No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
Two-Way Engagement in Public Diplomacy : The Case of Talk Talk Korea
Abstract
Proponents of new public diplomacy emphasize the importance of two-way engagement with foreign publics. Despite theoretical support for mutual dialogue, there is a lack of studies that examine the means by which governments and other actors of public diplomacy engage with civic stakeholders. Responding to this gap in the research literature, the present study introduces the case of Talk Talk Korea and critically examines how the Ministry of Foreign Affairs engage with foreign publics through online contests. The contest format has received limited attention in the research literature as a tool of political communication, despite being a popular platform among government agencies in South Korea. This study highlights the role of online contests in public diplomacy and examines seven rounds of contest participation in Talk Talk Korea from 2012 to 2018. Through examinations of both participation guidelines and user submissions, it is observed that the online format enables the government to steer direction of the dialogue, and to collect public views on topics of particular interest to South Korea. At the same time, it is argued that a contest premised on incentives requires particular attention to critical dialogue. The study concludes with a discussion of policy implications for two-way engagement in public diplomacy.
This study examines Korea's international development volunteer program as a citizen diplomacy initiative. Informed by a cultural perspective of transmission and relational models of public diplomacy, I examine the ways in which volunteer training incorporates cultural-learning into its program. The study finds that volunteer training is largely based on an instrumentalist approach to culture that places emphasis on learning the “explicit” side of culture, such as Korean traditional dance, art, and food as a strategy to promote the country's national image. In contrast, much less covered in the training program is a relational approach to culture-learning that is guided by a reflexive understanding of the “implicit” side of culture, or the values and beliefs that guide the worldviews and behavior of both volunteers and host constituents. Whereas the value of the volunteer program as a citizen diplomacy initiative is in its potential to build relationships based on two-way engagement, its conception of culture is mostly guided by that of the transmission model of public diplomacy. Based on the findings, this study calls for an integrated approach to culture-learning in volunteer training program to move the citizen diplomacy initiative forward.
Digital diplomacy is the latest technological advance to push change in diplomatic practice. It relates to the application of digital technologies, including information and communication technologies, software engineering and big data, and artificial intelligence, to the practice of diplomacy.
Positioned in the top ranks of connectivity, internet speed, smartphone ownership, and social media usage, South Korea should be a leader in the use of digital technologies in diplomatic practice. However, South Korea is not a leader; indeed, it has been left behind.
I explore digital diplomacy as a “disruptive technology” and look at criteria for organizational adaptation. I then use these criteria to assess South Korea's adaptation and draw from these the specific policy challenges facing South Korea. To conclude, I propose four core criteria to aid digital diplomacy adaptation in South Korea and other similar states.
The utility of social media platforms as means for communication and engagement has become important for those responsible for public diplomacy. This article addresses this nexus between social media studies and diplomacy studies using original empirical research based on Facebook pages published by the diplomatic missions of 8 nations in 22 host nations. Data from 161 pages from January to December 2016 were extracted using Netvizz. A multi-stage mixed-methods approach uses quantifiable engagement data and qualitative content. The analysis varies from many previous studies by foregrounding social media as a communication environment and by including audiences/users as active participants. The findings suggest Facebook diplomacy is more relevant in countries that are smaller, poorer and closer. They categorise content using a four-part taxonomy of diplomatic discourse: outward-facing publicity, inward-facing publicity, engagement, and user-generated content. The article aims to develop the field of digital diplomacy studies by highlighting innovative findings and suggesting trajectories for further scholarship.
In extant literature it has been advised that the central purpose of public diplomacy should be redefined as relationship management. Against this backdrop, the effects of engagement efforts made to build and nurture relationships has been contested. On one hand, relationship management is presented as an approach to promote mutual understanding while, on the other, research studies show that diplomatic agencies remain focused on advocacy and that foreign publics are unwilling to engage. As public relations research has identified the positive effects of using interpersonal approaches to build and nurture relationships, this study conducted a case analysis on the engagement efforts made by a diplomat to build relationships. It was found that relationships were built with multiple publics both locally and globally and that offline relationships preceded online relationships. In relating to foreign publics, relational capabilities, including relational continuation, relational attentiveness, relational curiosity and relational empathy, were portrayed. Although shared values and interactions were promoted, foreign publics were only invited to engage on soft topics, such as cultural and social issues.
