ArticlePDF Available

What is Digital Diplomacy, and how is it Practiced around the World? A brief introduction



What is digital diplomacy? How can it best be defined? This is a vexing question given the myriad of ways in which digitalization has impacted the practice of diplomacy. Arriving at such a definition becomes even more elusive when taking into account that scholars and practitioners also use the terms net diplomacy, social media diplomacy, diplomacy 2.0 and cyber diplomacy .This article aims to offer a definition of digital diplomacy. To do so, it first identifies certain events and processes that led to the emergence of digital diplomacy. Next, it demonstrates the manner in which digital diplomacy enables diplomats to overcome many of the limitations of traditional diplomacy. The article also explores the challenges of practicing digital diplomacy before ending with a definition of the term.
What is Digital Diplomacy, and how is it Practiced around the World? A brief introduction
Ilan Manor
Note: This paper was originally published in:
The 2016 Annual Review of the Diplomatist Magazine
What is Digital Diplomacy, and how is it Practiced around the World? A brief introduction
Ilan Manor
Department of International Development
University of Oxford
On April of 2015, a devastating earthquake shook Nepal killing more than 8,000 people.
Within hours of the deadly quake, India’s Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) launched a
dedicated twitter channel through which it coordinated consular aid to Indians stranded in
Nepal. Tweets published by the MEA included the emergency contact numbers for the Indian
embassy in Kathmandu, information on flights scheduled to transport civilians from Nepal
back to India and updates on India’s assistance in search and rescue operations. This is but
one example of how digitalization has impacted diplomatic institutions and diplomats in a
process generally referred to as digital diplomacy.
(tweet published on the MEA’s twitter channel, 26/04/2016)
Buy what is digital diplomacy? How can it best be defined? This is a vexing question given
the myriad of ways in which digitalization has impacted the practice of diplomacy. Arriving
at such a definition becomes even more elusive when taking into account that scholars and
practitioners also use the terms net diplomacy, social media diplomacy, diplomacy 2.0 and
cyber diplomacy
See Costigan, S. S. (2012). Cyberspaces and Global Affairs. Burlington, VT: Ashgate.
This article aims to offer a definition of digital diplomacy. To do so, it first identifies certain
events and processes that led to the emergence of digital diplomacy. Next, it demonstrates the
manner in which digital diplomacy enables diplomats to overcome many of the limitations of
traditional diplomacy. The article also explores the challenges of practicing digital diplomacy
before ending with a definition of the term.
So what is Digital Diplomacy?
Before defining digital diplomacy it may be beneficial to identify events and processes that
led MFAs (Ministries of Foreign Affairs) to adopt digital tools. One such event was the Arab
Spring of 2010. As Professor Phillip Seib of the University of Southern California has
, MFAs were taken by surprise by these democratic Arab revolts as they were not
monitoring the environment in which these revolts took shape- that of Facebook. While
Facebook did not cause the Arab Spring, it did serve as a modern day town square in which
digital citizens came together to openly criticize their governments, an occurrence that could
never have happened offline. Following the Arab Spring, MFAs began to migrate online so as
to better anticipate events in foreign countries.
The second process that led to the emergence of digital diplomacy was terrorist groups' use of
the internet to recruit youths to Jihadi movements
. In an attempt to combat such activities,
and prevent terrorist groups such as Al-Qaeda from gaining online support, the US State
Department took to the internet in order to wage a war of ideas and win over the hearts and
minds of Muslim internet users.
The third, and final process that led diplomats to adopt digital tools was the fact that these
were being used by journalists and news organizations
. Diplomats have traditionally sought
to influence how the media portrays events, actors and even countries given that the media
shapes public opinion. In addition, MFAs rely on journalists and the media for information
regarding events in foreign countries. Thus, once the media migrated online, MFAs were
soon to follow.
