An Integrated Approach to Public Diplomacy

Americanhttp://abs.sagepub.com/ Behavioral Scientist

An Integrated Approach to Public Diplomacy Guy J. Golan American Behavioral Scientist 2013 57: 1251 originally published online 10 May 2013 DOI: 10.1177/0002764213487711 The online version of this article can be found at: http://abs.sagepub.com/content/57/9/1251

Published by: http://www.sagepublications.com

Additional services and information for American Behavioral Scientist can be found at: Email Alerts: http://abs.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://abs.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Citations: http://abs.sagepub.com/content/57/9/1251.refs.html

>> Version of Record - Aug 13, 2013 OnlineFirst Version of Record - May 10, 2013 What is This?

Downloaded from abs.sagepub.com at SYRACUSE UNIV LIBRARY on January 22, 2014

487711 research-article2013

ABS57910.1177/0002764213487711American Behavioral ScientistGolan

Introduction

An Integrated Approach to Public Diplomacy

American Behavioral Scientist 57(9) 1251–1255 © 2013 SAGE Publications Reprints and permissions: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0002764213487711 abs.sagepub.com

Guy J. Golan1

By focusing on global engagement between governments (along with corporations and nongovernmental organizations [NGOs]) and citizens of foreign nations, public diplomacy research has gained much attention from international relations, mass communications, and political scientists alike. While mostly atheoretical (Entman, 2008; Gilboa, 2000), public diplomacy research is largely influenced by Joseph Nye’s (1990, 2008) soft power perspective. Nye’s perspective highlights the need to move away from traditional government-to-government diplomacy and toward a government-to-citizen perspective that highlights a relational approach based on two-way engagement. The soft power approach was so influential on both public diplomacy practitioners and scholars that President Clinton abolished the United States Information Agency (USIA) and replaced it with the Undersecretary of Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs. This move signified not only an organizational realignment but also a philosophical shift from a global persuasion model to a model of government-to-citizen engagement focusing on such soft power programs as educational, cultural exchanges along with language training and development programs as the key tools of public diplomacy. Many critics, including the current author, have argued that while soft power programs serve an important role in international engagement, they should complement rather than replace a strategic global communication effort that draws from the mediated public diplomacy approach (Entman, 2004; Sheafer & Gabay, 2009; Sheafer & Shenhav, 2010). While traditional diplomacy is focused on government-to-government engagement and the soft power approach is focused on government-to-citizen engagement, the mediated public diplomacy approach is focused on government-to-citizen engagement that is mediated by a third party—the global news media. The rising influence of global satellite networks and social media (Kwak, Poor, & Skoric, 2006; Nisbet, Nisbet, Scheufele, & Shanahan, 2004; Seib, 2007, 2008) necessitates an updated 1S.I.

Newhouse School of Public Communications, Syracuse University, NY, USA

Corresponding Author: Guy J. Golan, 215 University Place, Syracuse, NY 13244, USA. Email: [email protected]


1252

American Behavioral Scientist 57(9)

Integrated Public Diplomacy

Mediated Public Diplomacy

Naon Branding/Country Reputaon

Relaonal Public Diplomacy

(Short/Medium Term)

(Medium/Long term)

(Long Term)

Figure 1. An integrated model of public diplomacy.

practical approach to 21st-century public diplomacy. As governments aim to engage foreign public through third-party mediators (global media and international social media influencers), many scholars have argued for the centrality of the public relations perspective as a useful paradigm for the study and practice of public diplomacy (Fitzpatrick, 2007; Signitzer & Coombs, 1992; Signitzer & Wasmer, 2006). The current author agrees with this argument by positing that mediated public diplomacy is just one element in a broader perspective that is referred to as integrated public diplomacy. The integrated approach identifies three layers of public diplomacy: the short- to medium-termed mediated public diplomacy, the medium- to long-termed nation branding and country reputation, and the long-termed relational public diplomacy that is based on soft power programs (see Figure 1). While each element of integrated public diplomacy differs on the basis of its stakeholder engagement goals, it is only through the integration of all three that governments are likely to produce positive long-term engagement outcomes. The current issue of the American Behavioral Scientist aims to advance integrated public diplomacy research by examining public diplomacy through a strategic communication lens. Six different studies provide unique perspectives on this approach. Together they build knowledge on the growing body of literature that expands public diplomacy research beyond the soft power approach and toward a more integrated outlook. In “The Conditional Nature of Value-Based Proximity between Countries: Strategic Implications for Mediated Public Diplomacy,” Sheafer, Ben-Nun Bloom, Shenhav, and Segev (in press) discuss the relationship between proximity in values and global media coverage and its importance in the field of public diplomacy. Noting the central role of proximity both cultural and political as key predictor of international news flow and coverage, the study compares online nation visibility across 57 nations. The study advances research on both the determinants of international news coverage and public


