ArticlePDF Available

Building a Network to "Tell China Stories Well": Chinese Diplomatic Communication Strategies on Twitter


Abstract and Figures

The phrase “tell China stories well” (jianghao zhongguo gushi) is an important guide to China’s approach to public diplomacy. Uttered by Chinese president Xi Jinping in 2013, this phrase is an encouragement to use China’s own communication channels to promote and testify to official Chinese views and opinions and to strengthen the international influence of China. While social media diplomacy in China is still in its infancy, the Chinese government has launched a few diplomatic Twitter accounts to develop its public diplomacy network and to post stories about China for a global audience. Using a mixed- methods approach (i.e., manual coding, computer-assisted content analysis, network analysis, and discourse analysis), we examined how the Chinese government has mobilized a small number of diplomatic Twitter accounts to build a communication network and pursue the external propaganda goals of the Communist Party of China.
Content may be subject to copyright.
International Journal of Communication 13(2019), 29843007 19328036/20190005
Copyright © 2019 (Zhao Alexandre Huang and Rui Wang). Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution
Non-commercial No Derivatives (by-nc-nd). Available at
Building a Network to “Tell China Stories Well”:
Chinese Diplomatic Communication Strategies on Twitter
University of Paris-East, Laboratory of DICEN-IDF, France
Louisiana State University, USA
The phrase “tell China stories well” (jianghao zhongguo gushi) is an important guide to
China’s approach to public diplomacy. Uttered by Chinese president Xi Jinping in 2013,
this phrase is an encouragement to use China’s own communication channels to promote
and testify to official Chinese views and opinions and to strengthen the international
influence of China. While social media diplomacy in China is still in its infancy, the Chinese
government has launched a few diplomatic Twitter accounts to develop its public
diplomacy network and to post stories about China for a global audience. Using a mixed-
methods approach (i.e., manual coding, computer-assisted content analysis, network
analysis, and discourse analysis), we examined how the Chinese government has
mobilized a small number of diplomatic Twitter accounts to build a communication network
and pursue the external propaganda goals of the Communist Party of China.
Keywords: China, public diplomacy, Twitter, network communication
Widespread adoption of digital devices and social media have made contemporary society more
global and networked than ever before (Castells, 2010). Individuals are not only able to disseminate
messages and interact with others in real time, but they can also participate in various forms of exchange
because of the openness of organizations and institutions. Because of their flexibility and convenience, social
media platforms such as Twitter have not only sped up organizational and institutional communication but
also enhanced connectivity, symmetrical interaction, dialogue, and engagement between organizations and
target audiences. The Chinese government has also enjoyed the communication dividends of social media,
attempting to mobilize it in the diplomatic arena. According to an official report, China’s social media
diplomacy is still in its “infancy” (F. Chen, 2015, p. 28). Our research has revealed the same. By monitoring
all official websites of Chinese diplomatic departments, including the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Chinese
embassies and consulates in foreign countries, and Chinese missions in international organizations, we find
that only fourteen Chinese embassies and consulates abroad had officially opened Twitter accounts and that
only three Chinese diplomats were active on Twitter.
Zhao Alexandre Huang:
Rui Wang:
Date submitted: 20181218
International Journal of Communication 13(2019) Building a Network 2985
Analyzing the Twitter contents of two Chinese missions to the European Union and Canada, Huang
and Arifon (2018) find that the Chinese government has tried to use social media platforms to project the
“Chinese dream.” All twitter contents sent by Chinese embassies had “timid polyphonic features” (p. 51).
“Timid polyphony” is an expression referring to Chinese institutional communication practices under the
censorship system of the Communist Party of China (CPC); it is the proactive attempt by Chinese public
institutions to include various voices and opinions in news writing and storytelling. The objective is to display,
promote, and endorse specific events from diverse perspectives without violating the government’s
censorship rules. Similar to musical polyphony, in which the melodic lines of multiple voices or instruments
interweave to complement the main theme, polyphonic Twitter content creates political harmony to
represent China in a favorable way. Chinese public diplomacy practitioners intentionally bring multiple
viewpoints and voices into their Twitter content while still respecting the government’s censorship rules, to
create a tolerant, democratic, and responsible online image of a rising global power. Although Chinese
diplomatic missions and diplomats operate only a few Twitter accounts, the retweets, replies, and mentions
that redistribute content across a vast network create another form of polyphony that can help China
promote a favorable image through storytelling.
In this study, we examined the structure of the Chinese diplomatic Twitter network, the
collaborations and interactions that characterize that network, and the communicative strategies used on
the featured Twitter accounts. We explored the following questions: How does the Chinese government
manage its waixuan (external publicity) and public diplomacy? How do Chinese missions, consulates, and
diplomats use Twitter to build a communication network for “telling China Stories well and spreading China’s
Voices” (Xi, 2013, p. 2)?
Public Diplomacy in the Digital Age
Scholars from various fields (e.g., communication, public relations, international relations, and
political science) have shaped the complex definition of the hybrid term “public diplomacy,” which is
generally regarded as direct communication, initiated by a government, to “influence a foreign government,
by influencing its citizens” (Frederick, 1993, p. 229). Gilboa (2008) developed this concept by adding
nonstate actors and underlining the importance of using various communication channels to alter public
opinion in foreign nations. Public relations scholars have conceptualized public diplomacy as a long-term
strategic communication effort to build a favorable foreign public perception and national image while
achieving mutual cross-cultural and cross-border understanding and relationships (Buhmann & Ingenhoff,
2015; Fitzpatrick, 2007; Huang & Arifon, 2018).
Recent findings suggest that mass media-driven public diplomacy, an example of the one-way
communication model, is increasingly difficult to use in the social media era (Sevin & Ingenhoff, 2018; J.
Wang, 2006; Zaharna, 2007, 2018b). First, “at the core of social media technology” (Bucy, 2004, p. 373)
is interactivity, an exchange-based system of understanding that requires a “dynamic perspective”
(Henneberg, 2002, p. 95). Interactivity is an “expression of the extent that in a given series of
communication exchanges, any third (or later) transmission (or message) is related to the degree to which
previous exchanges referred to even earlier transmissions” (Rafaeli, 1988, p. 111). In the social media age,
scholars have discussed interactivity in various ways: (a) two-way communication (Rafaeli, 1988; van Dijk,
2986 Zhao Alexandre Huang and Rui Wang International Journal of Communication 13(2019)
1999), (b) personalization of information (Kalyanaraman & Sundar, 2006), and (c) technological support for
changing the medium, model, source, and message of communication (Sundar, 2009; Zaharna, 2007).
Lilleker (2015) indicated that any online click could be regarded as a replication of face-to-face conversation,
which has a certain degree of interactivity because of its experiential and perceptual nature (Bucy, 2004).
Second, highly interactive online content can heighten individual participation in specific social media topics
(Oh & Sundar, 2015). Online interaction can promote more favorable public attitudes toward the information
distributed on a network and allows individuals to maneuver across a dynamic terrain, communicating and
engaging with others in real time (Pfeil, Arjan, & Zaphiris, 2009). Therefore, interactivity can “positively
influence persuasion” (Sundar & Kim, 2005, p. 15). Third, social media offers “reciprocal symbolic
interaction” (Fuchs, 2014, p. 54), which shows “the behavior of a plurality of actors insofar as, in its
meaningful content, the action of each takes account of that of the others” (Weber, 1978, p. 26).
Accordingly, meaningful, symbolic interaction on social media strengthens social relationships.
Social media “manifest a convergence between personal communication (to be shared one-to-one) and
public media (to be shared with nobody in particular)” (Meikle & Young, 2011, p. 68). All formal
communication activities need to be connective, timely, and interactive in the digital age. As envisioned by
Deibert (1997), the evolution of communication technology created and shaped the communication
ecosystem and dynamics of international political exchange. The “two-way communication” and interactive
models are common targets of public diplomacy research. Gregory (2011) emphasized the necessity of
dialogue and interaction between nations, institutions, and people for relationship building. Fitzpatrick
(2007), and Fitzpatrick, Fullerton, and Kendrick (2013) placed relationship management at the core of public
diplomacy. Kampf, Manor, and Segev (2015) also demonstrated the potential of social media to foster
dialogue and relationship building between a country and foreign populations. Zaharna (2018a, 2018b),
using a cultural approach, argued that relationalism has become a trend in public diplomacy research and
practice. In the social media era, public diplomacy has shifted toward a network-building, development-
oriented, and relationship-focused communication model.