Taken together, these three processes suggest that digital diplomacy is actually social media
diplomacy. But this is not entirely the case. Ambassadors now use messaging applications
See Real Time Diplomacy (2012) by Seib
See Digital Diplomacy: The Internet, The battle for Ideas & US Foreign Policy (2010) by Hallams
See Are We there Yet: Have MFAs Realized the Potential of Digital Diplomacy (2016) by Manor
such as WhatsApp in order to influence UN deliberations as they take place. In addition,
MFAs have launched virtual embassies in virtual worlds in order to brand their nation.
Therefore, digital diplomacy includes a variety of digital tools that far exceed that of social
media. While digitalization has brought with it many benefits, it is not without its challenges.
It may thus be useful to explore such benefits and challenges before arriving at a definition of
digital diplomacy.
Digital Diplomacy- Overcoming the Limitations of Traditional Diplomacy
Traditional diplomacy was based on representation. An Ambassador served as one king’s
representative to the court of another king. This ambassador was also “extraordinary and
plenipotentiary” meaning that is was within his purview to negotiate and sign treaties on
behalf of his king. Yet in the age of ICTS (information and communication technologies) one
sovereign, or Prime Minister, may simply call his counterpart thus rendering the Ambassador
not so extraordinary. Likewise, in the age of diplomatic summitry (such as G20 meetings),
leaders come together to directly negotiate with one another.
But while ICTs have reduced an ambassador’s agency opposite a foreign leader, they have
increased his agency opposite foreign populations. SNS (social networking sites) such as
Twitter, Facebook and Instagram enable diplomats and embassies to converse online with
foreign populations and create relationships with them. Thus, digital diplomacy enables one
to overcome the limitations of traditional diplomacy and continuously engage with a large
and diverse audience. Notably, it is the two-way communicative nature of social media that
represents the fundamental difference between digital diplomacy and 20th century diplomacy
practiced via radio or television
Another limitation of traditional diplomacy was lack of representation. Consider for example
that the Emperor of Ethiopia had decided to banish the Swedish Ambassador from his court.
Not only would there be no communication between the two countries, but the Swedish
Ambassador would also be unable to communicate with Ethiopian citizens be it in order to
stimulate trade between both countries, strengthen political ties or even narrate his countries
policies in Africa.
See Digital Diplomacy: Theory & Practice (2015) by Bjola & Holms; Diplomacy in the Digital Age (2015) by
Hocking & Melissen
Nowadays, however, lack of representation does not necessarily infer lack of communication
as MFAs can create virtual embassies instead of physical ones. Such was the case with
Virtual Embassy Teheran, a web based embassy launched by the US state Department in
December of 2011
. Through this website, the US State Department hoped to converse online
with Iranian citizens, an occurrence that could not happen offline as both nations do not have
diplomatic ties. Similarly, in 2007, the Swedish MFA launched a virtual embassy in the
virtual world of Second Life. As Dr. James Pamment of Lund University explains
, the
embassy was meant to serve as a cultural hub that would showcase Swedish art through
gallery exhibitions, lectures and concerts. Given that Second Life attracts millions of users
from all over the world, this virtual embassy was actually the world’s first global embassy.
If we return to the court of the Ethiopian Emperor, we may also consider that the Swedish
Ambassador was the very embodiment of Sweden to all those at court. It was the
Ambassador’s duty to personify Swedish values, Swedish culture and even publicize Swedish
accomplishments. To paraphrase Louis XIV, the Ambassador was the State. Yet such
activities were usually limited to the court and thus failed to influence how the national
citizenry viewed another country.
In modern diplomacy the art of shaping and promoting a country’s image abroad is often
referred to as nation branding. And digital tools have proven themselves a powerful medium
for nation branding. One interesting example is Finland’s national emoji application now
available on the App Store. The application enables users to use a variety of emoji’s, or
images that are representative of Finland’s culture and history. Through this project, which
attracted mass media attention, Finland was able to brand itself as a vibrant, technologically
oriented and humoristic nation challenging the common perception of Finland as a dark and
desolate country.
