Public Diplomacy and Media - Research Paper Example

Public Diplomacy 1. Who was Ivy Lee? And have journalists become lazy or are there other factors to consider? The need for appropriate communication and keeping the public informed over issues that affect them is a sensitive factor for the individuals in public relation and journalism/media. Other than production of different versions of information, organizations have often adopted press release methods, which Ivy Lee has been considered to be the pioneer. You have perhaps witnessed institutions and government’s spokesperson coming out strongly to offer an explanation or defend an issue in the public. These are often public relation officers who come out to offer a press release on behalf of the organizations concerning an issue. Ivy Lee was a well educated man raised in a prominent family, and whose career and expertise led to the invention of public relations. His history in newspaper industry (then New York World) and presidential campaign for judge parker gave him the experience in reporting and publicity work, before engaging into a partnership to start what came to be a public relation firm. In regard to the invention of press release, it can be associated with Lee’s client (Pennsylvania Railroad Company) and the trains tragedy of October 28 1906. The train had caused an accident which claimed 50 people’s lives: Lee advised his client to issue a public statement (fist press release) explaining what had transpired to the journalists at the scene of the accidents before invented stories and rumours were reported (Kennedy ereleases.com). Two days later, the press release made by Lee appeared to be printed on NYT newspaper in the exact form it was reported without changes. This has been the trend for most media publications even in contemporary times. Journalists operate within an ethical framework and are responsible for informing the society through media. Considering issues of propaganda stories, and factors like evidence gathering and working along with justice departments journalists may need to rely on press release statements, by quoting or printing their statements when informing the society. One, misinformation and lying to capture the public’s attention could discredit the journalists and media group they work for, least to mention the violation of the code that governs media reporting. Though the demand for news is high, accuracy and authenticity are also critical. Second, in such time when public relations has risen and embraced by many institutions, journalism seems to be shrinking; most journalists would seek out certain information from organizations’ publicity agents while internet technology gives opportunity for PR to now by pass the press and get to directly communicate to the public (Sullivan cjr.org). 2. Avenues countries are using to get into public diplomacy and the possible effects The western domination in the media sphere has shaped and influenced foreign publics for quite a long period, which links it to its hard power and advantages over other countries. However, other countries have risen and developed strong means of persuasion capable of influencing the public discourse beyond their State boundaries through international broadcasting and cultural diplomacy other than the traditional government related policies. International broadcasting: Global influence has been achieved in the broader sense through international broadcasting. For most countries competition in broadcasting was hindered by the strict state control, which facilitated domination of US based broadcasting. The last two decades has seen most countries enter into public diplomacy through broadcasting networks, allowing media flows across continents, capable of covering international affairs and challenging the western media perspective (Thussu 9). For example, other the dominant western ABC and CBS broadcasting, Al-Jazeera a recent network from Qatar is now a major global broadcaster among others in the emerging nations of the global south. Thousands of homes as far as Africa get to view news in the Arabic world and compare with what is reported by the western broadcastings. For Qatar, this avenue has been valuable considering that it can leverage the channel to enhance its geopolitical leadership in the region and capable of influencing the popular opinion of the country/region. However, Press TV broadcasting in Iran has been faced with accusation of fabricating news and spreading propaganda, which eventually harms the country’s image in the foreign public Cultural Initiatives: Countries have adopted lucrative means of communicating and explaining themselves to the world through cultural diplomacy. Local and international channels that were previously dominated by US and London films have to offer competing drama and films produced based on the cultural themes of the diverse people especially in the Asian and South American regions. For instance, countries like Turkey, Brazil, Japan, China, Korea and India produces, showcase and exports their films, mini-series, game productions, soap operas among other drama to other countries and media across the globe. These productions are instruments of their cultural diplomacy across continents. They give the countries positive economic impacts and change the world’s idea of