China’s Xuanchuan and Public Diplomacy
Public diplomacy has been at the heart of the Chinese national promotion strategy since the
beginning of Xi Jinping’s first presidential term (Q. Zhao & Lei, 2015, p. 3). Replicating the idea of the
“American dream,” Xi proposed the “Chinese dream” (Zhongguo Meng) as a guiding idea for public
diplomacy (Shen, 2015; Q. Zhao, 2018). In line with this idea, the Chinese government has looked for
innovative ways to broadcast stories about China to the rest of world. As Xi (2003) mentioned at the National
Conference on Propaganda and Ideology, China needed to “create new concepts, new categories, and new
expressions that could be accepted by both China and foreign countries” (p. 2) to serve the purpose of
duiwai xuanchuan (or waixuan, meaning external propaganda
The term waixuan was initially translated into English by the Chinese government as “external
propaganda.” In 2004, being clearly aware of the ideological and totalitarian connotation of the term
waixuan, Beijing rebranded the term in Englishand only in Englishto mean “external publicity” (see
Rawnsley, 2016; Sun, 2015).
International Journal of Communication 13(2019) Building a Network 2987
Chinese scholars have disagreed with Western interpretations of xuanchuan as a dirty notion” that
underpins the restriction of public information, truncated or misleading distribution of political facts, and
even false information communicated by the government. In China, the term “propaganda” has positive
connotations, including public communication (Shi & Shi, 2007), public relations (X. Chen & Liu, 2015; Zhou,
2010), and legitimate promotion and advertising (Y. Wang, 2008). External propaganda (waixuan) includes
“all communication efforts to promote China in a positive way abroad” (Sun, 2015, p. 404). Therefore,
Chinese scholars understand public diplomacy as an extension of external propaganda. It is an invisible and
ubiquitous global communication practice that shapes China’s international image, promotes Chinese
culture, and upholds Chinese politics. Public diplomacy achieves two-way communication and interaction
with foreign audiences (Zhou, 2018). Chinese politicians have also defined “public diplomacy” in official
rhetorical terms. In the journal of Qiushithe official publication for research on CPC ideology and theory
the former foreign minister Yang Jiechi (2011) emphasized that China’s public diplomacy must be a long-
term, network-oriented approach to relationship building.
At the same time, within the communist system of government in China, all media and foreign-
related institutions“the throat and tongue of the party” (Sun, 2015, pp. 403404)must operate in line
with CPC propaganda and control. The term “gatekeeping,” according to Chinese communication theory, is
invariably related to censorship, including the self-censorship of media practitioners. At the top of the
censorship pyramid, the Department of Publicity of the Central Committee of the CPC is responsible for
public opinion censorship, communication strategies, and external propaganda rhetoric in China.
Social media usage is also subject to the paradigm of propaganda and public opinion censorship.
Both the government and the academy in China consider the Internet a “two-edged sword” (Sun, 2015, p.
409). On the one hand, international relations scholars are prudent when addressing the government’s use
of social media, repeatedly emphasizing government dominance in China’s social media strategy for public
diplomacy (X. Li & Wang, 2010). In line with this idea of “government dominance,” the responsibilities of
the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China are “to release information about important
diplomatic activities . . . [and] organize public diplomacy activities” (Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s
Republic of China, n.d., para. 9). On the other hand, Chinese communication scholars are more optimistic
about the use of social media, encouraging government institutions, particularly embassies and news
agencies, to create Twitter and Facebook accounts to enhance and extend international communication and
to engage and interact with foreign audiences (F. Chen, 2015; X. Chen & Liu, 2015).
Building Networks on Twitter
When communication technology (e.g., social media) and public diplomacy coexist in a social
environment, the integration of information resources, institutions, and audiences (Hayden, 2013) creates
a network that can build relationships and promote interaction. According to Cooke and Lawrence (2005),
this network is similar to “institutionalized social relations which entails making a choice to be connected
across recognized boundaries” (p. 1). It is a new communication channel in which the production,
exchange, and strategic use of information play key roles (Keck & Sikkink, 1998). In other words, network
communication builds internal structures of exchange, fosters relationship dynamics among network
members, and promotes cocreation of content.
2988 Zhao Alexandre Huang and Rui Wang International Journal of Communication 13(2019)
Therefore, investigating the application of network communication to public diplomacy requires
attention not only to network structure but also to communication dynamics. Zaharna (2014) regarded a
network based on the Internet and social media as an organizational structure in which online connectivity
and interactivity result in “collaborative initiatives,” including information, narrative, knowledge, and
innovation (p. 222). The network-building characteristics of Twitter also result in collaborative initiatives.
First, the basic functions of Twitter establish a virtual communication structure. Second, the connectivity
and interactivity made possible by Twitter facilitates widespread message dissemination.
Twitter networks consist of users and the connections and exchanges that occur when users
retweet, mention, or reply to each other (Cha, Haddadi, Benevenuto, & Gummadi, 2010). Users can
retweet to show endorsement, raise the visibility of original tweets, amplify and spread thoughts, start
conversations, and validate the views of others (boyd, Golder, & Lotan, 2010). Mentions, in particular,
epitomize a high level of interactivity and engagement, enabling users to converse directly with each
other. Although retweets, mentions, and replies establish network relationships using Twitter handles
(i.e., @username), the hashtag function facilitates network building using common topics and shared
interests. Hashtags (words or phrases preceded by “#”) allow publics to index and access larger
conversations across the Twitter network.
If the text, images, videos, and URLs featured in tweets construct and circulate meaning,
hashtags and mentions facilitate the intertextual connections among tweets. Bonilla and Rosa (2015)
argued that hashtags and mentions link “a broad range of tweets on a given topic or disparate topics as
part of an intertextual chain” (p. 5). This intertextuality is not only a concrete illustration of the network
structure of Twitter; it also contributes to network communication. The interdiscursive capacity of
hashtags and the interconnective capacity of mentions can capture accompanying texts and their
indexical meanings as part of a frame” (Bonilla & Rosa, 2015, p. 6). Furthermore, in an intertextual chain,
all contents and their associated elements exist within a complex network of interconnected meanings,
backgrounds, and messages (Kristeva, 2002). That is to say, the use of discourse, symbols, and images
suggest an intention (Bakhtin, 1981; Davis, 2013) to “induce social actions” (Hauser, 2002, p. 3). This
idea is consistent with the connective, timely, and interactive features of Twitter communication.
Retweets, hashtags, and replies supplement and distribute various pieces of information about a particular
topic, continually growing and empowering a cocreated discourse network of senders and receivers.
Although the Twitter platform has successfully connected users worldwide, government
institutions still have difficulty building online networks. For instance, scholars have shown that most
online followers of politicians are family members, friends, or acquaintances (Baxter & Marcella, 2012;
Strauß, Kruikemeier, van der Meulen, & van Noort, 2015). To reach a broader public and build and
maintain a diverse network, institutions and politicians must understand how to use Twitter strategically
and effectively. Previous findings indicate that social media users can expand their networks using
interactive communication with their followers, such as allowing followers to post comments or send
private messages, responding to followers’ questions, and tapping various hashtags in posts (Baxter &
Marcella, 2012; Strauß et al., 2015).
International Journal of Communication 13(2019) Building a Network 2989
Building on the network communication approach of Zaharna (2007, 2014), we proposed research
questions and hypotheses based on three elements: network construction, collaboration and interaction on
a network, and network communication strategies. First, network construction refers to facilitating
information exchange and flow by linking individuals and organizations (Zaharna, 2007). Therefore, we
assessed how various actors performed on the Twitter network built by Chinese diplomatic agencies:
RQ1: How do Chinese diplomatic missions and diplomats use Twitter to maintain and extend the
RQ2a: Who most frequently interacts with Chinese diplomatic Twitter accounts via retweets, replies,
and/or mentions?
RQ2b: Which hashtags most frequently appear on the network?
Second, cooperation and interaction on the network builds relationships and increases diversity.
The effectiveness of network synergy determines the stability of network construction and the
performance of communication strategy on the network (Zaharna, 2014). A network accumulates
resources from relationship-building activities. Because Chinese state-owned media outlets have opened
Twitter accounts and participated in international communication for years, we expected that Chinese
diplomatic departments and officials would have added those outlets to the network.
H1: Chinese diplomatic departments and officials continue to build a network using Chinese state-
owned media on Twitter.
Third, in transnational networks, the combination of local roots and global links can be a source
of diversity (Zaharna, 2007). Therefore, we proposed the following hypothesis and research question:
H2: Chinese diplomatic departments and officials continue to build a network with foreign
counterparts on Twitter.
RQ3: In addition to diplomatic departments and officials, do any other user groups participate in
Chinese diplomatic communication on Twitter?
Finally, from the perspective of network strategy, we explored how networks use information to
generate credibility, storylines, or master narratives:
RQ4: How do Chinese diplomatic missions and diplomats effectively create favorable narratives about
China on Twitter?