See Is it the Medium or the Message? Social Media, American Public Relations & Iran (2012) by Metzgar
See New Public Diplomacy in the 21st Century (2013) by Pamment
(Image of Finland Emoji Application in the iTunes Store)
Other MFAs employ social media to brand their nation. Given that self-portraits in the age of
social media are known as Selfies, social media based branding may be conceptualized as
Selfie diplomacy
. The Kenyan foreign ministry, for instance, has been using its SNS
accounts to brand Kenya as the financial gateway to Africa and an emerging technological
powerhouse. Poland, on the other hand, has been crafting a different Selfie labelling itself the
Heart of Europe.
Lastly, as was the case with extraordinary Ambassadors, diplomats have been using digital
tools in order to create trans-national networks. At times, such networks may include MFAs
and NGOs who collaborate on advocacy campaigns. Such was the case with UK Foreign
Office’s campaign to End Sexual Violence in Conflicts
. Through a global network of civil
society organizations, individuals and diplomats, the Foreign Office aimed to influence
policy and prevent sexual violence which is rampant during times of armed conflict.
Other foreign ministries aim to foster networks with their Diasporas
. One example of these
activities is the Indian MEA’s Know India programme that targets second generation
Diaspora (i.e., children of immigrants). The Know India programme website offers a range of
activities for second generation Diasporas so that these retain their cultural heritage and a link
to their country of origin.
The Challenges of Digital Diplomacy
One of the greatest challenges of digital diplomacy lies in its conversational nature.
Following their migration online, diplomats and diplomatic institutions have been forced to
See America’s Selfie: How the US Portrays itself on its Social Media Accounts (2015) by Manor & Segev
See Digital Diplomacy as Transmedia Engagement (2015) by Pamment
See Practicing Digital Diaspora Diplomacy (2016) by Bjola
contend with a vocal and unpredictable online public
. Indeed, verbal attacks and hate
speech against diplomats are an inseparable part of digital diplomacy.
Additionally, MFAs' online activities may soon cause online controversy. Such was the case
with the Selfie below published by the US First Lady Michele Obama. In the selfie, Obama
holds a sign with the hashtag “Bring Back Our Girls”, referencing the abduction of some 250
Nigerian school girls by the Islamist Boko Haram group. The Selfie was meant to raise media
attention to this abduction and indicate that the release of the girls was a US foreign policy
(tweet published by First Lady, 8/05/2014)
Yet what followed was a social media campaign by Twitter users denouncing the First Lady.
Users soon uploaded their own Selfies baring the hashtag “Bring Back You Drones”,
referencing the Obama administrations affinity to drone strikes against suspected terrorists.
Thus, Obama’s Selfie reignited the online conversation regarding US morality in its War on
See Corporate Diplomacy in the Information Age: Catching Up to the Dispersal of Power (2011) by Haynal
(image source:
An additional challenge lies in MFAs’ need to maintain their online diplomatic empires. In
order to attract social media users to their accounts, MFAs must create attractive social media
content. In order to brand their nation, MFAs must converse with online publics and respond
to questions and comments. In order to influence news coverage MFAs must follow
journalists online and in order to predict events in foreign countries they must follow other
diplomatic institutions. These all demand substantial resources. This challenge becomes
evident when one realizes the size of MFAs’ digital diplomacy apparatuses. The US State
Department, for instance, manages an empire of some 1,000 social media accounts
It is also worth noting that digital diplomacy is not practiced in a vacuum. Indeed one MFA’s
online content may immediately be contrasted by another. For instance, the Hamas group that
controls the Gaza strip recently published a new YouTube video depicting life in Gaza. This
video was part of Hamas' election campaign and it therefore portrayed Gaza as a bustling city
with an emerging economy, beautiful beaches and large communal parks.
See Social Media at State: Power, Practice and Conceptual Limits for US Public Diplomacy (2012) by Hayden
(images from Hamas election video)
But immediately after this video was released, Israeli diplomats used it to infer that Hamas
had been lying in recent years by depicting Gaza as the victim of a brutal Israeli military
siege. It is this example that demonstrates that digital diplomacy is a competitive arena in
which MFAs and diplomats bide over audience and media attention while attempting to
discredit one another.