1253

Golan

diplomacy by highlighting the conditional effects of value proximity on foreign countries’ web visibility, showing that countries systematically differ in recognizing proximity such that democracies base their judgment on similarity in shared democratic principles, while authoritarian countries focus on the affinity in religious culture. Among the practical implications of the study on the integrated public diplomacy approach is the realization that nations should emphasize shared core values (of cultural proximity) when targeting foreign audiences. The study is of particular relevance to the mediated public diplomacy approach when applied to the deliberation of framing a government’s message strategy. Study results can also provide guidance for nation reputation and branding campaigns that can benefit from the incorporation of core values as central components of global outreach campaigns. In “Diplomat in Chief? Assessing the Influence of Presidential Evaluations on Public Diplomacy Outcomes Amongst Foreign Publics,” Golan and Yang (in press) investigate the relationship between evaluations of President Obama and evaluations of the United States and the American people by the people of Pakistan. On the basis of the public relations perspective to public diplomacy research, the authors argue that organizations are often evaluated according to the reputation of their leadership. Through their advanced analysis of data from the Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes Project, the authors present a model that demonstrates just how meaningful evaluations of President Obama were on the evaluations of the United States, the American people, and the U.S.-led global war on terror. The authors suggest that future public diplomacy campaigns should consider the reputation of a nation’s leader as a potential asset of liability. As such, the implications of the study should be considered in both mediated public diplomacy and country reputation campaigns. In “Al-Jazeera, Qatar, and New Tactics in State-Sponsored Media Diplomacy,” Samuel-Azran examines the manner in which the nation of Qatar used the Al-Jazeera network as a strategic tool of public diplomacy. More specifically, the study demonstrates that coverage of matters related to Saudi Arabia was directly related to QatariSaudi international relations. Overall, the Samuel-Azran study shows that Al-Jazeera was used by Qatar as a hybrid network whose independence is influenced by Qatar’s national interests. The implications of the study are of great importance when considering the diffusion of global satellite networks affiliated with global governments, such as the Al-Arabiya network of Saudi Arabia, Russian Television of Russia, and the Xinhua global news agency of China. As the lines blur between broadcast news networks and their strategic use by governments, one must recognize that broadcasting is a key tactic in modern public diplomacy. More specifically, ownership of global broadcasting networks takes the mediated public diplomacy concept to a new level as governments bypass gatekeepers (or appoint them) and are able to directly influence the framing of their nation by the news media. A rare exception of this rule is the American Broadcast Board of Governors (BBG), which is the American broadcast authority that promotes press freedom around the world without much government interference. The BBG’s commitment to its independence and to press freedom has been criticized by some who suggest that the United States must have its own broadcasting arm in the war for international influence over global public opinion.


1254

American Behavioral Scientist 57(9)