the nations. For Turkey’s case, film production has aided in attracting a wave of tourists in Istanbul while Bollywood of India has promoted its family and community oriented values, which foreigners and people at the Diaspora can relate with. 3. Successes and Failures of Confucius Institute China has invested heavily in establishment of Confucius institutes (CI) across the world as one strategy of Chinese cultural diplomacy tool. These institutions have served to promote Chinese cultural knowledge and language in the international scene, which is necessary for social and economical operations with the China’s emerging economy. Success: According to Zahran in USC Centre on public Diplomacy, CI are spreading faster and “expanding most rapidly in liberal democracies” (6). You would find quite a number of Chinese guest teachers in oversees learning institutions who teach Chinese educational programs and cultures. Flew and Hartig state that “between 2004 and 2012, China set up over 900 Confucius Institutes and Confucius Classrooms in 108 countries to promote Chinese language and culture” (3). Just as other western powers have done, China CIs are today felt across the continents in the world. The CIs have managed to establish a strong network structure. They work closely with the Chinese language Council international (CLCI/Hanban) that entails different departments (like foreign affairs, commerce, culture, media and press, and education amongst), other than working in partnership with other oversees educational programs and colleges. CIs have created network synergy to enhance interpersonal relations and employed network strategies for further engagement in cultural exchanges (USC Centre on public Diplomacy 6). CIs have been supportive in promoting prosperity in foreign developed and developing countries. Failure: Despite its success in fostering African education, CIs have in certain places failed to increase Chinese power. Compared to developed nations and places like Africa, Chinese soft power effect is high for the latter. Similarly, CIs intentions remain sceptical in the foreign nations’ public. Comparing CI and Goethe institute: CIs are much widespread across the world compared to Goethe institutes. The less than 200 Goethe institutes do not measure up with hundreds of CIs beyond China. Both promote their original nation’s language and cultural knowledge. The establishment of Goethe Institute was originally an NGO and non profit organization, but it receives much financial support from the German government. CIs are funded and operated by the Chinese government agencies, which run the programs in foreign universities. Goethe Institute programs are not strategically housed in universities and offer its program to broad range of learners including children, university students, and immigrants in Germany among others. In contrast to Goethe, CIs emerging dominance across the world and especially in US is faced by criticism of spreading Chinese propaganda and its enhancing control that threatens foreign academic matters. 4. The difference between propaganda and public diplomacy? The two terms are intrinsically linked to power and intention to persuade. Public diplomacy entails putting human interactions ( eg., between cultures, groups or people) beyond state’s borders as the focal point while avoiding use of manipulative methods to respond to situation/idea. Most people would equate the two terms due to their role in strategic messaging. However, unlike propaganda, public diplomacy entails other activities like educational campaigns and exchange programs least the strategic messaging intended for the foreign public (Tiedeman 1). It entails active communication and to avail information, build on relationships to better understand the people, their culture and values (offering their side of the story), while promoting meaningful dialogue on both parties. Messages directed to the receiver (publics)are offered by the authoritative persons public affairs officer or spokesperson among other of respective bodies of NGOs, private companies and governments amongst. In most cases it’s based on truths that can offer credible, believable and persuasive information. Propaganda has been known to serve a pro-source function and highly employed during times of crisis to influence people’s emotions for a designed purpose. Snow describes propaganda as a “source-based, cause-oriented, emotion-laden content that utilizes mass persuasion media to cultivate the mass mind in service to the source’s goals” (e-ir.info). It seeks to favour the sponsor of the message, with their interest and views taking the centre stage, while reflecting on some truths and manipulating others. Dennis Rodman’s statement in the sports diplomacy article makes personal promises yet to be endorsed by the sport committee on behalf of his nation. This makes it propaganda though without a negative implication. 