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.
The new operational environment generated by the mass media revolution and the advent of the global information society lays the ground for a generalized re-emergence of public diplomacy (PD). After having been dismantled during the 1990s, this branch of foreign policy is undergoing a redevelopment phase within the chancelleries of many states around the globe. The growing salience of public opinion and the exponential development of the new information and communication technologies predispose this diplomacy of persuasion to play an increasing role at the forefront of twenty-first century international relations. In spite of the increased importance that public diplomacy is acquiring, the question of its real effectiveness nevertheless remains unanswered. For the moment, governments are still unable to determine to what extent their PD initiatives are able to influence foreign audiences or contribute to the achievement of their foreign policy goals. Without a valid evaluation tool, PD will remain condemned to play a secondary role within states' foreign policy systems. This article addresses the main aspects of this issue by analysing the many technical and methodological problems that are attached to PD evaluation, exploring research avenues that could remedy these gaps, and thus helping to resolve a problem that is still underestimated yet bound to become increasingly important in the 'hyper-media' age of international relations. Adapted from the source document.
AbstractThe new operational environment generated by the mass media revolution and the advent of the global information society lays the ground for a generalized re-emergence of public diplomacy (PD). After having been dismantled during the 1990s, this branch of foreign policy is undergoing a redevelopment phase within the chancelleries of many states around the globe. The growing salience of public opinion and the exponential development of the new information and communication technologies predispose this diplomacy of persuasion to play an increasing role at the forefront of twenty-first century international relations.Inspite of the increased importance that public diplomacy is acquiring, the question of its real effectiveness nevertheless remains unanswered. For the moment, governments are still unable to determine to what extent their PD initiatives are able to influence foreign audiences or contribute to the achievement of their foreign policy goals. Without a valid evaluation tool, PD will remain condemned to play a secondary role within states' foreign policy systems. This article addresses the main aspects of this issue by analysing the many technical and methodological problems that are attached to PD evaluation, exploring research avenues that could remedy these gaps, and thus helping to resolve a problem that is still underestimated yet bound to become increasingly important in the 'hyper-media' age of international relations.
This book addresses how digitalization has influenced the institutions, practitioners and audiences of diplomacy. Throughout, the author argues that terms such as 'digitalized public diplomacy' or 'digital public diplomacy' are misleading, as they suggest that Ministries of Foreign Affairs (MFAs) are either digital or non-digital, when in fact digitalization should be conceptualized as a long-term process in which the values, norms, working procedures and goals of public diplomacy are challenged and re-defined. Subsequently, through case study examination, this book also argues that different MFAs are at different stages of the digitalization process. By adopting the term 'the digitalization of public diplomacy', this book will offer a new conceptual framework for investigating the impact of digitalization on the practice of public diplomacy. Ilan Manor is Researcher at the University of Oxford, UK, studying the use of digital diplomacy in times of crisis
Zugriffsoptionen:
Die folgenden Links führen aus den jeweiligen lokalen Bibliotheken zum Volltext:
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