Chapter 1. Introduction
1.7. Literature Review
國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
1.7. Literature Review
1. Public Diplomacy 1.1. Public Diplomacy
There are lots of books about the study of PD. Each author interprets this term by his own way. For instance, Christopher Ross considers public diplomacy as "a public face of a traditional diplomacy" (Hess, Kalb, 2003; p.224).
In "Media, Terrorism, and Theory" book we can see that PD differs from traditional diplomacy, because it involves interaction not only with governments but primarily with nongovernmental individuals and organizations. Furthermore, public diplomacy activities often present many differing views represented by private American individuals and organizations in addition to official government views (Kavoori, 2006; p.150).
Mark Leonard (2002) in his "Public Diplomacy" stresses that in fact PD is about building relationships: understanding the needs of other countries, cultures, and peoples;
communicating different points of view; correcting misperceptions; looking for areas where we can find common cause. He defines impacts that public diplomacy can achieve. For instance, it can:
• increase people’s familiarity with one’s country;
• engage people with one’s country through strengthening ties, tourism and education, including the cultural one;
• enhance people’s perception of one’s country through creating positive apprehension, getting others to see issues of global importance from the same perspective.
In the post-Gullion period analysts of definitions the concept with three distinct phases of the definitions and conceptualizations of PD (Auer & Srugies, 2013; p.9).
Figure 1. Definitions Influenced by Distinct Global Paradigms
Cold War Post-Cold War 9/11 (1945-1989) (1989-2001) (2001-present)
persuasion understanding by the mutual foreign public understanding
Source: Auer & Srugies, 2013
PD research can also be done through characterizing its three dimensions, such as 1) building long-term relationships with populations overseas to win recognition of one’s country, 2) reacting to news events as they occur in a way that suits one’s state strategic goals,
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
and 3) creating a news agenda through activities and events which are designed to reinforce core messages and influence perceptions of other countries (Snow, Taylor, 2009; p. 74).
Even though public diplomacy differs from advertising, education, branding, journalism, and public relations, it still imports methods and norms from civil society. Bruce Gregory in his "Public Diplomacy and National Security" (2006) states that "PD operates though actions, relationships, images, and words in three-time frames: 24/7 news streams, medium range campaigns on high-value policies, and long-term engagement. Its tools range from electronic media to cultural diplomacy to “the last three feet” of personal communication".
Many scientists and analytics of modern political science and diplomacy tried to form the basic principles of PD. Many of them believe that one of the most successful works belongs to Christopher Ross. Based on historical experience and his own achievements, he formulated six principles, which help to build a comprehensive strategy for public diplomacy to promote the national brand of any country (Borodina, 2010):
• providing an understanding of the foreign policy to the audience in its real form, not a form others used to believe in;
• explaining the policy, showing its rationality and justifying its fundamental values;
• appealing to the international community by consistent, truthful and convincing methods;
• working not only with narrow target segments but also with the broad mass through the print and electronic media;
• interaction with a variety of partners to reach new target audience: private sector, corporations, non-profit organizations, communities;
• participation in international communication and exchange programs.
We cannot study PD without its relation to the foreign policy of a state. In this case, this is not only about the achievement of national interests, but also about how to guarantee national security. Here one can mention about the identity of the state, its activities, interests and values, and their status in the international arena. All these categories should be included in the agenda of state’s foreign policy and its priorities. "States have their interests, including strategic, geopolitical, economic, or commercial. In addition, they want to have a certain position in the international community to gain some diplomatic influence" (Peterkova, 2008;
p. 8)
‧
tradition of the society, what public diplomacy is aimed to.1.2. Soft Power
In the XXI century, the instruments of indirect actions, such as the policy of "soft power" are becoming increasingly popular. The term was coined in 1990 by Joseph Nye in his work "Bound to Lead the Changing Nature of American" and developed in "The Means to Success in World Politics". Nye divides "power" into "hard" and "soft." By "hard power"
scientist understands the capacity for coercion by means of one country’s military and economic power (Nye, 2004; p.25). "Soft power" is the ability to achieve objectives based on the voluntary participation of allies, rather than by coercion (p.27). According to the ANNALS journal, here are the main differences between hard and soft power:
Table 1. Hard Power versus Soft Power
Type Resources
Force; threats Sanctions; paymentsValues; culture;
"political values" and "foreign policy". But there is another approach, according to which
"soft power" can be subdivided into the following components: economic, political and cultural influence (Radikov, Leksyutina, 2012; p 22).