Digital diplomacy also presents certain technical difficulties. The first of these is Bots which
are computer programs that are meant to imitate Internet users and post certain comments and
opinions on SNS and websites. By using Bots, one nation can impact the social media
discourse in another. For instance, it has been alleged that Russia uses Bots in order to create
a swarm of online criticism against German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Regular internet
users, that visit social media sites or even online newspapers, will therefore get the
impression that many in Germany oppose the Chancellor and her migration polices. In this
manner, Bots warp online discourse and people’s perception of reality.
Algorithms present an additional difficulty. Social networking sites are all based on
algorithms that are meant to tailor our online experience. For instance, an algorithm may
detect our political affiliation, world view and even sexual orientation. The algorithms than
exposes us primarily to content that confers with our opinions and beliefs. As such,
algorithms are actually bubbles that limit what we know about the world. This is a major
challenge for MFAs and diplomats looking to alter the manner in which their nation is
perceived. If, for instance, a social media user is inclined to support Palestinian statehood, it
is unlikely that he will be exposed to content posted online by the Israeli MFA. Likewise, a
social media user who is critical of the US is unlikely to be offered articles on US aid to Syria
in his Facebook feed. It is therefore incumbent on diplomats to attempt and crack these
algorithmic bubbles, a task which to date has proven most problematic.
A Definition of Digital Diplomacy
This article aimed to offer but a glimpse into the emerging world of digital diplomacy.
Through a series of examples, it also aimed to demonstrate that digital diplomacy is a global
phenomenon. From Nairobi to Delhi, and Lima to Ottawa, MFAs and diplomats are
embracing digital tools. This process offers both great rewards, and great challenges. Finally,
the article illustrates the fact that digital diplomacy is more than just tweeting. It is a
conceptual shift in diplomatic practice that places and emphasis on conversing with foreign
populations. It is a cultural shift which requires that MFA share information rather than guard
it. And it is a technological shift that necessitates that diplomats develop digital skills
spanning from knowledge of social media algorithms to the writing of computer programs
and smartphone applications.
For some diplomats it is a time of innovation and experimentation. For others, it is a culture
It is this realization that demands a definition of digital diplomacy that is both inclusive and
particular, that is both optimistic and cautious. Thus, this article ends with the following
definition of digital diplomacy-
The positive and negative impact digitalization has had on the practice of diplomacy at both
the institutional and personal level
Author Bio:
Ilan Manor is PhD student at the University of Oxford. His research focuses on the manner in
which foreign ministries use social media during times of geo-political crises. His book Are
We There Yet: Have MFAs Realized the Potential of Digital Diplomacy was recently
published as part of Brill’s Research Perspectives in Diplomacy and Foreign Policy. His
analysis of America’s Selfie (with Elad Segev) was recently published in Digital Diplomacy:
Theory & Practice (Routledge). He has contributed to the Hague Journal of Diplomacy and
Global Affairs. He blogs on the issue of digital diplomacy at
... Fergus Hanson defines it as 'the use of internet and new information communication technologies to help achieve diplomatic objectives' (detiknews 2017). Digital diplomacy applies both positive and negative impacts of the internet into the practice of diplomacy at the institutional and personal level (Manor 2016). Everyone involved in this method has a heavy load to be taken care of, due to the possible results it may bring and affect the state. ...
... As soon as the earthquake happened, India's Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) spreads the news on Twitter, coordinated some consular aids to Indians residing in Nepal. Each piece of important information was broadcast, such as contact number of Indian embassy in Kathmandu, flights schedules, and some updates on search and rescue operations (Manor 2016). These contacts were substantially helpful to conduct faster evacuation. ...
... Lack of representation is not a concern for state nowadays. Manor (2016) gives an example from the case of US' Virtual Embassy in Tehran which was launched in December 2011. US expected this website to help them interact with Iranian citizens online, because United States (US) and Iran do not have any diplomatic relationship. ...