This is a classic textbook in public relations, which emphasizes a theoretical, managerial approach to public relations.
The role of non-state actors in public diplomacy remains an unsettled question in the literature. However, various transnational activities of non-state actors are often called public diplomacy, without discrimination. The lack of empirical studies on non-state public diplomacy is to blame for this conceptual confusion. Analytical and empirical studies of non-state public diplomacy are needed to consolidate this phenomenon, which is relatively new, while maintaining the conceptual clarity of public diplomacy. This study explores how Voluntary Agency Network of Korea (VANK), a Korean NGO, conducts public diplomacy and nation branding of Korea based on its members’ relationships with foreigners. To gain an in-depth understanding of VANK’s activities from the perspectives of public diplomacy and nation branding, this study follows an exploratory single case study method. The findings of this article suggest how VANK and similar non-state actors offer potential for public diplomacy and nation branding that can be utilized also by state agencies.
South Korea’s cultural entertainment products such as popular music, TV dramas and films have recently enjoyed growing popularity in Asia-Pacific rim countries and the rest of the world. The cultural phenomenon called the Korean Wave or “Hallyu” has elevated South Korea’s national brands, increased their overseas exports, and promoted human exchanges. This study finds that the remarkable success of the Korean Wave is due to collaborative efforts by the Korean government and private cultural industries by utilizing Korea’s pop entertainment products as an effective tool for global public diplomacy. This study also discusses recent setbacks in the Korean Wave due to protective trade barriers in several Asian countries, as well as strained diplomatic relations and anti-Korean Wave sentiments in Japan and China.
Debates concerning the rise and effects of soft power have flourished since
Joseph Nye differentiated it from hard power by defining it as ‘the ability to alter
other’s behaviour for what we want themto do by attraction’ (Nye, 2004: 11).
According to Nye (1990, 2004, 2006) power can be generated by coercion (sticks),
payments (carrots) or attraction (soft power). Among those means of power, soft
power can be enhanced by sharing culture, values and foreign policies
accommodating international norms.
Despite the fact that some time has passed since the concept was first
introduced as a principle of scholarly literature, soft power remains a somewhat
ambiguous and multifaceted concept frequently put to work in social and political
sciences in an attempt to explain the complexities of the contemporary world.
In social and cultural studies the term isfrequently used interchangeably with
‘cultural influence’. The export of popular culture is seen as the main vehicle through
which the world comes to know about and is attracted by a country. Nye (2004) even
includes pop culture in a collection of social institutions, such as education and
political ideology that he considers to be instruments of a ‘soft power’, that is, a
country’s ability to attract and to influence an international audience to accept its
ideas and cultural products on the basis of influence with no constraints.
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.
The first decade of the new millennium witnessed the rising importance of public diplomacy across the globe. The elevation of public diplomacy has a dual dimension, as a new field of diplomatic practice and a new field of academic research. What should be the Korean model of public diplomacy? How can Korea shift to the emerging paradigm of diplomacy? To address these simple but fundamental questions, this paper provides a conceptual model of Korea's public diplomacy within a five-phase framework, emphasizing the production of diverse soft power assets based on competitive advantage and the development of knowledge diplomacy as a complementary alternative to a narrow cultural diplomacy. Given Korea's "middle power" status in the international society, we argue that the new model should combine universal values with Korea's historical experience in such a way that Korea could play a role in bridge-building between advanced and developing nations. We also suggest adopting a geographic-thematic approach in combination with a modular approach, taking into consideration the needs and demands of object nations and groups. Networking of subjects and objects is another crucial element of the new model, while new digital media should provide the necessary instruments for networking and other activities throughout nearly the entire process of public diplomacy.