"Soft power" as a force in international relations is always associated with diplomacy, where each state aims to represent its people, their national interests, and culture on the international stage. Therefore, in theoretical and practical terms, much attention is paid to
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
such concepts as "public diplomacy" (Matveenko, Galaeva, 2015; p. 166). Here, PD is an activity used for the development and accumulation potential of "soft power"(p. 168).
1.3. New Public Diplomacy or PD 2.0
Recently, the international communication space has changed dramatically, and therefore the government began to look for new forms of public diplomacy. This led to appearance of the term "new public diplomacy" or "PD 2.0", focused on intercultural dialogue and the establishment of an atmosphere of trust and cooperation between peoples in different countries, thus creating a favorable environment for interstate cooperation and for cooperation between States and non-state actors in other areas through Web 2.0 technologies27, such as social networks, blogs, video sharing, etc.
Because of such changes Cull, N. J. identified key shifts in the practice of public diplomacy. For example, he stressed that the international actors have become nontraditional and the mechanisms to communicate with world publics, used by these actors, have moved into new, real-time global technologies (especially the Internet). There is no place for propaganda in PD anymore. Now states pay more attention to nation branding and "soft power". The actor-to-people communication during the Cold War-era has shifted to people-to-people contact for mutual enlightenment, with the international actor playing the role of facilitator. Nowadays, the prime task of the new public diplomacy is characterized as
"relationship building" (2009; p. 13).
N. Cull also identified several characteristics of the new PD (Cull, 2013; p 6.). Firstly, it is based on the ability of ICT to facilitate the establishment of relationships within social networks and online communities. Secondly, it depends on user-generated content, for example, comments from social networks and blogs. And finally, its operation is built on the exchange of information, and not on the transmission of data messages from the top downward, what was typical for vertical networks in the era of the traditional public diplomacy.
What is more, basic subjects of "public diplomacy 2.0" are foreign ministries and related institutions, some politicians and public figures and also mass media. Political parties
27 A Web 2.0 site may allow users to interact and collaborate with each other in a social media dialogue as creators of user-generated content in a virtual community, in contrast to the first generation of Web 1.0-era websites where people were limited to the passive viewing of content. Examples of Web 2.0 include social networking sites and social media sites (e.g., Facebook), blogs, wikis, folksonomies ("tagging" of websites and links), video sharing sites (e.g., YouTube), hosted services, Web applications ("apps"), collaborative consumption platforms, and mashup applications, that allow users to blend the digital audio from multiple songs together to create new music.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
and public organizations, which are able to actively influence public opinion abroad, also play a significant role in PD 2.0. (Marchukov, 2014; p.107).
2. Mass Media, its functions, fields of concern, models and methods
Media has a huge number of functions, which are detailed in "Media as factors in world politics". The most common ones are the information and manipulation of the internal and external public; dissemination of ideology; socialization and education of the population;
the audience entertainment; maintenance and regulation of relations between the institutions of government and society… (Fokina, 2013; p.61)
Fokina also argues that modern democracies have developed three fields of concern of media in world politics (p.62). The first one talks about mass media as an instrument of political power, where one of the main purposes is to carry out propaganda. The second one is about media as a social institution, and its main task is to express an opinion on the most important foreign policy decisions and actions. The last one describes media as a corporation or "influence institute".
Models and methods of mass media work with the state and public are described in the article "Political communication" (Petrunin, 2004, p. 213-214). The author identifies three models, such as "free market ideas", "social responsibility" and "democratic representation".
In the first model, the main objective of any state is to guarantee citizens’ access to information. The second model envisages that the media should fulfill certain obligations to society, while the third model focuses on the content of media materials.
3. Propaganda
In order to understand the means and objectives of PD, there is a need to analyze the term "propaganda". This paper examines the definitions given by not only foreign authors but also by the Russian ones. For instance, the Russian professor Dolinskiy (2011) sees propaganda as deliberate manipulation with symbols, words, gestures, flags, monuments, music or actions of some people in relation to beliefs, values and behaviors of others (p. 275).
