's trust-building effort in Pakistan following the so-called "Muhammad crisis" (from 2010); The British Council's strategy for trust-building in China (2012); Russian President Vladimir Putin's letter in The New York Times (2013), and the USA's trust-building effort in Turkey (from 2006). The best results have been obtained where Public Diplomacy has been linked to successful traditional diplomacy at state-level (Iran) or has created a framework for people-to-people relations (Denmark, UK and USA). A backlash was experienced in the case where a foreign state leader patronized the national leader (Russia). In all cases, respect for people in other countries despite differences in culture seems fundamental for a Public Diplomacy initiative to succeed. A central concept in the paper is International Trust as described by Brewer, Gross, Aday and Willnat (2004). ; Countries struggle to find ways to be perceived as trustworthy by people around the world because trust is linked to efficiency, business opportunities and political influence. Social trust is also important for democracy to function. A central concept in this paper is International Trust as described by Brewer, Gross, Aday and Willnat (2004). The paper is based on case studies of five Public Diplomacy activities: Iranian President Hassan Rouhani's letter in The Washington Post (2013); Denmark's trust-building effort in Pakistan following the so-called "Muhammad crisis" (from 2010); The British Council's strategy for trust-building in China (2012); Russian President Vladimir Putin's letter in The New York Times (2013), and the USA's trust-building effort in Turkey (from 2006). The best results have been obtained where Public Diplomacy has been linked to successful traditional diplomacy at state-level (Iran) or has created a framework for people-to-people relations (Denmark, UK and USA). A backlash was experienced in the case where a foreign state leader patronized the national leader (Russia). In all cases, respect for people in other countries despite differences in culture seems fundamental for a Public Diplomacy initiative to succeed. From a social responsible perspective journalists may have a role to play in creating international trust, and Public Diplomacy staffs consider it already important