Full-text available
Indonesia is known as a country whose people massively use social media. It is currentlyone of the largest internet users in the world, especially social media. President of Indonesia,Joko Widodo, (famously called ‘Jokowi’) also tries to ‘fit in’ to the trend of social media acrossIndonesia. Jokowi has several social media accounts, including Facebook, Twitter, Instagram,and YouTube. He even publishes a lot of his works, including his meeting agenda with otherstates’ leaders. Jokowi sometimes uploads some video blogs or ‘vlogs’ which some of them arecollaborations with leaders of powerful countries, such as King Salman Abdul Aziz of SaudiArabia, Emmanuel Macron of France, and many others. Therefore, the authors consider thisas a great opportunity for Indonesia to start digital diplomacy. Through literature study,the authors will provide a broader analysis of prospect and challenge of Indonesia’s digitaldiplomacy. The findings showed that digital diplomacy implemented by Jokowi has a goodprospect albeit many challenges. Moreover, it was also discovered that this type of diplomacycould bring some threats to Indonesia.
... Kent and Taylor (1998, p. 325) highlighted five principles that apply to dialogic communication on the web: 1) dialogic loop, through which audiences are capable of requesting information to organizations and they can provide the requested information; 2) utility of information, through which is presumed that organizations provide useful information for all audiences; 3) generation of return visits, meaning, websites have characteristics which make users return; 4) easy interface related to the way information is presented; and 5) visitor retention. In the last decade, the Theory of Dialogic Communication of Kent and Taylor has been adapted to studies related to dialogic communication on social media (Bonsón & Ratkai, 2013;Sommerfeldt & Yang, 2018;Uysal, 2018), also, it has been used to prove online communication of MFAs with citizens, as well as its application in studies related to public diplomacy (Cha et al., 2015;Ittefaq, 2019;Manor, 2017Manor, , 2019. The results mentioned in the literature point towards general failures when seeking to achieve the communication potential of social media (Ittefaq, 2019, p. 65;Manor & Segev, 2015, p. 11) since MFAs send messages, but do not respond to comments, questions or requests of users through this channel. ...
Full-text available
This study seeks to gauge the level of engagement and interaction of seven Ministries of Foreign Affairs from the Americas with citizens who requested assistance through Twitter during the first months of the covid-19 pandemic. Among the results obtained significant differences are identified, notably an increase in dialogic communication with respect to previous studies, explained by the state of emergency. In addition, countries that achieved high levels of engagement are those that focused their communication towards the user. Thus, different approaches to digital diplomacy are detected in its consular activities.
... Н. Калл пропонує розглядати цифрову дипломатію як самостійну новітню сферу та пов'язує це з фундаментальними змінами у міжнародних відносинах і зовнішній політиці із появою цифрових інструментів та простору [2]. Зважена позиція запропонована І. Манором, який вважає, що цифрова дипломатія є окремим феноменом, що виник завдяки диджиталізації сфери комунікації та дипломатії і є послідовником публічної дипломатії, проте відділяється від неї [3]. ...
Diplomacy is a key tool for conducting foreign policy, and it has experienced changes throughout the past centuries. Information and communication technologies (ICTs) and social media platforms began playing a highly important role in achieving diplomatic objectives leading to the emergence of the term “digital diplomacy.” Being one of the main trends in contemporary diplomatic communication, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, taking a closer look at digital diplomacy is worthwhile. This chapter analyzes the main characteristics of digital diplomacy as well as its opportunities and challenges, compares digital and traditional diplomacy, and aims to determine whether traditional diplomacy is in decline. The author argues that traditional diplomacy is not antiquated; traditional and digital diplomacy complement each other. Diplomats will need to function in a hybrid regime, both in offline and online environments. Utilizing digital diplomacy will improve the effectiveness of traditional diplomacy contributing to more multifaceted, comprehensive, and results-oriented foreign policy.