2990 Zhao Alexandre Huang and Rui Wang International Journal of Communication 13(2019)
Few scholars have explored Chinese diplomatic Twitter accounts. To determine the number of
Twitter accounts held by Chinese missions and diplomats, we monitored the websites of all foreign
agencies listed on the “Missions Overseas”
page created by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of China. First,
we searched for links to the Twitter accounts of relevant institutions or diplomats published directly on
these official websites. In addition, we searched Twitter using keywords such as “Chinese embassy,”
“embassy of China,” and “Chinese ambassador.” We found only fourteen accounts held by institutions
and three accounts held by diplomats. However, we excluded four of the institutional accounts for the
following reasons: (a) the cultural office of the embassy of China in Chile had not been updated since
December 21, 2015; (b) the embassy of China in Switzerland had no new posts since March 3, 2016; and
(c) embassies of China in Japan and Turkey had Twitter accounts published in languages we did not
Table 1 in the results section lists the profiles of the Chinese diplomatic Twitter accounts we
We used the Digital Methods Initiative Twitter Capture, Analysis Toolset (DMI-TCAT), and the
Twitter API to collect tweets posted by Chinese diplomatic departments and diplomats. Written in MySQL,
PHP, JavaScript, and Python, DMI-TCAT is a set of tools for retrieving and amassing tweets (Borra &
Rieder, 2014). Using Twitter’s REST API, DMI-TCAT can collect roughly 3,200 of the most recent tweets
from each Twitter account. For Twitter accounts with fewer than 3,200 posts, this method collects all
existing tweets. We collected a total of 17,372 tweets posted between August 18, 2014, and October 20,
2018 (UTC),
and stored this dataset in DMI-TCAT for further statistical and network analysis.
Similar to Meraz and Papacharissi (2013), we used a multimethods approach. First, we used
quantitative methods to identify influential users on Twitter. In addition to statistical analysis, we
conducted discourse analysis to understand the “systematic links between texts, discourse practices, and
sociocultural practices” (Fairclough, as cited in Meraz & Papacharissi, 2013, p. 147). We read the content
of the tweets carefully for meaning and rhetorical strategy.
Following methods used in previous studies,
we coded the 115 most-mentioned (i.e., 15
times) Twitter users for user type, country of origin, and location. Using Gephi (Bastian, Heymann, &
Missions Overseas (n.d.). Retrieved from Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China
website at
Embassy of China in Japan (@ChnEmbassy_jp) posted in Japanese; Embassy of China in Turkey
(@ChinaEmbTurkey) posted in Turkish.
We collected tweets on October 20, 2018, using the Twitter API, which allows users to collect roughly
3,200 of the most recent tweets from each Twitter account. The oldest tweet collected was posted on August
18, 2014. Therefore, our sample spans from August 18, 2014, to October 20, 2018.
Meraz and Papacharissi (2013) coded the top 100 tweeters for their affiliations; Groshek and Tandoc
(2017) coded the top 100 users into three user types. In this study, we found that the account of Luo
Zhaohui (Chinese Ambassador to India) ranked 102nd and Wei Qiang (Chinese Ambassador to Panama)
ranked 107th. We still included these two accounts because we focused on Chinese diplomatic Twitter
International Journal of Communication 13(2019) Building a Network 2991
Jacomy, 2009), we graphed the connections among relevant Twitter accounts. To discover different
content types, we downloaded a random sample of 1,000 Chinese diplomatic tweets for content analysis.
The unit of analysis was a single tweet. We used emergent coding so that all tweet topics were set by
examination of the data rather than reference to previous findings (Stemler, 2001). During our
investigation, we (a) analyzed China’s official communication strategies on Twitter, (b) identified various
content types in China’s official and unofficial diplomatic discourse, and (c) examined how these content
types contributed to China’s public diplomacy.
To build categories and improve accuracy, we coded 200 tweets together. Then we each coded
the same 100 tweets independently to assess intercoder reliability using ReCal2 (Freelon, 2010).
Krippendorff’s alpha was 0.916, which is above the minimum standard of 0.70. Then, we each coded 350
tweets separately.
Among the 13 Twitter accounts we observed (see Table 1), Chinese missions and diplomats
followed three primary patterns of usage:
First, diplomats actively used Twitter to connect with other users. Although the information
released was primarily work oriented, it occasionally incorporated personal life, sentiments, and attitudes.
For instance, Zhao Lijian, a diplomat at the Chinese Embassy in Pakistan, was the most prolific Chinese
diplomat on Twitter. His account was created in May 2010, the earliest of all the Chinese diplomatic
accounts. Zhao had sent a total of 40,526 tweets, had 202,294 followers, and was following 215,505
Second, several Chinese missions used Twitter to communicate and interact with foreign
audiences and counterparts, promoting China in dynamic ways. Mission of the People’s Republic of China
to the European Union, for instance, was the most prolific Chinese diplomatic agency on Twitter. Its
account was created in September 2013 and had a much higher proportion of original tweets and online
interactions (e.g., mentions, retweets, and hashtags) than the other accounts.
Third, several Chinese diplomatic accounts used Twitter only to release information. They did not
seek to interact with foreign audiences for fear of distress and uncertainty caused by multiple voices
(Arsène, 2012; A. K. Li, 2015). For instance, the account of the Consulate General of the People’s Republic
of China in Chicago used Twitter only to disseminate information and was not following any other users.
research. Because Wei Qiang was mentioned 15 times, we set the threshold to 15 mentions, ultimately
selecting the top 115 accounts.
2992 Zhao Alexandre Huang and Rui Wang International Journal of Communication 13(2019)
Table 1. Profiles of Chinese Diplomatic Twitter Accounts.
Mission of the Peoples Republic of
China to the European Union
Embassy of the Peoples Republic
of China in Canada
Permanent Mission of the Peoples
Republic of China to the United
Permanent Mission of the Peoples
Republic of China to the United
Nations at Geneva and Other
International Organizations in
Embassy of the Peoples Republic
of China in the Islamic Republic of
Embassy of the People’s Republic
of China in the Republic of the
Consulate General of the People’s
Republic of China in Chicago
Embassy of the People’s Republic
of China in the Republic of
Embassy of the People’s Republic
of China in the Republic of Uganda
Embassy of the People’s Republic
of China in the Republic of
Zhao Lijian (diplomat in Pakistan)
Wei Qiang (ambassador to
Luo Zhaohui (ambassador to
International Journal of Communication 13(2019) Building a Network 2993
To explore how Chinese missions and diplomats continue to build a communication network on
Twitter (RQ1), we examined user interactions and related content connections. User interaction analysis
focused on three actions: (a) using @mention in an original tweet, (b) retweeting a tweet, and (c) replying
to a tweet. Related content connection analysis focused on the use of hashtags.
First, original tweets revealed the official attitudes and aims of Chinese diplomatic departments.
The inclusion of @mention could be considered an active attempt to interact and exchange with others.
Among tweets posted by Chinese diplomatic Twitter accounts with a high frequency of original tweets (
60%), 34.67% included @mention. The Mission of the People’s Republic of China to the European Union
used @mention most frequently; 53% of its tweets had at least one “@” symbol, followed by Permanent
Mission of the People’s Republic of China to the United Nations (49%), Embassy of the People’s Republic of
China in Canada (44%), and Permanent Mission of the Peoples Republic of China to the United Nations at
Geneva and Other International Organizations in Switzerland (37%). The consulate general of China in
Chicago and the Chinese Embassy in Uganda had a high original content rate ( 94%) as well, but they
rarely used @mention ( 20%), confirming their cautious approach to diplomatic communication on Twitter
(i.e., more information release than interaction).
Retweeting was also an important way that Chinese diplomatic services established a
communication network. For instance, as the most productive Twitter user in our sample, the diplomat Zhao
Lijian posted 68 tweets per day on average (Max = 224, Min = 1, Median = 65, n = 3,213), 89.4% of which
were retweets. However, the reply function was not frequently used by Chinese diplomatic accounts. Only
Ambassador Wei Qiang used this function to interact with his foreign counterparts (13% of his total).
The hashtag allows all posts featuring the same hashtag to be linked. Chinese diplomatic accounts
used this method to build a polyphonic information network, fulfilling the “harmonious communication
objective” of telling favorable China stories on Twitter (Huang & Arifon, 2018, p. 43). All Chinese diplomatic
accounts used hashtags in their tweets. Our findings show that the mission of China to the European Union
had the highest proportion of tweets with at least one hashtag (n = 2,680; 83%), followed by Chinese
Embassy in Pakistan (n = 1206; 38%) and Zhao Lijian (n = 1079; 34%).
