Weitere Kapitel dieses Buchs durch Wischen aufrufen
This chapter examines how the norms, values and the logic of the digital society have influenced the practice of public diplomacy. Through a review of case studies from Africa, Israel, Palestine, Poland, the USA and Eastern Europe, the chapter illustrates how digital technologies have impacted the working routines and structures of diplomatic institutions as well as the metaphors diplomats’ employ to conceptualize their craft. The chapter, then, reviews a series of factors that can impact the process of digitalization of diplomatic institutions, ranging from the affordance of digital technologies to the domestic agendas of governments and innovative foreign ministers. Lastly, the chapter discusses new avenues for public diplomacy research that further elucidate the relationship between digital technologies, the digital society and public diplomacy.
Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten
Sie möchten Zugang zu diesem Inhalt erhalten? Dann informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:
Archetti, C. (2012). The impact of new media on diplomatic practice: An evolutionary model of change. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 7(2), 181–206. CrossRef
Attias, S. (2012). Israel’s new peer-to-peer diplomacy. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 7(4), 473–482. CrossRef
Bauman, Z., & Lyon, D. (2016). Liquid surveillance: A conversation. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Bernal, V. (2014). Nation as network: Diaspora, cyberspace, and citizenship. Chicago, USA: University of Chicago Press. CrossRef
Bjola, C. (2014). The ethics of secret diplomacy: A contextual approach. Journal of Global Ethics, 10(1), 85–100. CrossRef
Bjola, C., & Jiang, L. (2015). Social media and public diplomacy: A comparative analysis of the digital diplomatic strategies of the EU, US and Japan in China. In C. Bjola & M. Holmes (Eds.), Digital diplomacy theory and practice (pp. 71–88). Oxon: Routledge.
Bjola, C., & Manor, I. (2018). Revisiting Putnam’s two-level game theory in the digital age: Domestic digital diplomacy and the Iran nuclear deal. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 31(1), 1–30. CrossRef
Castells, M. (2013). Communication power. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Causey, C., & Howard, P. N. (2013). Delivering digital public diplomacy. In R. S. Zaharna, A. Arsenault, & A. Fisher (Eds.), Relational, networked and collaborative approaches to public diplomacy (pp. 144–156). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
Clarke, A. (2015). Business as usual? An evolution of British and Canadian digital diplomacy as policy change. In C. Bjola & M. Holmes (Eds.), Digital diplomacy theory and practice (pp. 111–126). Oxon: Routledge.
Comor, E., & Bean, H. (2012). America’s ‘engagement’ delusion: Critiquing a public diplomacy consensus. International Communication Gazette, 74(3), 203–220. CrossRef
Copeland, D. (2013). Taking diplomacy public: Science, technology and foreign ministries in a heteropolar world. In R. S. Zaharna, A. Arsenault, & A. Fisher (Eds.), Relational, networked and collaborative approaches to public diplomacy (pp. 56–69). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
Freedman, L. (2014). Ukraine and the art of crisis management. Survival, 56(3), 7–42. CrossRef
Gilboa, E. (2005a). The CNN effect: The search for a communication theory of international relations. Political Communication, 22(1), 27–44. CrossRef
Gilboa, E. (2005b). Global television news and foreign policy: Debating the CNN effect. International Studies Perspectives, 6(3), 325–341. CrossRef
Harnden, T. (2010, November). WikiLeaks: Hillary Clinton states WikiLeaks release is “an attack”. The Telegraph. Retrieved from https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/8169040/WikiLeaks-Hillary-Clinton-states-WikiLeaks-release-is-an-attack.html.
Hayden, C. (2012). Social media at state: Power, practice, and conceptual limits for US public diplomacy. Global Media Journal, 11(21), 1–21.
Hocking, B., & Melissen, J. (2015). Diplomacy in the digital age. Clingendael: Netherlands Institute of International Relations.
Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs. (2017). Digital diplomacy conference summary (pp. 6–19). Retrieved from https://www.state.gov/documents/organization/271028.pdf.
Kampf, R., Manor, I., & Segev, E. (2015). Digital diplomacy 2.0? A cross-national comparison of public engagement in Facebook and Twitter. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 10(4), 331–362. CrossRef
Lichtenstein, J. (2010, July). Digital diplomacy. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/18/magazine/18web2–0-t.html.