5. Lobby Group and Public diplomacy American and Israeli relations and shared policies in the context of promoting peace and bringing insecurity to an end is a form of public diplomacy. For many decades, the two nations have coordinated and remained allies right from their head of states to military defence in promoting and enforcing the American- middle East policies in the Arab world. Since WWW II Israeli and U.S top officials have engaged in discussions and reached a consensus on various policies like supporting Israel economic development. Israel remains great benefactor of U.S foreign aids, least to mention the negotiations US has been involved in solving Israel-Arab countries conflicts. U.S has been centre stage in supporting sustainable agreement during peace negotiation, which is a U.S public diplomacy strategy. Lobby groups attempt to influence the actions of governments/firms and the public opinion to support a particular cause, using various advocacies. They are capable of influencing public policies, raising awareness on the same issues, and contribute in finding mutual beneficial outcome. Often the groups are composed of different people, but who promote a specific agenda, but may vary in certain issues. For example, the American Jews, AIPAC and Jewish Voice for Peace consist of the Israeli lobby groups in U.S.A; they however differ in certain policies and opinions, but are known to influence and bend U.S foreign policies towards pro- Israel Interest (Mearsheimer and Walt 40). Can a strong lobby, in your opinion, replace any need for public diplomacy? Irrespective of how strong a lobby is, it cannot replace the need for public diplomacy. The lobby serve to push for a desired policy/action and may not last enough to serve the public needs consistently. In contrast, public diplomacy has numerous avenues other than lobbied polices, it can be communicated through sports, cultures and exchange programs across borders. Lobbies may hold the view of few selected people in the population, and though a critical element in influencing policies, it does not fully represent ‘the side of the story’ in the population. 6. What is successful Twitter diplomacy and how successful was it in Venezuela? Why? The internet technology provides a digital platform for virtual communication which allows current government s to defend, explain and reveal their foreign policies. Public diplomacy requires a communication process that supports a two way relationship to deliver the parties’ messages and their articulate image. According to Yepsen , successful public diplomacy in relation to a given country/entity “includes a bi-directional communication effort aimed at promoting greater appreciation and understanding of the entity’s society, culture, institutions, values and policies” (18). Twitter as a social media site is currently been used by numerous diplomats from different countries for direct engagement with other foreign publics to deliver government messages, engage in quicker dialogues and building on the nations’ relationship through the digital diplomacy. Examples of secretary of U.S state Hilary Clinton and most of U.S embassies across the globe demonstrate the use of internet (especially the twitter their numerous followers) and how U.S public diplomacy in promotion of U.S policies has been successful. Based on the research of U.S embassy’s twitter diplomacy in Venezuela, it shows that twitter a social media has not yet fully managed to engage influential. Yepsen used the opinion leader network model to test for twitter engagement. Analysis of the twitter engagement demonstrates that discussion put forth are limited (e.g political discussions) by the current policies, which also serve to limit the number of potential opinion leaders. There exist a variety of twitter policy limitations which prevents the U.S embassy and her diplomats in Venezuela from engaging in conversations that have essential value in its public diplomacy. 7. How can water be part of public diplomacy? Why is it important and who benefits from it? Works Cited Sullivan, J. “True Enough.” cjr.org. 2 may 2011. Web. 23 October 2014. http://www.cjr.org/feature/true_enough.php?page=all Yepsen, E.A. “Practicing Successful Twitter Public Diplomacy: A Model and case study of U.S Efforts in Venezuela.” CPD Perspective on Public Diplomacy (6), 2012. Mearsheimer, J.J., and Walt, S. M. “The Israel Lobby and U.S Foreign Policy.” Middle East Policy, XIII (3), 2006: p. 29-87. http://mearsheimer.uchicago.edu/pdfs/IsraelLobby.pdf Snow, N. “Public Diplomacy and Propaganda: Rethinking Diplomacy in the Age of persuasion.” e-ir.info. 12 December 2012. Web. 24 October 2014. http://www.e-ir.info/2012/12/04/public-diplomacy-and-propaganda-rethinking-diplomacy-in-the-age-of-persuasion/ Tiedeman , A. “Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting: Public Diplomacy or Propaganda?” tufts.edu. Springs 2005. Web, 24 October 2014. < http://fletcher.tufts.edu/Al-Nakhlah/Archives/~/media/Fletcher/Microsites/al%20Nakhlah/archives/pdfs/tiedeman.pdf> Kennedy, M. “The History of the Press Release.” ereleases.com. N.d. Web. 23 October 2014. Thussu, D. “De-Americanizing Soft Power Discourse?” uscpublicdiplomacy.org. April 2014. Web. 24 October 2014. Perspectives2_2014_SoftPower.pdf Los Angeles: Figueroa Press Flew, T., and Hartig, F. “Confucius Institutes and the Network Communication Approach to Public Diplomacy.” qut.edu.au . 2014. Web. 24 October 2014. http://eprints.qut.edu.au/74877/1/Confucius_Institutes_Journal_of_Asian_Studies_Flew_and_Hartig_final.pdf USC Centre on public Diplomacy. “A New Era in Cultural Diplomacy: Rising Soft power in Emerging markets.” uscpublicdiplomacy.org. 28 February 2014. Web. 24 October 2014. Read More