To address RQ2a and RQ2b, we identified (a) who frequently interacted with Chinese diplomatic
accounts and (b) which hashtags were most frequent. Our findings indicate that Chinese media held
dominant positions on the Chinese diplomatic Twitter network. Chinese diplomats often forwarded news
stories from the Twitter accounts of Chinese mainstream media outlets. Xinhua News Agency was the most-
mentioned account (2,034 times), followed by People’s Daily (1,253 times), and China Global Television
Network ([CGTN], 793 times). Diplomat Zhao Lijian was not only a prolific user but was also frequently
mentioned by others or himself (i.e., self-retweet, 751 times). In addition, the CPEC Portal, a Twitter account
developed by the Pakistan-China Institute, a Pakistan-based, independent, nonpartisan research think tank,
also received 430 mentions. The graph generated by Gephi displays a clear network (see Figure 1). Network
analysis uses nodes and edges to illustrate actors and their relationships. In a Twitter network graph, each
node represents a Twitter user. Each link (i.e., edge) indicates that one user mentioned another.
2994 Zhao Alexandre Huang and Rui Wang International Journal of Communication 13(2019)
Figure 1 illustrates the essential characteristics of tweets posted by Chinese diplomatic officials.
Although various embassies, consulates, and diplomats managed these accounts, most of the released
information (e.g., Chinese political, economic, and social news) were initially published by China state-
owned media outlets, such as Xinhua, People’s Daily, and CGTN. Such behavior is a result of China’s
censorship system and institutional self-censorship. Xi Jinping has insisted that “all the work of the news
media must reflect the party’s will, reflect the party’s ideas, safeguard the party’s central authority,
safeguard the party’s unity, and love the party, protect the party, and serve the party” (B. Li & Huo, 2016,
para. 15). Insofar as Xi’s requirements for “adhering to the correct direction of public opinion” and “focusing
on making positive publicity” (B. Li & Huo, 2016, para. 16) imply that Chinese media must review, verify,
and filter all news, diplomatic accounts can safely forward tweets posted by Chinese media outlets without
violating the censorship rules. At the same time, this phenomenon shows that the invisible hand of
censorship extends to the Twitter communication management of Chinese agencies abroad.
Figure 1. Top 115 most-mentioned users.
Note. Nodes = 115; Edges = 307; Spatialization: Fruchterman Reingold Layout; Size: Number of
mentions; Color: Modularity.
RQ2b addressed the frequency of hashtags on the Chinese diplomatic Twitter network. As official
representatives and spokespeople of the central Chinese government, Chinese diplomatic account managers
used #China a total of 2,047 times in the tweets we analyzed (see Table 2). They added #China to enhance
exposure to labels and topics related to their homeland on Twitter and to attract the attention of audiences
interested in Chinese issues. In addition, the hashtag #CPEC appeared frequently in tweets posted by users
located in Pakistan, including government departments, media, nonstate organizations, the Chinese
Embassy in Pakistan, Chinese diplomats, and people working in Pakistan. CPEC is the acronym for the China-
Pakistan Economic Corridor, a significant economic and social cooperative between China and Pakistan and
International Journal of Communication 13(2019) Building a Network 2995
an example of the “all-weather strategic partnership”
between the two countries. Notably, only two of the
thirteen Chinese diplomatic accounts used #CPEC: diplomat Zhao Lijian and the Chinese Embassy in
Pakistan. On the one hand, this finding suggests China’s massive communication efforts to promote its close
relationship with Pakistan and the CPEC initiative. On the other hand, it indicates that #CPEC has a regional
characteristic, compared with widely used hashtags such as #China, #BeltandRoad, and #Xijinping. For
instance, #BeltandRoad was posted by 11 Chinese diplomatic users on Twitter. Because the Belt and Road
Initiative is an important geopolitical and economic development strategy of China, #BeltandRoad frequently
appeared on Chinese diplomatic tweets to promote China’s interest in cooperation and peaceful expansion.
The fourth most frequently mentioned hashtag was #XiJinping, which refers to the name of the Chinese
president. Twelve of the Chinese diplomatic accounts mentioned this hashtag when promoting Chinese
policies and Xi’s activities, speeches, and appearances.
Table 2. Top 20 Hashtags.
Distinct accounts use the hashtag
Note. * indicates the highest value in the column.
In the Chinese diplomatic partnership system, among 24 different types, the “all-weather strategic
partnership” is the highest level and most-important partnership type after the “comprehensive strategic
partnership of coordination” (Q. Li, 2019, p. 6).
2996 Zhao Alexandre Huang and Rui Wang International Journal of Communication 13(2019)
To test the two hypotheses and address RQ3 (i.e., collaboration and interaction on the network), we
selected the 115 most mentioned users ( 15 times) to code manually. We identified 12 user types in our
dataset: (a) Chinese counterparts, including China’s administrative departments and diplomatic services; (b)
Chinese media; (c) foreign counterparts, including foreign government departments, foreign embassies and
diplomats, international political representatives, and intergovernmental organizations; (d) foreign media; (e)
Chinese organizations (e.g., companies, nongovernmental organizations); (f) foreign organizations; (g)
Chinese experts; (h) foreign experts; (i) Chinese individual users; (j) foreign individual users; (k) social media
platforms (e.g., Twitter, YouTube, Facebook); and (l) other (i.e., unidentified users). We also coded the country
of origin and the location of the account owner. For instance, the user @CathayPak was a Chinese counterpart
(Type) from China (Country) living in Pakistan (Location). See Table 3.
Table 3. Most Frequently Mentioned Users.
Chinese media
Chinese media
Chinese media
Chinese counterparts
Foreign counterparts
Chinese media
United States
Chinese counterparts
Foreign individual users
Foreign counterparts
Chinese experts
Chinese media
Chinese media
Foreign counterparts
Chinese media
Foreign counterparts
United States
Chinese media
Foreign counterparts
Foreign media
Foreign media
Foreign media
International Journal of Communication 13(2019) Building a Network 2997
We then calculated the number of times each user type was mentioned (see Table 4). For instance,
the “Chinese media” category contained fifteen Chinese media accounts (e.g. Xinhua News Agency [2,034
mentions], People’s Daily [1,253 mentions]). The total number of mentions for users in the category
“Chinese media” was 5,327.
Table 4. Categories of Most Frequently Mentioned Users.
Total mentions
Distinct accounts in this type
Chinese media
Foreign counterparts
Chinese counterparts
Foreign media
Foreign individual users
Foreign organizations
Chinese experts
Foreign experts
Chinese organizations
Chinese individual users
Social media platforms
Note. * indicates the highest value in the column.
The graph in Figure 2 reflects the influence levels of different user types on the network. Based on
the results, both H1 and H2 were supported. On the one hand, Chinese diplomatic accounts mentioned 47
distinct foreign counterparts, indicating the ambition of Chinese diplomatic officials to build a broad network
of interaction with their foreign counterparts. On the other hand, these foreign counterparts were mentioned
less frequently than Chinese media (2,178 vs. 5,327), confirming again that Chinese media outlets were
the leading sources of information for Chinese diplomatic accounts.
2998 Zhao Alexandre Huang and Rui Wang International Journal of Communication 13(2019)
Figure 2. Ranking of user types by mentions.
Note. Spatialization: Network Splitter 3D Layout; Size: Number of mentions; Color: Type.
To address RQ4 (i.e., how Chinese diplomatic agencies used Twitter to tell China stories), we
conducted a content analysis. Using the emergent coding approach, we coded 1,000 random tweets into
seven categories. In this dataset, 96 tweets were “other,” and 19 tweets were irrelevant (see Table 5).
Table 5. Topics of Chinese Diplomatic Tweets.
Chinaforeign economic & social cooperation
Political relationships
Promotion of Chinese culture and society
China’s development achievement
Explication of China’s domestic policy
Global responsibility
Press-release of Xi’s activities
International Journal of Communication 13(2019) Building a Network 2999
In the China stories posted by Chinese diplomatic officials, the most frequent topic was China foreign
economic and social cooperation (25% of the tweets). They tweeted or retweeted about how China cooperated
with foreign countries to pursue economic or social development. Using these tweets, Chinese diplomatic
officials promoted China as an advocate for free trade and international cooperation, demonstrating the
openness and sincerity of China to foreign relations. The second most frequent topic was political relationships,
which includes bilateral or multilateral relations, diplomatic ties, and military cooperation. Tweets in this
category were more politically oriented and carried a more official tone. Promotion of Chinese culture and
society was another important topic of China stories designed to increase national attractiveness: tourism
scenery, traditional Chinese culture, and the daily lives of Chinese people. Close behind was China’s
development achievement, a topic that also showed the world an attractive and thriving China.
Our content analysis (see Figure 3) confirmed that intertextuality played a crucial role in the strategy
and implementation of Chinese diplomatic network communication on Twitter. For instance, the Mission of the
People’s Republic of China to the European Union published numerous tweets on economic issues. One of its
tweets (June 4, 2018) underlined China’s motivation to encourage multilateralism and free trade with
Germany. In the image published with the tweet, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi and his German counterpart
Heiko Maas are shaking hands and smiling at the camera. To the left of Heiko Maas is the national emblem of
Germany. In the background are the national flag of China and the flag of the European Union. The handshake
in the photo echoes the emoji showing the Chinese flag and the German flag shaking hands in the text. This
tweet emphasized the cooperative relationship between China and Germany and between China and the EU.