In recent years, there has been an influx of Korean popular culture throughout the world, in-cluding East Asia, Southeast Asia, Europe, and the Americas. Korean popular culture, also known as the "Korean Wave" (Hallyu in Korean) ranges from television dramas, movies, popular music (K-pop), dance (B-boys), video game, food, fashion, tourism, and language (Hangul). The main focus of this paper is to examine the essence of the Korean Wave and its impact on the world. In particular, this paper aims to ex-plore the relationships between the spread of the Korean Wave and political and social changes in a global perspective. That is, does the Korean Wave affect the political position and diplomatic leverage of Korea in any meaningful way? Toward this objective, this paper first examines the relevant literature of interna-tional relations for policy and culture change, especially with regards to globalization, interdependence, soft power and world value change. Then, recent developments of the Korean Wave are reviewed and critically analyzed in order to ascertain political and policy implications for Korean diplomatic and prac-tical directives. Finally, we will draw an interpretive conclusion and recommendations toward the plausi-bility of the Korean Wave as a policy tool for Korea's cultural diplomacy.
The Obama administration has embraced ‘engagement’ as the dominant concept informing US public diplomacy. Despite its emphasis on facilitating dialogue with and among Muslims overseas, this article demonstrates that, in practice, engagement aims to leverage social media and related technologies to persuade skeptical audiences to empathize with American policies. Indeed, its primary means of implementation – participatory interactions with foreign publics – is inherently duplicitous. Through the authors’ description of how engagement is rooted in long-standing public relations and corporate marketing discourses, and in light of the historical and structural foundations of anti-Americanism, this contemporary public diplomacy strategy is shown to be both contradictory and, ultimately, delusional. As an alternative, the authors argue that an ethical public diplomacy should be pursued, i.e., a public diplomacy that embraces genuine (rather than contrived) dialogue. Although this approach is difficult to achieve (primarily because it implies a direct challenge to entrenched US foreign policy norms), it constitutes a mode of public diplomacy that better reflects the idealized principles of American democracy.
This work presents and critically evaluates attempts to theorize and conceptualize public diplomacy within several disciplines, including international relations, strategic studies, diplomatic studies, public relations, and communication. It also examines research methods used to investigate public diplomacy, including models, paradigms, case studies, and comparative analysis. The work identifies promising directions as well as weaknesses and gaps in existing knowledge and methodology and outlines a new research agenda. The presented analysis and examples suggest that only a systematic multidisciplinary effort and close collaboration between researchers and practitioners can lead to a coherent theory of public diplomacy.
The abstract for this document is available on CSA Illumina.To view the Abstract, click the Abstract button above the document title.
La Corée du Sud est depuis quelques décennies une puissance économique montante. Elle présente plusieurs caractéristiques associées aux puissances émergentes, telles que le leadership thématique ou la recherche d’opportunités. La Corée souhaite jouer le rôle de leader thématique en matière de développement, et cherche dans le même temps à assurer les fondations d’une croissance économique durable. Dans cet article, nous examinons la stratégie globale mise en place par la Corée depuis les années 90 pour que sa montée économique se traduise par une plus grande influence politique sur la scène internationale. Plus spécifiquement, nous proposons une évaluation critique de l’approche depuis 2008 de l’administration actuelle de Lee Myung Bak. Nous examinons les facteurs internes qui ont conduit la Corée à poursuivre ses stratégies d’influence, en nous intéressant en particulier à l’héritage du modèle de développement mercantiliste. Cet article soulève des questions concernant la capacité de la Corée de mener une politique étrangère qui ne serve pas ses seuls intérêts économiques, mais joue un rôle actif dans la création de biens publics mondiaux.