Lutyens, A. (2018). Investigating New Zealand’s model of democratized public diplomacy [In person].
Manor, I. (2016). Are we there yet: Have MFA s realized the potential of digital diplomacy? Brill Research Perspectives in Diplomacy and Foreign Policy, 1(2), 1–110. CrossRef
Manor, I., & Crilley, R. (2018). The aesthetics of violent extremist and counter violent extremist communication. In C. Bjola & J. Pamment (Eds.), Countering online propaganda and extremism: The dark side of digital diplomacy. Oxon: Routledge.
Manor, I., & Crilley, R. (2019). The mediatization of MFAs: Diplomacy in the new media ecology. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy.
Manor, I. & Kampf, R. (2019). Digital nativity and digital engagement: Implications for the practice of dialogic digital diplomacy.
Manor, I., & Soone, L. (2018, January). The digital industries: Transparency as mass deception. Global Policy. Retrieved from https://www.globalpolicyjournal.com/articles/science-and-technology/digital-industries-transparency-mass-deception.
Melissen, J. (2005). The new public diplomacy: Between theory and practice. In J. Melissen (Ed.), The new public diplomacy: Soft power in international relations (pp. 3–27). New York: Palgrave Macmillan. CrossRef
Melissen, J., & de Keulenaar, E. V. (2017). Critical digital diplomacy as a global challenge: The South Korean experience. Global Policy, 8(3), 294–302. CrossRef
Metzgar, E. T. (2012). Is it the medium or the message? Social media, American public diplomacy & Iran. Global Media Journal, 12(21), 1.
Miller, D., & Horst, H. A. (2017). The digital and the human: A prospectus for digital anthropology. In H. A. Horst & D. Miller (Eds.), Digital anthropology (pp. 3–38). London: Bloomsbury Academic.
Mor, B. D. (2012). Credibility talk in public diplomacy. Review of International Studies, 38(2), 393–422. CrossRef
Natarajan, K. (2014). Digital public diplomacy and a strategic narrative for India. Strategic Analysis, 38(1), 91–106. CrossRef
Pamment, J. (2014). The mediatization of diplomacy. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 9(3), 253–280. CrossRef
Pamment, J., Nothhaft, H., Agardh-Twetman, H., & Fjallhed, A. (2018). Countering information influence activities: The state of the art. Lund University.
Paulauskas, R. (2018). Understanding Lithuania’s digital diplomacy model [In person].
Quelch, J. A., & Jocz, K. E. (2009). Can brand Obama rescue brand America? The Brown Journal of World Affairs, 16(1), 163–178.
Robinson, P. (1999). The CNN effect: Can the news media drive foreign policy? Review of International Studies, 25(2), 301–309. CrossRef
Seib, P. (2012). Real-time diplomacy: Politics and power in the social media era. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. CrossRef
Sheridan, M. B. (2010, November). Hillary Clinton: WikiLeaks release an ‘attack on international community’. The Washington Post. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/29/AR2010112903231.html.
Sontag, S. (1990). On photography. London, UK: Penguin Books.
Stein, J. G. (2011). Diplomacy in the digital age. In J. G. Stein (Ed.), Diplomacy in the digital age: Essays in honour of Ambassador Allan Gotlieb (pp. 1–9). Ontario: Signal.
Storr, W. (2018). Book six: The digital self. In W. Storr (Ed.), Selfie: How the West became self-obsessed (pp. 243–303). London: Picador.
Tucker, J., Guess, A., Barberá, P., Vaccari, C., Siegel, A., Sanovich, S., …, Nyhan, B. (2018). Social media, political polarization, and political disinformation: A review of the scientific literature. Hewlett Foundation.
United States Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy. (2017). Can public diplomacy survive the internet? Bots, echo chambers, and disinformation (pp. 2–91). Retrieved from https://www.state.gov/documents/organization/271028.pdf.
Van Ham, P. (2013). Social power in public diplomacy. In R. S. Zaharna, A. Arsenault, & A. Fisher (Eds.), Relational, networked and collaborative approaches to public diplomacy (pp. 17–28). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
Wichowski, A. (2015). ‘Secrecy is for losers’: Why diplomats should embrace openness to protect national security. In C. Bjola & M. Holmes (Eds.), Digital diplomacy theory and practice (pp. 52–70). Oxon: Routledge.
- A Discussion of the Digitalization of Public Diplomacy
- Chapter 10