Another tweet (July 23, 2018) contains an image of Donald Tusk, the president of the European Council. In
this tweet, a photo of Tusk and a short part of a speech are combined in an image. The photo shows a stern
gaze; to the left are the quoted words. Combined with the information in the tweet, Tusk’s speech highlighted
and endorsed China’s pivotal role in the defense of multilateralism. Another tweet (July 28, 2018) addresses
the same topic in more detail. The Chinese ambassador to the EU explains China’s plans for promoting and
defending free trade and multilateralism. The picture attached to this tweet linked to an article explaining the
official Chinese positions. In the photo, sitting on either side EU and Chinese flags, representatives are under
negotiation, further emphasizing the close relationship between the EU and China in multilateral cooperation.
Figure 3. Tweets about China–foreign economic and social cooperation.
3000 Zhao Alexandre Huang and Rui Wang International Journal of Communication 13(2019)
By analyzing this set of tweets, we found that Chinese diplomatic agencies told China stories and
conveyed the Chinese political views in a pluralistic way. First, they used the @mention function to interact
with foreign counterparts on Twitter. They also used hashtags purposefully. Although related information
was released at different times, tweets with the same theme are organically interconnected to form an
online narrative. For example, both #China and #multilateralism were used twice in the three tweets in
Figure 3.
Second, the tweets featured different types of discourse. Tweeters quoted news releases to show
the favorable and active attitude of China toward global cooperation or directly cited the words of foreign
political leaders to endorse China’s contributions. The tweets also contained descriptions of China’s solutions,
often featuring emojis that made the content more vivid and dynamic. In addition, Chinese diplomatic
agencies liberally used pictures that often contained implicit meanings to reinforce the content and increase
We examined network communication on Twitter to characterize public diplomacy efforts of the
Chinese government, which runs a few diplomatic Twitter accounts to build a communication network and
promote a favorable national image. Some accounts, such as Zhao Lijian and the Mission of China to the
European Union, used Twitter actively. Diplomat Zhao Lijian, in particular, exercised less restraint,
discretion, and caution than might typically be expected from Chinese officials who speak in public or post
on social media.
In addition, we found that China’s public diplomacy was impacted by CPC propaganda and
censorship. Although Chinese missions and diplomats have interacted with various types of stakeholders
online (e.g., domestic and foreign), information distributed by Chinese media outlets has become a major
source of content because those outlets, as mouthpieces of their government, reflect the ideas of CPC and
the Chinese government. Indeed, ideology and propaganda work comprise “an extremely important mission
for the CPC” (Xi, 2013, para. 3). These findings confirm that Chinese public diplomacy practices are led by
the CPC under the “Whole-Nation System,” in which “the power structure is undeniably centralized to a large
extent” (K. Zhao, 2019, p. 172). In fact, the Chinese government has legalized this system. According to
China’s latest constitutional amendment, “the leadership of the Communist Party of China is the defining
feature of socialism with Chinese characteristics” (Constitution of the People’s Republic of China, 2018,
Chapter I, Article 1). Moreover, under the order of Xi Jinping, China needs to uphold “the Party leadership
over all work” (Xi, 2017, p. 17). In this way, the highly centralized management system is a distinct feature
of public diplomacy in China.
Moreover, network building in the virtual world reflects international relationships in the real world.
Although Chinese diplomats have attempted to reach a broad spectrum of foreign counterparts on Twitter,
the existing relationship of “old friend” remains primary. Eleven of the top-mentioned accounts were located
in Pakistan, including the Chinese embassy, Chinese diplomats, Chinese experts, Pakistani counterparts,
media outlets, and individual users. This finding is consistent with the “all-weather strategic partnership”
between China and Pakistan, the highest diplomatic relationship level defined by the Chinese government.
International Journal of Communication 13(2019) Building a Network 3001
We concluded that China’s effort to build a robust Twitter network centers around its closest friends and
then expands outward to include other partners.
Furthermore, our content analysis confirmed that “timid polyphony” was a common practice among
Chinese diplomatic Twitter users. While CPC leadership is reflected in the political and ideological direction
of public diplomacy (Xi, 2013, 2018), public diplomacy practitioners have relative freedom to choose
strategies and content for daily communication, permitting wide use of timid polyphony on Twitter. Timid
polyphony is the use of diverse voices and perspectives to demonstrate and endorse government initiatives.
Using hashtags, mentions, and time-phased information releases, Chinese diplomats could devote single
tweets to particular aspects of China stories but link tweets across the network to form a narrative.
Despite its contributions, our study has noteworthy limitations that open pathways to future
research. First, because of language barriers, we did not analyze two Twitter accounts, one in Japanese and
another in Turkish. Therefore, our sample did not cover the entire Twitter network built by Chinese
diplomats. Considering the limited number of Chinese diplomatic accounts on Twitter, scholars should
consider including all existing accounts in future studies. Because the relationships between China and Japan
tend to be dramatic and vital, we would expect to find valuable and interesting phenomena when looking
through tweets posted by the Embassy of China in Japan.
Second, to ensure data integrity, our dataset derived from monitoring the Twitter accounts of all
Chinese diplomatic missions and diplomats. However, potential usage gaps in different Twitter accounts,
such as the extremely active diplomat Zhao Lijian, could have led to deviations in our dataset. For instance,
Zhao Lijian’s high level of activity on Twitter was positively related to a high frequency of hashtags (e.g.,
#CPEC) and mentions (e.g., @CathayPak) related to his work. On the one hand, such data deviation can
produce skewed effects. On the other hand, a skewed distribution of user activities is common on Twitter
because of super prolific users. Therefore, we could not remove such prolific users from our dataset. In
future studies, scholars should consider using relative values to measure user influence on subnetworks in
specific areas (e.g. South Asia, Europe, North America) or in the different partnership classes defined by
the Chinese government (e.g., “comprehensive strategic partnership of coordination” and “all-weather
strategic partnership”).
Finally, we only collected tweets posted on Chinese diplomatic accounts. In this first step of a long-
term research agenda, we focused on how these accounts actively built a communication network. In future
studies, we plan to investigate interactions and dialogues between Chinese diplomatic accounts and their
audiences on Twitter to draw a global picture of Chinese Twitter communication in service of public
3002 Zhao Alexandre Huang and Rui Wang International Journal of Communication 13(2019)
Arsène, S. (2012). Chine: Internet, levier de puissance nationale [China: Internet, lever of national
power]. Politique étrangère, Eté(2), 291303. doi:10.3917/pe.122.0291
Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
Bastian, M., Heymann, S., & Jacomy, M. (2009, May 1720). Gephi: An open source software for
exploring and manipulating networks. In E. Adar, M. Hurst, T. Finin, N. Glance, N. Nicolov, & B.
Tseng (Eds.), Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media
(pp. 361–362). Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press.
Baxter, G., & Marcella, R. (2012). Does Scotland “like” this? Social media use by political parties and
candidates in Scotland during the 2010 UK General Election. Libri, 62(2), 109124.
Bonilla, Y., & Rosa, J. (2015). #Ferguson: Digital protest, hashtag ethnography, and the racial politics of
social media in the United States. American Ethnologist, 42(1), 417. doi:10.1111/amet.12112
Borra, E., & Rieder, B. (2014). Programmed method: Developing a toolset for capturing and analyzing
tweets. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 66(3), 262278.
boyd, d., Golder, S., & Lotan, G. (2010, January 5–8). Tweet, tweet, retweet: Conversational aspects of
retweeting on Twitter. In R. H. Sprague (Ed.), Proceedings of the 43rd Hawaii International
Conference on System Sciences (pp. 110). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE Computer Society Conference
Publishing Services. doi:10.1109/HICSS.2010.412
Bucy, E. P. (2004). Interactivity in society: Locating an elusive concept. The Information Society, 20(5),
373383. doi:10.1080/01972240490508063
Buhmann, A., & Ingenhoff, D. (2015). Advancing the country image construct from a public relations
perspective: From model to measurement. Journal of Communication Management, 19(1), 62
80. doi:10.1108/JCOM-11-2013-0083
Castells, M. (2010). The rise of the network society (2nd ed., with a new pref.). Chichester, UK: Wiley-
Cha, M., Haddadi, H., Benevenuto, F., & Gummadi, K. P. (2010, May 23–26). Measuring user influence in
Twitter: The million follower fallacy. In M. Hearst, W. Cohen, & S. Gosling (Eds.), Proceedings of
the Fourth International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (pp. 1017). Menlo Park, CA:
AAAI Press.