The purpose of this study is to examine the role of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) as a part of new public diplomacy. The study specifically investigates NGO’s use of soft power and social media and how they collaborate with the government. This study utilizes qualitative analysis to investigate how an NGO called the Voluntary Agency Network of Korea (VANK) influences the national reputation of South Korea. In-depth interviews were conducted with VANK employees and officers from Korean government agencies who have expertise in promoting Seoul, South Korea, and Korean culture and have previously collaborated with VANK. Findings show that VANK shares functional roles with the government to convey positive information about South Korea based on boundary-spanning theory. VANK specifically demonstrates expertise in correcting misconceptions about Korea online and implanting positive images of Korea to foreigners by actively employing its extensive networks, social media, and soft power.
Governments across the globe are increasingly recognizing the importance of public diplomacy. In particular, cultural diplomacy is considered important in fostering a mutual understanding between nations. South Korea officially embraced the notion of public diplomacy in 2010 and has since been making extensive efforts to promote its soft power assets. In particular, the Korean government has embraced mainstream cultural contents as tools of soft power. Popular culture from South Korea has attracted a significant foreign audience, first in Asia and later across the globe. The spread of Korean cultural contents is commonly referred to as the Korean Wave, or Hallyu. This paper provides a brief outline of how the Korean government simultaneously has contributed to and benefited from Hallyu. It is argued that the current policy framework for cultural diplomacy in South Korea has two major shortcomings. First, the government has succeeded in developing a strategic approach to cultural diplomacy that effectively and efficiently supports, promotes and coordinates efforts by actors within and outside of the state. Specifically, this paper points to the lack of continuity in public policies, the absence of a control tower and the need to improve collaboration with non-governmental actors. It is recommended that South Korea establish a top-level organization responsible for coordinating efforts by the various governmental and non-governmental stakeholders involved in promoting the country’s public diplomacy. Second, it is argued that Korean cultural diplomacy is highly diversified and lacks a focal point. This paper suggests that the government can benefit from placing Korean dramas at the center of its cultural assets. The structure is inspired by the corporate structure of the Walt Disney Company. Disney regards theatrical films as its core asset, and has built a network of complimentary assets that reinforce and benefit one another. In summary, this paper advocates that South Korea might benefit from a more strategic approach to cultural diplomacy with regards to both actors and contents.
The attitude-behavior (AB) relation with direct experience has produced a decades-long debate between two camps. Early on, Regan and Fazio first argued for a strong AB relation, whereas Schlegel and DiTecco found the opposite. This article examines the issue in the context of the attitudinal domain of international students as to their host country. Using the SEM technique to analyze a survey of 300 Chinese students in Korea, the study found a weak AB relation among the whole group and indicated that more direct experience led to a weaker AB relation in two split subgroups (long stay vs. short stay). This article discusses the implications not only for public diplomacy research on international students but for attitude literature in general.
South Korea’s history and political system. As Koreas is located in Northeast Asia and surrounded by larger countries such as China, Japan, and Russia, its foreign policy has long been focused on guaranteeing its independence. The Korean War and the country’s subsequent division into two Koreas forced South Korea to engage in active public diplomacy vis-à-vis North Korea in international society. During the Cold War period, the United States, its strongest ally since the Korean War, was supportive of South Korea’s public diplomacy, which was based on anticommunism. South Korea’s democratic transition in the late 1980s, together with its successful economic development, provided a more solid basis for its post-Cold War public diplomacy, which employed economic and cultural resources.
Globalization casts manifold issues over various fields in contemporary society. It is often perceived as a phenomenon that reinforces transnational interrelatedness and the exchange of economical, societal, technological, and cultural activities beyond national borders (Beck 2000). While the overall consensus would be that globalization constrains roles of nation states (Steger 1998), there exist different perspectives: there is the view that sees globalization as eventually leading nation states into being absorbed into the larger structure of a transnational state (Robinson 2001) to the argument that, in spite of globalizing forces, the existing patterns of institutions for governing nation state and its economy will still remain powerful (Giddens 2003). This chapter points out that nation states are devising strategies to deal with globalizing forces in various ways and discusses the rise of nation branding policy in South Korea within this context. The chapter views nation branding as part of the country’s active strategies to manage and survive the forces of economic globalization. Through cultivating a distinct message and impression of the country and improving its prestige in the international arena, nation branding could function as a tool to strengthen the country’s business competitiveness in the global market. Despite a strong economic agenda, Korea’s nation branding has very strong cultural aspects to the degree that it should be seen as an extension of cultural policy.