In “A Strategic Issue Management (SIM) Approach to Social Media Use in Public Diplomacy: Based on Two Case Studies,” Zhang suggests that the use of social media in public diplomacy should be considered as a strategic issue management (SIM) function. While the author recognizes that social media platforms serve as public diplomacy tactics in their initial and later stages, he argues that they serve a strategic function as well. Two case studies involving U.S. public diplomacy and Chinese citizens were used to present four stages of the SIM model of public diplomacy, which includes a phase whereby an issue ferments and goes viral, a proactive phase, a reactive phase, and phases whereby the issue recedes and a new issue emerges. The author challenges traditional definitions of public diplomacy engagement and discusses the potential impact of social media on 21st-century public diplomacy. In “Strategic Uses of Mediated Public Diplomacy: International Reaction to U.S. Tourism Advertising,” Fullerton and Kendrick discuss the application of paid advertising as a tactic of public diplomacy. The authors discuss the historic use of these tactics by such governments as the United States in its Shared Values Initiative (SVI), which was widely criticized as ineffective, along with other similar case studies. The study uses a quasiexperiment to test the influence of tourism advertising on a variety of public diplomacy measures. Based on a representative sample of Australian adults, the quasi-experiment results indicate that Brand USA’s Land of Dreams commercial (the treatment) was successful in both increasing interest in visiting the United States and improving perceptions of the United States and its people. The authors argue that paid advertising can be a constructive tactic in mediated public diplomacy campaigns. The study’s findings are important to the integrated public diplomacy approach since it demonstrates the potential impact of paid advertising on both the mediated public diplomacy and nation-branding levels. I argue that one potential limitation of paid advertising, as a tactic of public diplomacy campaign, is the high cost of global media buying. However, the proliferation of online filesharing websites, such as Youtube and Reddit, offer governments an alternative or complementary web distribution network for the ads. In “Crisis Communication, Image Restoration, and Battling Stereotypes of Terror and Wars: Media Strategies for Attracting Tourism to Middle Eastern Countries,” Avraham integrates the mediated public diplomacy and nation-branding approaches by studying the manner in which Middle East governments attempted to repair their global image and reinvigorate their tourism industries via public diplomacy engagement campaigns. More specifically, he offers a multistep model for altering place image focusing on source, message, and audiences. The study identifies a multitude of message strategies used by Middle East governments in their image restoration campaigns. Furthermore, the study’s findings highlight the need for the integration of the short- to medium-term mediated public diplomacy approach (as reflected in the nations’ media relations efforts) and the medium- to long-termed nation-branding campaigns aimed at the reshifting of public opinion regarding a nation’s global reputation. References Avraham, E. (in press). Crisis communication, image restoration, and battling stereotypes of terror and wars: Media strategies for attracting tourism to Middle Eastern countries. American Behavioral Scientist.


1255

Golan

Entman, R. M. (2004). Projections of power: Framing news, public opinion, and foreign policy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Entman, R. M. (2008). Theorizing mediated public diplomacy: The U.S. case. International Journal of Press/Politics, 13, 87-102. Fitzpatrick, K. R. (2007). Advancing the new public diplomacy: A public relations perspective. Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 2, 187-221. Fullerton, J. A., & Kendrick, A. (in press). Strategic uses of mediated public diplomacy: International reaction to U.S. tourism advertising. American Behavioral Scientist. Gilboa, E. (2000). Mass communication and diplomacy: A theoretical framework. Communication Theory, 10, 275-309. Golan, G. J., & Yang, S.-U. (in press). Diplomat in chief? Assessing the influence of presidential evaluations on public diplomacy outcomes among foreign publics. American Behavioral Scientist. Kwak, N., Poor, N., & Skoric, M. M. (2006). Honey, I shrunk the world! The relation between Internet use and international engagement. Mass Communication and Society, 9(2), 189-213. Nisbet, E. C., Nisbet, M. C., Scheufele, D. A., & Shanahan, J. (2004). Public diplomacy, television news, and Muslim opinion. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 9, 11-37. Nye, J. S., Jr. (1990). Soft power. Foreign Policy, 153-171. Nye, J. S., Jr. (2008). Public diplomacy and soft power. ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 616, 94-109. Samuel-Azran, T. (in press). Al-Jazeera, Qatar, and new tactics in state-sponsored media diplomacy. American Behavioral Scientist. Seib, P (2007). New media and the new Middle East. New York, NY: Palgrave McMillian. Seib, P. (2008). The Al Jazeera effect. Washington, DC: Potomac Books. Sheafer, T., Ben-Nun Bloom, P., Shenhav, S., & Segev, E. (in press). The conditional nature of value-based proximity between countries: Strategic implications for mediated public diplomacy. American Behavioral Scientist. Sheafer, T., & Gabay, I. (2009). Mediated public diplomacy: A strategic contest over international agenda building and frame building. Political Communication, 26, 447-467. Sheafer, T., & Shenhav, S. R. (2010). Mediated public diplomacy in a new era of warfare. Communication Review, 12, 272-283. Signitzer, B. H., & Coombs, T. (1992). Public relations and public diplomacy: Conceptual covergences. Public Relations Review, 18(2), 137-147. Signitzer, B. H., & Wasmer, C. (2006). Public diplomacy: A specific government public relations function. In I. C. H. Botan, & V. Hazelton (Eds.), Public relations theory II (pp. 435-464). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Zhang, J. (in press). A strategic issue management (SIM) approach to social media use in public diplomacy: Based on two case studies. American Behavioral Scientist.

Author Biography Guy J. Golan is an associate professor of public relations and public diplomacy at the S.I. Newhouse School of Public Communications of Syracuse University. His research focuses on public diplomacy, political communications, and international public relations. Golan has published more than two dozen peer reviewed journal articles in such journals as Communication Research, Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, The Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, and the Journalism Studies.