International Journal of Communication 13(2019) Building a Network 3003
Chen, F. (2015). Practical research on the diplomatic activities of Chinese media in the new media age. In
Q. Zhao & W. Lei (Eds.), Blue book of public diplomacy: Annual report of China’s public diplomacy
development (pp. 237249). Beijing, China: Social Sciences Academic Press.
Chen, X., & Liu, X. (2015). Hexin jiazhiguan chuanbo de guojia gonggong guanxi zhanlve gouxiang
[Strategic conception of national public relations for spreading Chinese core values]. Modern
Communication, 6(227), 2531.
Constitution of the People’s Republic of China [2018 Amendment]. (2018, November 3). Retrieved from
Cooke, M., & Lawrence, B. B. (2005). Introduction. In M. Cooke & B. B. Lawrence (Eds.), Muslim networks
from Hajj to hip hop (pp. 128). Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.
Davis, B. (2013). Hashtag politics: The polyphonic revolution of #Twitter. Pepperdine Journal of
Communication Research, 1, 1622.
Deibert, R. J. (1997). Parchment, printing, and hypermedia: Communication and world order
transformation. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
Fitzpatrick, K. R. (2007). Advancing the new public diplomacy: A public relations perspective. The Hague
Journal of Diplomacy, 2(3), 187211. doi:10.1163/187119007X240497
Fitzpatrick, K. R., Fullerton, J., & Kendrick, A. (2013). Public relations and public diplomacy: Conceptual
and practical connections. Public Relations Journal, 7(4), 121.
Frederick, H. H. (1993). Global communication and international relations. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Freelon, D. (2010). ReCal: Intercoder reliability calculation as a Web service. International Journal of
Internet Science, 5(1), 2033.
Fuchs, C. (2014). Social media: A critical introduction. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications.
Gilboa, E. (2008). Searching for a theory of public diplomacy. The ANNALS of the American Academy of
Political and Social Science, 616(1), 5577. doi:10.1177/0002716207312142
Gregory, B. (2011). American public diplomacy: Enduring characteristics, elusive transformation. The
Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 6(34), 351372. doi:10.1163/187119111X583941
Groshek, J., & Tandoc, E. (2017). The affordance effect: Gatekeeping and (non) reciprocal journalism on
Twitter. Computers in Human Behavior, 66, 201210.
Hauser, G. A. (2002). Introduction to rhetorical theory (2nd ed). Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.
3004 Zhao Alexandre Huang and Rui Wang International Journal of Communication 13(2019)
Hayden, C. (2013). Logics of narrative and networks in US public diplomacy: Communication power and
US strategic engagement. Journal of International Communication, 19(2), 196218.
Henneberg, S. C. M. (2002). Understanding political marketing. In N. J. O’Shaughnessy & S. C. M.
Henneberg (Eds.), The idea of political marketing (pp. 93170). Westport, CT: Praeger.
Huang, Z. A., & Arifon, O. (2018). La diplomatie publique chinoise sur Twitter: la fabrique d’une
polyphonie harmonieuse [Chinese public diplomacy on Twitter: Creating a harmonious
polyphony]. Hermès, La Revue, 2(81), 4553.
Kalyanaraman, S., & Sundar, S. S. (2006). The psychological appeal of personalized content in Web
portals: Does customization affect attitudes and behavior? Journal of Communication, 56(1),
110132. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00006.x
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), 331362.
Keck, M. E., & Sikkink, K. (1998). Activists beyond borders: Advocacy networks in international politics.
Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Kristeva, J. (2002). “Nous deux” or a (hi)story of intertextuality. The Romanic Review, 93(12), 713.
Li, A. K. (2015). Vers une méthode plus proactiveLe contrôle de l’opinion publique sur les microblogs
chinois sous la nouvelle présidence de Xi Jinping [Toward a more proactive approachPublic
opinion control over Chinese microblogs under the new presidency of Xi Jinping]. Perspectives
Chinoises, 4, 1524.
Li, B., & Huo, X. (2016, February 19). Xi Jinping: Jianchi zhengque fangxiang, chuangxin fangfa shouduan,
tigao xinwen yulun chuanbo li yindao li [Xi Jinping: Adhere to the right direction and innovative
methods to improve the communication and guidance of news media]. Xinhua. Retrieved from
Li, Q. (2019, March 2730). China’s emerging partnership network and its impact on global order. Paper
presented at the International Studies Association Annual Convention 2019, Toronto, Canada.
Li, X., & Wang, J. (2010). Zhongguo ruhe miandui wangluo gonggong waijiao [How does China face cyber
public diplomacy]? Public Diplomacy Quarterly, 4, 2530.
Lilleker, D. G. (2015). Interactivity and branding: Public political communication as a marketing tool.
Journal of Political Marketing, 14(12), 111128. doi:10.1080/15377857.2014.990841
International Journal of Communication 13(2019) Building a Network 3005
Meikle, G., & Young, S. (2011). Media convergence: Networked digital media in everyday life. London, UK:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Meraz, S., & Papacharissi, Z. (2013). Networked gatekeeping and networked framing on #Egypt. The
International Journal of Press/Politics, 18(2), 138166. doi:10.1177/1940161212474472
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China. (n.d.). Main responsibilities of the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China. Retrieved from
Oh, J., & Sundar, S. S. (2015). How does interactivity persuade? An experimental test of interactivity on
cognitive absorption, elaboration, and attitudes: Persuasive effects of interactivity. Journal of
Communication, 65(2), 213236. doi:10.1111/jcom.12147
Pfeil, U., Arjan, R., & Zaphiris, P. (2009). Age differences in online social networkingA study of user
profiles and the social capital divide among teenagers and older users in MySpace. Computers in
Human Behavior, 25(3), 643654. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2008.08.015
Rafaeli, S. (1988). Interactivity: From new media to communication. In R. P. Hawkins, J. M. Wiemann, &
S. Pingree (Eds.), Advancing communication science: Merging mass and interpersonal processes
(pp. 110134). Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publications.
Rawnsley, G. D. (2016). Reflections of a soft power agnostic. In X. Zhang, H. Wasserman, & W. Mano
(Eds.), China’s media and soft power in Africa: Promotion and perceptions (pp. 1931). London,
UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Sevin, E., & Ingenhoff, D. (2018). Public diplomacy on social media: Analyzing networks and content.
International Journal of Communication, 12, 36633685.
Shen, Y. (2015). “Zhongguo meng” de gonggong waijiao: Tiaozhan yu jiyu [Public diplomacy of “Chinese
Dream”: Challenges and opportunities]. China International Studies, 6, 89103.
Shi, C., & Shi, Y. (2007). Lun xinxing meiti shidaide gonggong chuanbo [Discussing the public
communication in the era of new media]. Modern Communication, 4, 1214.
Stemler, S. (2001). An overview of content analysis. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 7(17),
Strauß, N., Kruikemeier, S., van der Meulen, H., & van Noort, G. (2015). Digital diplomacy in GCC
countries: Strategic communication of Western embassies on Twitter. Government Information
Quarterly, 32(4), 369379. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2015.08.001
3006 Zhao Alexandre Huang and Rui Wang International Journal of Communication 13(2019)
Sun, W. (2015). Slow boat from China: Public discourses behind the “going global” media policy.
International Journal of Cultural Policy, 21(4), 400418. doi:10.1080/10286632.2015.1043129
Sundar, S. S. (2009). Social psychology of interactivity in human-website interaction. In A. N. Joinson, K.
Y. A. McKenna, T. Postmes, & U.-D. Reips (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Internet psychology
(pp. 89104). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Sundar, S. S., & Kim, J. (2005). Interactivity and persuasion: Influencing attitudes with information and
involvement. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 5(2), 518.
van Dijk, J. (1999). The network society. London, UK: SAGE Publications.
Wang, J. (2006). Managing national reputation and international relations in the global era: Public
diplomacy revisited. Public Relations Review, 32(2), 9196. doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2005.12.001
Wang, Y. (2008). Public diplomacy and the rise of Chinese soft power. The ANNALS of the American
Academy of Political and Social Science, 616(1), 257273. doi:10.1177/0002716207312757
Weber, M. (1978). Economy and society: An outline of interpretive sociology. Berkeley, CA: University of
California Press.
Xi, J. (2013, August 20). Xi Jinping: Yishixingtai gongzuo shi dang de yixiang jiduan zhongyaode gongzuo
[Xi Jinping: Ideological work is an extremely important task of the party]. Xinhua. Retrieved from
Xi, J. (2017). Secure a decisive victory in building a moderately prosperous society in all respects and
strive for the great success of socialism with Chinese characteristics for a new era. (Xi Jinping’s
report at the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China). Beijing, China. Retrieved
Yang, J. (2011). Nuli kaichuang zhongguo tese gonggong waijiao xinjumian [Strive to open up a new
situation of public diplomacy with Chinese characteristics]. Qiu Shi Theory, 4. Retrieved from
Zaharna, R. S. (2007). The soft power differential: Network communication and mass communication in
public diplomacy. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 2(3), 213228.