It is tempting to see public diplomacy as old wine in new bottles. Official communication aimed at foreign publics is after all no new phenomenon in international relations. Image cultivation, propaganda and activities that we would now label as public diplomacy are nearly as old as diplomacy itself. Even in ancient times, prestige-conscious princes and their representatives never completely ignored the potential and pitfalls of public opinion in foreign lands. References to the nation and its image go as far back as the Bible, and international relations in ancient Greece and Rome, Byzantium and the Italian Renaissance were familiar with diplomatic activity aimed at foreign publics.
The notion of soft power has emerged as an important ingredient in foreign policy in the last decade or so. Jan Melissen writes that it was during the First World War that professional image cultivation across national borders was started and that international politics woke up to see the importance of soft power.1 Today, as Melissen points out, the loss of soft power—which can be termed the “post-modern variant of power over opinion”—is increasingly costly, since people are more connected because of the global information revolution and multiple transnational linkages. Soft power matters in today’s information age. The information revolution has a decentralizing and leveling effect by reducing costs, economies of scale, and barriers of entry to markets, thus reducing the power of large states and enhancing the power of small states and nonstate actors.2 As power is interdependent and information sources are abundant, soft power is likely to become less a function of material resources than in the past.3
It is currently fashionable to compare the United States' power to that of the United Kingdom a century ago and to predict a similar hegemonic decline. But the United States is not in absolute decline, and in relative terms, there is a reasonable probability that it will remain more powerful than any other state in the coming decades.
This article places the current South Korean Nation Branding project, which was institutionalised by the Lee Myung-bak administration in the Presidential Council on Nation Branding (PCNB) in January 2009, in the context of Chalmers Johnson's concept of the Developmental State (DS). It assumes that Johnson's model of a plan-rational, capitalist, interventionist state continues to serve as an explanatory tool in regard to South Korea's political economic strategies. In this connection, the South Korean government's efforts to improve the country's international reputation (Nation Branding) are understood as an example of the country's continued developmental orientation, since they display important parallels to the South Korean DS as far as their institutional set-up, actors and objectives are concerned. This hypothesis is investigated on the basis of an analysis of material published by the PCNB, as well as personal interviews conducted with members and associates of the PCNB.
This study probed the existence of symmetrical benefits of student exchange between Korea and China. People in the public diplomacy field have acclaimed the importance of student exchange between countries, given its promise of relationship building and the perennial appeal of symmetrical benefits. To measure symmetry, this study examined three effects of student exchange between China and Korea: conation for relationship building, belief, and attitude toward the host country. Latent mean analysis using survey data found that outside of personal relationships with host nationals, the norm was asymmetry, not symmetry. As findings failed to support perfect symmetry, this study discusses the potential of imperfect symmetry in future research.
Nation Branding: Concepts, Issues, Practice is a comprehensive and exciting text that demonstrates why nations are embracing the principles of brand management. It clearly explains how the concepts and techniques of branding can be adapted to the context of nations- as opposed to the more usual context of products, services, or companies. Concepts grounded in the brand management literature such as brand identity, brand image, brand positioning, and brand equity, are transposed to the domain of nation branding and supported by country case insights that provide vivid illustrations of nation branding in practice. Nation branding is a means by which more and more nations are attempting to compete on the global stage. Current practice in nation branding is examined and future horizons traced. The book provides: The first overview of its kind on nation branding A blend of academic theory and real world practice in an accessible, readable fashion A clear and detailed adaptation of existing brand theory to the emerging domain of nation branding An original conceptual framework and models for nation branding A rich range of international examples and over 20 contributions by leading experts from around the world Country case insights on nation branding strategies currently being utilized by nations such as Japan, Egypt, Brazil, Switzerland, Iceland, and Russia Clearly and coherently structured, the book is an essential introduction to nation branding for both students and policymakers and will be an essential text for those interested in this fast growing area.