Full-text available
The digital media platforms are a communication field imposed in public and private life, and this has motivated the diplomatic authorities in the world to employ them in their communication with their audiences and their counterparts. Hence, the article comes to reveal the effectiveness of Algerian Public diplomacy in employing “Twitter” in its diplomatic activities for the period from January 1 to April 30, 2021, and to determine the level of interaction achieved, through analysing (133) tweets of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The article has found that the most topics of Algerian public diplomacy on Twitter are issues of common interest by (30.1%), and the most prominent communication activities are meetings (21.8%), then visits, and phone calls, by (17.3%). Also, it has found that the original tweet constituted (86.5%), and the most popular design in which the Algerian Ministry of Foreign Affairs' tweets appeared, is text with an image (60.2%). Finally, the level of interaction is extraordinarily strong (52.6%).
Full-text available
The new Corona pandemic surpasses all the pandemics that the world has faced since the Spanish pandemic in 1918, which started late 2019 due to a new Coronavirus called"SARS CoV2", in addition to high mortality rates, the pandemic has caused economic losses, and disrupted all human activities by closing borders and adopting a lockdown system to limit the transmission of the virus. At the level of international relations, most of the diplomatic meetings and conferences were cancelled which led to the reliance on digital technologies to revive diplomatic activity and avoid international isolation with its repercussions on countries. The article explores the role of digital diplomacy, as a form of modern diplomacy in mitigating the effects of the pandemic on states and as well as laying the foundations of international solidarity, exchanging experiences and means of confrontation, in the same context the choice of digital diplomacy is considered as an extension of traditional diplomacy in light of the development witnessed in the field of (ICTs); which opens the door to challenges related to data security and confidentiality of communication as well as to the ethical challenges resulting from the use of digital technologies and online platforms.
Full-text available
This research treats a new and contemporary subject, i.e. e-diplomacy. Diplomacy has been transformed as a tool of foreign policy and a new pattern of diplomatic practice has emerged through the establishment of virtual embassies and websites of foreign ministries and diplomatic institutions, and also through the large presence of diplomats on social network websites. Additionally, this has been utilized in diplomatic administration and public diplomacy to achieve diplomatic goals. This research focuses on the concept of e-diplomacy and highlights its main characteristics and opportunities it offers to international units. It also focuses on the most important necessities and implications of using e-diplomacy, pros and cons to challenges and risks. With the opportunities offered by such diplomacy to international units in the exercise of their external relations, there are many requirements for such diplomacy. The research has proved its hypothesis which is that the diplomacy of international units cannot be successful if they fail or neglect to provide the essential requirements for e-diplomacy. They really need to use this diplomacy if they want their diplomacy to succeed and develop or if they are to respond to developments in diplomacy, communication technology, and information. Ignoring this will expose them to isolation from the international community, because the role of international relations, now in the official and popular spheres, depends largely on e-diplomacy, especially public diplomacy. It formulates faster communication channels and more efficient than traditional channels and can reach a wider audience, as well as administrative, structural, and informational capabilities it provides.
With the current massive coverage of Internet technologies and ongoing spread as well as progressively growing influence of social media platforms, it is natural that diplomacy as a sphere could not refrain from this phenomenon. Moreover, not only did it nor abstain, it has harnessed the new opportunities instead. This paper contributes to the debate on the phenomenon of digital diplomacy which has entered the scientific environment relatively recently and has not yet been comprehensively conceptualized into a single and globally recognized theory. In this paper we study how digital diplomacy is organized and implemented in the Czech Republic. The paper focuses on the approach of the Czech Republic to digital diplomacy, the country’s implementation of its tools and digital diplomacy is embedded within the foreign policy of the state. The author provides an overview of the legal framework underlying development of digital diplomacy in the Czech Republic. The paper also outlines the institutional system operating in the sphere and how its elements contribute to the attainment of the goals typically set up by digital diplomacy. Finally, the author defines the projects created by the Czech governmental and non-governmental bodies aiming at strengthening the image of the country and promoting its brand for the foreign audiences using online tools and solutions. The paper also offers the analysis of efficiency of the primary digital diplomacy tools applied by the Czech Republic in its foreign policy and provides recommendations and conclusions based on the data included for the research.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.