Zaharna, R. S. (2014). Network purpose, network design: Dimensions of network and collaborative public
diplomacy. In R. S. Zaharna, A. Arsenault, & A. Fisher (Eds.), Relational, networked and
International Journal of Communication 13(2019) Building a Network 3007
collaborative approaches to public diplomacy: The connective mindshift (pp. 211248). New York,
NY: Routledge.
Zaharna, R. S. (2018a). Global engagement: Culture and communication insights from public diplomacy.
In K. A. Johnston & M. Taylor (Eds.), The handbook of communication engagement (pp. 313
330). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.
Zaharna, R. S. (2018b, May 2428). Trends. Paper presented at the Public Diplomacy Business Meeting
symposium, 2018 International Communication Association Annual Conference, Prague, Czech
Republic. (Unpublished paper.)
Zhao, K. (2019). The China model of public diplomacy and its future. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy,
14(12), 169181. doi:10.1163/1871191X-14101033
Zhao, Q. (2018, April 11). Zhongguo jinru gonggong waijiao xinjieduan [China enters a new stage of
public diplomacy]. People’s Daily. Retrieved from
Zhao, Q., & Lei, W. (Eds.). (2015). Blue book of public diplomacyAnnual report of China’s public
diplomacy development (2015). Beijing, China: Social Sciences Academic Press.
Zhou, Q. (2010). Cong guoji yujing bianqian dao huayuquan tisheng: Shilun zhongguo guojia gongguan
de jiyu yu tiaozhan [From the change of international context to the promotion of discourse right:
The opportunities and challenges of China’s national public relations]. News and Writing, 10,
Zhou, Q. (2018). Chaoyue youzing jiangjie: Quanqiu chuanbo zhong de gonggong waijiao [Beyond visible
border: Public diplomacy in global communication]. Beijing, China: Communication University of
China Press.
... Available relevant studies have found that China's state news media, which started having a presence on Twitter from at least 2009, are the core actors of China's PD network on Twitter (Huang & Wang, 2019;Jia & Li, 2020). China's diplomats started publishing on Twitter in 2010, but by late 2018, there were fewer than 20 active Twitter accounts of China's diplomats (Huang & Wang, 2019). ...
... Available relevant studies have found that China's state news media, which started having a presence on Twitter from at least 2009, are the core actors of China's PD network on Twitter (Huang & Wang, 2019;Jia & Li, 2020). China's diplomats started publishing on Twitter in 2010, but by late 2018, there were fewer than 20 active Twitter accounts of China's diplomats (Huang & Wang, 2019). However, it is not clear to what extent non-state actors are involved in China's PD. ...
... However, it is not clear to what extent non-state actors are involved in China's PD. China's diplomatic and state news media Twitter accounts rarely reply to other Twitter accounts (Huang & Wang, 2019;Nip & Sun, 2018), and when China's diplomatic accounts network, they do so much more frequently with China' state news media by mentioning them than with foreign diplomatic accounts (Huang & Wang, 2019). However, it is not known whether other China accounts behave in similar ways. ...
Full-text available
Multiple modes of communication on social media can contribute to public diplomacy in informing, conversing, and networking with members of foreign publics. However, manipulative behaviours on social media, prevalent especially in high tension contexts, create disruptions to authentic communication in what could be grey/black propaganda or information warfare. This study reviews existing literature about models of public diplomacy to guide an empirical study of China's communication in the #SouthChinaSea conversation on Twitter. It uses computational methods to identify, record, and analyze one-way, two-way, and network communication of China's actors. It employs manual qualitative research to determine the nature of China's actors. On that basis, it assesses China's Twitter communication in the issue against various models of public diplomacy.
... Regional analysis on the use of bots has shown that this type of inauthentic activity can perform specific roles within an information campaign [9]. Similar research on Chinese diplomatic Twitter accounts underlined China's centralized censorship policies, but did not explore other elements of information diffusion within the network beyond the diplomatic accounts themselves [4]. ...
Full-text available
China has embraced the social media domain to promote pro-Chinese narratives and stories in recent years. However, China has increasingly been accused of launching information operations using methods such as bot activity, puppet accounts and other forms of inauthentic activity to amplify pro-Chinese messaging. This paper provides a comprehensive network analysis characterization of the hashtag influence campaign China promoted against the US-hosted Summit on Democracy in December 2021, in addition to methods to identify different types of actors within this type of influence campaign.KeywordsChinese influence operationsBotsNetwork Analysis
... China's national image has been tarnished and distorted by some Western media in relation to issues such as the South China Sea dispute, China's Tibet policies, and the India-China border row (Yang, 2018). In response to the hegemony of Western media narratives, the Chinese government has increased its discourse power on the world stage by proposing a "media going global" policy and "tell China's stories well" framework (Z. A. Huang & Wang, 2019;Yang, 2018). It has invested money and resources in expanding the overseas presence of the Chinese media and used the media as a tool to increase its soft power, cultural appeal and global influence, and to combat anti-China sentiment (Yang, 2018). ...
... Unlike many Chinese diplomats who continue to exercise caution and restraint on social media, Zhao has actively defended what he sees as legitimate Chinese national interests. 65 During his stay in Islamabad, Zhao got into quite a few public fracases with well-known local journalists and diplomats from the United States. 66 Although Zhao is viewed in the West and by Pakistani liberals as an example of China's increasingly muscular "wolf-warrior" diplomacy, he developed a loyal following among Pakistani social media users. ...
... : 144). Basée sur cette doctrine maoïste et sur le discours de Xi Jinping sur l'esprit de la Longue Marche, une forme agressive et offensive de la diplomatie publique chinoise a émergé sur Twitter, accompagnée de la création d'un grand nombre de comptes Twitter de diplomates chinois (de moins de 20 comptes à la fin 2018 à plus de 200 comptes en janvier 2021) (Huang & Wang, 2019 ;2021). Cette dernière pratique de communication diplomatique a été finalement qualifiée par la presse occidentale de diplomatie du loup combattant en 2020 (AFP), en écho avec les propos radicaux et agressifs de Pékin. ...
Full-text available
(Article published in French): This article explores a Wolf Warrior communication practice im- plemented by Chinese diplomats on Twitter. On the one hand, it examines the strategy of influence mobilised by Chinese diplomats responding to inter- national criticism, which blamed Beijing for its censorship and non-transparency regarding the Covid-19 pandemic. On the other hand, it shows how so-called Wolf Warrior diplomats employ a series of public diplomacy discourses and narratives to repair China’s damaged image at the onset of the health crisis while also shaping an international perception of China as a major, responsible world power and a model for the effective prevention of the Covid-19 pandemic.
... : 144). Basée sur cette doctrine maoïste et sur le discours de Xi Jinping sur l'esprit de la Longue Marche, une forme agressive et offensive de la diplomatie publique chinoise a émergé sur Twitter, accompagnée de la création d'un grand nombre de comptes Twitter de diplomates chinois (de moins de 20 comptes à la fin 2018 à plus de 200 comptes en janvier 2021) (Huang & Wang, 2019 ;2021). Cette dernière pratique de communication diplomatique a été finalement qualifiée par la presse occidentale de diplomatie du loup combattant en 2020 (AFP), en écho avec les propos radicaux et agressifs de Pékin. ...
Full-text available
(EN)This article explores a Wolf Warrior communication practice implemented by Chinese diplomats on Twitter. On the one hand, it examines the strategy of influence mobilised by Chinese diplomats responding to international criticism, which blamed Beijing for its censorship and non-transparency regarding the Covid-19 pandemic. On the other hand, it shows how so-called Wolf Warrior diplomats employ a series of public diplomacy discourses and narratives to repair China’s damaged image at the onset of the health crisis while also shaping an international perception of China as a major, responsible world power and a model for the effective prevention of the Covid-19 pandemic. (FR) Cet article explore une forme de communication mise en œuvre par les diplomates chinois sur Twitter, qu’il définit comme communication du loup combattant. D’une part, il examine la stratégie d’influence mobilisée par les diplomates chinois pour répondre aux critiques internationales blâmant Pékin pour sa censure et la non-transparence des informations liées à la pandémie. D’autre part, il montre comment les diplomates dits loups combattants emploient une série de discours de diplomatie publique ainsi que des récits pour réparer l’image chinoise endommagée au début de la crise sanitaire, tout en façonnant une nouvelle perception de la Chine en tant que grande puissance mondiale responsable et modèle de la prévention efficace de la pandémie de Covid-19.