What is citizen diplomacy and how do we assess its significance? These are important questions because of the recent upsurge in international activity of this kind, and because how we answer them says a great deal about how we “do IR.” By examining citizen diplomacy in Duluth, Minnesota, this paper offers a typology of citizen diplomats organized around the ideas of who or what they are representing and to whom. Assessing the significance of citizen diplomacy is a more difficult problem since individuals tend to generate a priori answers to it based on our respective theoretical orientations to IR as a whole. As a solution to this problem, the paper proposes a “diplomatic” approach which focuses on both the representation of differences to one another and the professional commitment which diplomats have to maintaining the practices and institutions which make such relations possible.
This paper argues that in the case of Korea, cultural diplomacy (CD) has been explicitly implemented in a top-down and unilateral approach by government to enhance national prestige abroad, underpinned by the institutional legacy of a ‘developmental state’ model of governance. Yet, an implicit approach has also emerged, associated with capacity building of the domestic cultural industries through promoting ‘international cultural exchange’. Whilst the top-down unilateral approach has persisted, a disarray of policy rhetoric and institutional fragmentation surrounding CD, as well as the blurring of cultural industries development policy with the CD agenda has led to gradual convergence of both explicit and implicit approaches.
The United States has a long history of deploying new technology as a mechanism for public diplomacy (the conduct of foreign policy by engagement with foreign publics) but it was relatively slow to make full use of the on-line technologies known as Web 2.0. This essay reviews the early work of the US Information Agency (1953–1999) in the field of computer and on-line communications, noting the compatibility of a networking approach to USIA's institutional culture. The essay then traces the story forward into the work of the units within the US Department of State which took over public diplomacy functions in 1999. The article argues that this transition deserves a large part of the blame for the difficulty which the risk-averse State Department displayed in embracing first the web and then the full range of qualities associated with Web 2.0. The State Department has emphasized one-way broadcast media rather than two-way relational media and functions connected with listening and exchange diplomacy were subordinated to advocacy. The essay also notes the challenge of a non-diplomatic agency—the Department of Defense—playing a dominant role in digital and other forms of outreach at some points in the process. The essay ends by noting the recent evolution of the State Department's approach to digital media and the emergence of a non-governmental model for American digital outreach (known by the acronym SAGE) which may overcome many of the institutional limits experienced thus far and provide a way to bring together the relational priorities of the New Public Diplomacy with the relational capacities of Web 2.0 technology.
This article examines how South Korean and Japanese public diplomacy organizations employ digital media to embrace the principle of ‘networked public diplomacy’ through analyses of the web and social media practices. A network analysis was used to map interorganizational information networks among core public diplomacy organizations in each country. To reveal the key organizations' communication strategies on Facebook, a content analysis was also conducted. The findings indicate that Japan had a strong internal network infrastructure achieved through dispersed connections and partnerships; however, Korea had a centralized network, including a limited number of dominant actors. The results of content analysis suggest that both South Korea and Japanese public diplomats focused on promoting their cultural products and national values through their use of texts and visual images. In addition, user profile analysis gaged the degree of users' engagement in the organizations' profiles and identified the demographic features of users. Comparative data suggest the Korean public diplomacy organization was more successful at attracting and engaging with foreign public than the Japanese public diplomacy organization. These results imply that although these two countries had similar sociopolitical backgrounds and perspectives of public diplomacy, they had distinct forms of internal information networks, communication strategies, and social networking performances with public.
