Public Diplomacy: Old Organization, New Trends, and Ways Forward (original) (raw)

A Public Diplomacy Paradigm Shift

CPD Blog, USC Center on Public Diplomacy, 2022

The Public Diplomacy Staffing Initiative (PDSI) is one of the most important transformations in U.S. public diplomacy (PD) operations overseas since the merger of the U.S. Information Agency into the Department of State in 1999. In addition to launching a major revision of the position descriptions for locally employed public diplomacy staff at U.S. diplomatic missions abroad, the PDSI includes a significant restructuring of embassy public diplomacy sections. Yet outside of the relatively narrow scope of public diplomacy bureaus and offices within the Department of State, little is known about the PDSI’s strategic intent, let alone its impacts. In a recently published report, "Putting Audience and Policy First: A Public Diplomacy Paradigm Shift," the U.S. Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy (ACPD) fills this knowledge gap with an assessment of the PDSI’s transformative potential.

American Public Diplomacy: Enduring Characteristics, Elusive Transformation

The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 6, 2011

Understanding, planning, engagement and advocacy are core concepts of public diplomacy. They are not unique to the American experience. There is, however, an American public diplomacy modus operandi with enduring characteristics that are rooted in the nation's history and political culture. These include episodic resolve correlated with war and surges of zeal, systemic trade-offs in American politics, competitive practitioner communities and powerful civil society actors, and late adoption of communication technologies. This article examines these concepts and characteristics in the context of US President Barack Obama's strategy of global public engagement. It argues that as US public diplomacy becomes a multi-stakeholder instrument and central to diplomatic practice, its institutions, methods and priorities require transformation rather than adaptation. The article explores three illustrative issues: a culture of understanding; social media; and multiple diplomatic actors. It concludes that the characteristics shaping the US public diplomacy continue to place significant constraints on its capacity for transformational change.

New Developments in Public Diplomacy Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs

The concluding months of 2008 saw dynamic discussions about the application of new technology in public diplomacy. Government in particular entered the realm of online social networking with at least two purposes: to promote collaboration and to organize messaging campaigns. The new trend was exemplified by the U.S. Department of State's Public Diplomacy 2.0 strategy-an umbrella term for a variety of new initiatives, including:

Global Perspectives on the Emerging Trends in Public Diplomacy

Global Perspectives on the Emerging Trends in Public Diplomacy, 2023

Since the 20th century, when modern democracies gained strength, governments have been carrying out their domestic and foreign policies with the consent of society. For this reason, all organizations that seek to influence governments strive to make a name for themselves in the eyes of the public. Similarly, states also seek to establish a reputation and trust in the public opinion of a target country or within specific target communities through public diplomacy activities. As can be seen, notable studies and work on public diplomacy have been conducted for more than half a century, and the field has evolved. Public diplomacy emerged as an extension of developments in international relations and diplomacy, as a way for countries and governments to communicate and build relationships with the corresponding strategic bodies in other countries. Increasing political, economic, social, and cultural relations on a global scale have transformed diplomatic relations into an issue that encompasses societies and peoples, unlike in the past when they were limited to official relations between countries and governments. As the public face of diplomacy as we know it, we can describe it as an international actor’s attempt to navigate the international environment by building close relationships with foreign peoples.

NEW PUBLIC DIPLOMACY IN THE NEW MILLENNIUM 1

Journal of Contemporary Issues in Business and Government Vol. 27, No. 2,2021, 6272-6282, 2021

The new instruments of public diplomacy are deepening and diversifying in the contemporary world. Today, the range of phenomena that could be used as new tools of public diplomacy has grown. Some of the new instruments in the new millennium could be highlighted as diaspora, international conferences, scholarships, journals, advertorials, towering personalities, sport, dominant culture, relations with Intergovernmental institutions, focus on international civil society groups, news agencies, social media tools, cultural centers, universal kitchen, music and exchange programs, in addition to the older ones.The number of these public diplomacy tools that is updatedin this research is 37 as seen in the figure. Old public diplomacy tools are not easy to reshape or create such as organizing diaspora, flouring your language, kitchen or culture. But majority of the new public diplomacy tools could be created in a mid or short term such as establishing university chairs, television channels, communicating social media groups, organizing frequent international conferences, publishing journals, initiating quality movies and serials and establishing good relations with the international NGOs, CSGs and think-tanks. All of those instruments need money, but this should be perceived as soft power investment.

Public diplomacy: Seven lessons for its future from its past

Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 2010

This article examines the history of public diplomacy and identifi es seven lessons from that history. These are: (1) public diplomacy begins with listening; (2) public diplomacy must be connected to policy; (3) public diplomacy is not a performance for domestic consumption; (4) effective public diplomacy requires credibility, but this has implications for the bureaucratic structure around the activity; (5) sometimes the most credible voice in public diplomacy is not one ' s own; (6) public diplomacy is not ' always about you ' ; and (7) public diplomacy is everyone ' s business. The article considers the relevance of these lessons for ' the new public diplomacy ' , which have emerged over the last decade. Cull concludes that this new public diplomacy era has opened up fresh possibilities, but has not erased the relevance of the history of public diplomacy. On the contrary, the lessons of the past seem even more relevant in an age in which communications play an unprecedented role.

Exploring U.S. Public Diplomacy’s Domestic Dimensions: Purviews, Publics, and Policies

U.S.Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy, 2022

In October the U.S. Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy and the USC Center on Public Diplomacy convened a virtual workshop for 45 public diplomacy practitioners, scholars, policy experts, and journalists to explore the role that public diplomacy might play in advancing Americans' understanding of the domestic impact of U.S. global engagement. The following report features essays by three thought leaders in public diplomacy that offer practitioner, historical, and social research perspectives on the domestic public diplomacy concept. The report also offers key takeaways about the scope and authorities of public diplomacy’s domestic dimension, the identification of key domestic audiences, stakeholders, and potential partners, and the policy and resource implications of a focus on domestic public diplomacy. This report is intended to serve as framework for informed inquiries into public diplomacy’s domestic dimension for practitioners, policymakers, and scholars. It is also meant to provide a platform for a sustained and productive dialogue on these issues.The following report features essays by three thought leaders in public diplomacy that offer practitioner, historical, and social research perspectives on the domestic public diplomacy concept. The report also offers key takeaways about the scope and authorities of public diplomacy's domestic dimension, the identification of key domestic audiences, stakeholders, and potential partners, and the policy and resource implications of a focus on domestic public diplomacy.

Public Diplomacy’s Next Challenge

Connections: The Quarterly Journal, 2008

Despite seven years of experiments, U.S. public diplomacy against international terrorism has largely failed. What is most needed is a strong infusion of fresh ideas. The rhetorical branch of the offensive against terror has been utterly neglected. U.S. spokesmen should reopen the argument about terrorism's rank immorality; amplify the voices of Muslim critics of terrorism; publicly deconstruct the ideas of outspoken terrorists; and point to such weaknesses as their lack of credentials in theology. Secondly, there is much room for vigorous and thoughtful defense of evident political alternatives to terror, especially moderation and the rule of law.