On 31 December 2019, China reported the emergence of a cluster of pneumonia of unknown cause in the city of Wuhan in the province of Hubei. As the novel disease turned into a global pandemic, China had to face a serious damage to its portrayed image of a responsible global power. Combining Benoit’s Image Repair Theory (IRT) with a contextual framework singling out cultural, societal and political variables that influence Chinese Communication Strategies (CCSs), the article pioneers the analysis of strategies adopted to respond to public image’s threats by adding an explicative nuance to their selection and reception.
The concept of mass society is generally considered as an emphasis on the loss of the individual in society. Gustave Le Bon defines mass society as mindless, motivated masses. Today, it is assumed that the individual in the society can think independently, be rational and question. The network society approach is based on the idea of an independent and organized individual. According to Jan Van Dijk and Manuel Castells, with the help of technology and globalization, the way of production and communication has taken the form of a more organized and complex network. The network approach in public diplomacy (Metzl, 2001; Hocking, 2005; Zaharna R. , 2007; 2010) is accepted as an effective approach of public diplomacy. The approach, which is planned around volunteerism, synergy and team belonging, is based on the production of messages and the continuous circulation of the message within the system. In this study, the activities regarding the network society approach in public diplomacy is discussed through a critical perspective. The concepts of 'volunteering', 'synergy', 'team belonging', ‘flexibility` and ‘horizontal participation’, which constitute the basic principles of the network approach, were analyzed on the basis of the mass society approach. Purpose of the study: To critically consider the network-based public diplomacy approach and to analyze the concept of network society according to the principles of the mass society approach.
Full-text available
The aim of this chapter is to analyse China’s vaccination-themed narratives published by its state-owned media on both domestic and international social media platforms (Weibo and Twitter). Analysis has been carried out on Beijing’s intermestic online communication strategy to promote its domestic vaccines, motivate global vaccination, and increase public confidence in the quality and efficiency of domestic vaccines. As part of China’s vaccine diplomacy and public diplomacy during the pandemic, Beijing’s intermestic vaccination- themed narratives addressed domestic and foreign communities and displayed the government’s international responsibilities through visual content, subtly legitimising China’s political initiative for a global community of health for all.
Full-text available
Measurement has been and still is a challenging issue in the practice and study of public diplomacy. In this article, we propose a model to assess the impacts of public diplomacy projects by creating a link between social media communication campaigns and the perception of nations by audiences—or nation brands. We demonstrate how the model can be used to analyze the digital communication projects of four countries: Australia, Belgium, New Zealand, and Switzerland. Using data sets composed of tweets sent by and about four countries, we focus on the messages crafted by both official public diplomacy projects and nonstate users, and on the relations established as a result.
Full-text available
(FR) L’analyse netnographique des tweets publiés par les deux comptes Twitter des diplomates chinois à Bruxelles et à Ottawa en 2017 met en évidence les efforts de polyphonie de la diplomatie chinoise dans sa stratégie de publication sur des médias sociaux numériques. Ces comptes diplomatiques incarnent une diplomatie publique moderne et sympathique qui renouvelle le genre de la propagande et qui est la pointe émergée des stratégies de soft power chinois. Pékin continue à s’appuyer sur des mécanismes d’autocensure et des dispositifs de censure qui encadrent et prescrivent des discours diplomatiques chinois parfaitement lisses et harmonieux. Cette dimension stratégique est sans doute bien perçue par les publics et dirigeants étrangers. Pour autant, ces comptes autorisent des débuts de conversations et humanisent l’image de l’hyperpuissance chinoise. (EN) Chinese Public Diplomacy on Twitter: Creating a Harmonious Polyphony A netnographic analysis of tweets published in 2017 in two Twitter accounts held by Chinese diplomats based in Brussels and Ottawa highlights the polyphonic nature of Chinese diplomacy’s digital social media strategy. The accounts of these diplomats embody a modern and friendly approach to public diplomacy, which breathes new life into propaganda as a genre. They are the tip of the iceberg of China’s soft power strategies. Beijing continues to rely on forms of censorship and self-censorship that condition Chinese public discourse and stipulate that it be perfectly sleek and harmonious. This strategic dimension is likely to be well-received by foreign leaders and nationals. At the same time, these Twitter accounts permit conversations to begin and give a human face to the Chinese superpower.
Full-text available
Conceptual and practical connections between public relations and public diplomacy, or the process by which governments communicate and build relationships with foreign publics in pursuit of political objectives, have been observed by scholars in both fields. Yet, there is little empirical evidence demonstrating similarities and/or differences in the two disciplines. This study helped to fill that gap through comparative analyses of the knowledge and skills considered important for success in each profession and in effective practices. Although some differences were revealed, the data provided evidence that perceived conceptual and practical links between public relations and public diplomacy are real. The research indicated significant potential for public relations concepts and practices to inform thinking and practices in public diplomacy, particularly in the area of research and evaluation. At the same time, insights gained by public diplomats working in international environments could be valuable to global public relations practitioners.
Full-text available
Social media holds the potential to foster dialogue between nations and foreign populations. Yet only a few studies to date have investigated the manner in which digital diplomacy is practised by foreign ministries. Using Kent and Taylor’s framework for dialogic communication, this article explores the extent to which dialogic communication is adopted by foreign ministries in terms of content, media channels and public engagement. The results of a six-week analysis of content published on Twitter and Facebook by eleven foreign ministries show that engagement and dialogic communication are rare. When engagement does occur, it is quarantined to specific issues. Social media content published by foreign ministries represents a continuous supply of press releases targeting foreign, rather than domestic, populations. A cross-national comparison revealed no discernible differences in the adoption of dialogic principles. Results therefore indicate that foreign ministries still fail to realize the potential of digital diplomacy to foster dialogue
Since 2012, China’s top leadership has argued that China’s public diplomacy should integrate with the ‘New Model of Major-Country Diplomacy with Chinese Characteristics’. Among this series of initiatives, China formulates a public diplomacy model that is different from those of other countries. China’s model of public diplomacy falls under the unified leadership of the Communist Party of China ( CPC ), but coordinates various public diplomacy players culturally rather than institutionally. The current trends of China’s public diplomacy include to evolve from listening to telling, and to be more confident, positive and active. Based on empirical studies, this article concludes that China’s public diplomacy since 2012 has created a unique model that emphasises cultural and other informal norms under the CPC ’s leadership. Moreover, public diplomacy will be regarded as a necessary wisdom to understand how China has integrated with the world harmoniously.
This section presents the third volume of Max Weber's fundamental work Economy and Society which has been translated into Russian for the first time. The third volume includes two works devoted to the sociology of law. The first, 'The Economy and Laws', discusses differences between sociological and juridical approaches to studies of social processes. It describes peculiarities of normative power arenas (orders) at different levels and demonstrates how they influence the economy. The second, 'Economy and Law' ('Sociology of Law'), reviews the evolution of law orders (primarily, the three "greatest systems of law" including Roman Law, Anglo-American Law, and European Continental Law) in the context of changes in the organization of economy and structures of dominancy. Law is considered an influential factor of the rationalization of social life which in turn is affected by a rationalized economy and social management. The Journal of Economic Sociology here publishes an excerpt from the chapter 'Law, Convention and Custom' in this third volume, which shows the role of the habitual in the formation of law; explains the importance of intuition and empathy for the emergence of new orders; and discusses the changeable borders between law, convention and custom. The translation is edited by Leonid Ionin and the chapter is published with the permission of HSE Publishing House. © 2018 National Research University Higher School of Economics. All rights reserved.
This study examines contemporary gatekeeping as it intersects with the evolving technological affordances of social media platforms and the ongoing negotiation of professionalized journalistic norms and routines in contentious politics. Beginning with a corpus of just over 4.2 million Tweets about the racially charged Ferguson, Missouri protests, a series of network analyses were applied to track shifts over time and to identify influential actors in this communicative space. These models informed further analyses that indicated legacy news organizations and affiliated journalists were least present and only marginally engaged in covering these events, and that other users on Twitter emerged as far more prominent gatekeepers. Methodological considerations and implications about the importance of dialogic and reciprocal activities for journalism are discussed.
Drawing upon online communication research, this study identifies six effective communication strategies for social media-based diplomacy on Twitter: interactive, personalized, positive, relevant, and transparent communication among a broad network of stakeholders. By using an extensive mix-method design (i.e., combining a manual content and automated network analyses, N = 4438 tweets), this research examines to what extent these communication strategies are adopted on Twitter by Western embassies active in countries from the Gulf Cooperation Council. We found that embassies are not utilizing social media to its full potential. Although embassies are transparent, use positive sentiment in their online communication and post relevant information to their stakeholders, they hardly engage in direct interactive and personal communication, and only reach out to a limited group of stakeholders. We recommend embassies to put more emphasis on two-way interactive communication with a vast variety of stakeholders.