This paper seeks to provide an historical reflection on the central purpose of U.S. public diplomacy through an examination of the manifest mandate of the three major institutional settings for such international communication programs, i.e., the Committee on Public Information, the Office of War Information, and the United States Information Agency, and to shed light on the current public diplomacy endeavor spearheaded by the Department of State. The review demonstrates that U.S. public diplomacy has been principally an ad hoc instrument of American foreign policy to meet wartime exigencies and has been underscored by the promotion of American values of democracy and freedom. Over the years, it has expanded to encompass multiple modes of engagement, while at the same time there has been constant tension concerning the role of public diplomacy as a strategic, policy function versus merely as a “mouthpiece” within the foreign affairs apparatus. All of these themes continue to reverberate in the contemporary practice of public diplomacy.
Public diplomacy is a term much used but seldom subjected to rigorous analysis. This article—which draws heavily on a report commissioned by the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office in the spring of 2007—sets out a simple taxonomy of public diplomacy's components and their interrelationships. These components are (1) listening, (2) advocacy, (3) cultural diplomacy, (4) exchange, and (5) international broadcasting. It examines five successful and five unsuccessful uses of each individual component drawing from the history of U.S., Franco-German, Swiss, and British diplomatic practice. The failures arise chiefly from a discrepancy between rhetoric and reality. The final section applies the author's taxonomy to the challenges of contemporary public diplomacy and places special emphasis on the need to conceptualize the task of the public diplomat as that of the creator and disseminator of “memes” (ideas capable of being spread from one person to another across a social network) and as a creator and facilitator of networks and relationships.
This article examines the history of public diplomacy and identifies seven lessons from that history. These are: (1) public diplomacy begins with listening; (2) public diplomacy must be connected to policy; (3) public diplomacy is not a performance for domestic consumption; (4) effective public diplomacy requires credibility, but this has implications for the bureaucratic structure around the activity; (5) sometimes the most credible voice in public diplomacy is not one's own; (6) public diplomacy is not `always about you'; and (7) public diplomacy is everyone's business. The article considers the relevance of these lessons for `the new public diplomacy', which have emerged over the last decade. Cull concludes that this new public diplomacy era has opened up fresh possibilities, but has not erased the relevance of the history of public diplomacy. On the contrary, the lessons of the past seem even more relevant in an age in which communications play an unprecedented role.
The continued rise of the non-state actor in twenty-first century international politics issues a potent challenge to state primacy in the area of diplomacy. Diplomacy's statist tradition, once the bedrock organising institution for pursuing international politics, is ceding influence to non-state actors—the “new” diplomats—who have displayed impressive skill at shaping policy through means that foreign ministries fail to grasp. To the chagrin of established scholars and practitioners, this paper claims that nothing has transpired to suggest the diplomatic profession is doing anything but pluralising. Furthermore, the process by which the foreign ministry opens itself to the public increasingly resides with the latter. Does this revolution mean the evolution of the “new diplomacy” has materialised? The contents in the following pages suggest so, and the main reason for this is built upon a radical view of agency: the age of diplomacy as an institution is giving way to an age of diplomacy as a behaviour. Yet despite who dominates in the art of influence, caveats remain and it appears likely that each side will need the other to achieve successful statecraft in the years to come.
This paper aims to clarify the meaning, and explain the utility, of the case study method, a method j often practiced but little understood. A "case study," I argue, is best defined as an intensive study of a single unit with an aim to generalize across a larger set of units. Case studies rely on the same sort of covariational evidence utilized in non-case study research. Thus, the case study method is correctly understood as a particular way of defining cases, not a way of analyzing cases or a way of modeling causal relations. I show that this understanding of the subject illuminates some of the persistent ambiguities of case study work, ambiguities that are, to some extent, intrinsic to the enterprise. The travails of the case study within the discipline of political science are also rooted in an insufficient appreciation of the methodological tradeoffs that this method calls forth. This paper presents the familiar contrast between case study and non-case study work as a series of characteristic strengths and weaknesses - affinities -rather than as antagonistic approaches to the empirical world. In the end, the perceived hostility between case study and non-case study research is largely unjustified and, perhaps, deserves to be regarded as a misconception. Indeed, the strongest conclusion to arise from this methodological examination concerns the complementarity of single-unit and cross-unit research designs.