It is known that the term "public diplomacy" appeared in American political science in the mid-1960s by replacing the negative associations with the word "propaganda". The Western analytic Welch (1999) considers propaganda as "the deliberate attempt to influence the opinions of the audience through the transmission of ideas and values for the specific purpose, consciously designed to serve the interest of the propagandists and their political
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
masters either directly or indirectly" (p. 24). Propaganda is also a way to present states’
foreign policy to the external world using the media (Naveh, 2002; p. 9).
There are three types of propaganda, white, black and grey. The white and black propaganda are the most significant ones and are discussed in a book "Global communications, international affairs and the media since 1945" (p. 159).
4. Information warfare
In the context of the study of the national news networks impact on international relations, it is also necessary to note such thing like information warfare. There are many methods and ways in which the political forces sway the world community to one direction or another. One of the most common and advanced information technologies in our time is an information manipulation or the so-called information war. This war has different rules, objectives, and weapons than previous wars, thus they are more dangerous because they are able to "erase" the historical memory of the people.
Currently, the concept of "information warfare" is defined differently. For example, information wars are the informative activities undertaken by political entity (i.e. a state) to weaken or even destroy another political entity (Ivanov, 2013; p. 277).
Another Russian analyst Panarin (2012) considers such kind of war as the most socially dangerous form of information warfare, carried out by violent means and methods of influence on the information-psychological sphere of the enemy with the purpose of solving strategic tasks (p 223).
Objectives of the information war, such as control of the information space to conduct information attacks on the enemy and increase the overall effectiveness of the armed forces with the help of the universal use of military information functions, as well as the main features of the information war are described in the Dementieva’s article (2014; p. 15)
5. Telediplomacy
5.1. The concept of telediplomacy
Television media is a tool of foreign policy, which may impact on the dynamics of international processes. The concept of "telediplomacy" originated as a product of the transformation of traditional diplomatic processes (Robinson, 2001; p.534). Nowadays, telediplomacy plays an important role, due to leaders of states and diplomats use the global television broadcast as a platform for the declaration of their decisions. Objectives of
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
telediplomacy are to informed about various political, social and cultural processes of the world and provide a "platform" for performances of world leaders.
There are specific conditions under which the global TV can influence the political decision-making. First of all, the degree of influence of global television networks is determined by the scale of events. In particular, large international crises and acts of terrorism always dominate the information space and require an urgent response of world governments.
Secondly, the rate of development of the situation also largely determines the "level of influence" on decisions, especially in a situation of "political or power vacuum"28, when political leaders are unable to monitor the development of events, choose a clear political line in relation to a particular emergency situation. In addition, an event should capture the attention of a wide audience. A collection of operational information raises a problem, which requires a rapid response of the political leaders (Larionov, 2015; p. 114). In this case, there is a serious risk – if an event is out of political control, the main tool of influence on public society will be global television networks.
The significant element of the activities of global television networks is their potential to influence the development of international politics. They can be summarized in several points. Firstly, the international news content of the global television forms the agenda. This can help politicians and diplomats to prioritize facts when developing their own agenda. In this regard, it is noteworthy that in most government and diplomatic institutions TV are tuned to receive information from BBC World and CNN channels (Ammon, 2001; p131-132).
Another object of global television news is the definition of criteria of the particular events.
Indeed, the sequence of the reporting facts can significantly shift the focus of perception of events.
Thus, the activities of global television networks represent a field for active political lobbying strategies of any state. Careful attention of governments to the television networks has marked by the significance of the latest contemporary political processes and the ability to form public moods. Consequently, global television can be considered as a full member of the political and diplomatic processes.
5.2. CNN effect
28 In political science and political history, the term power vacuum is an analogy between a physical vacuum, to the political condition when someone has lost control of something and no one has replaced them. The situation can occur when a government has no identifiable central power or authority. The physical analogy suggests that in a power vacuum, other forces will tend to "rush in" to fill the vacuum as soon as it is created, perhaps in the form of an armed militia or insurgents, military coup, warlord or dictator.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Mass media have an enormous influence over the public. "From advertising to news broadcasts to nightly sitcoms, people are continuously bombarded with opinions and information" (Cohen, Gunther, Talor & Tsfati, 2009).
Cable News Network or CNN began its broadcasting on June 1st, 1980. Since the beginning of the Gulf War in 1991, CNN was the only channel reported (and broadcasted live) air attacks on Iraq all 24 hours. Other TV channels worldwide used CNN unique footage with its logo for the relay. Another scenario of using such model of translation was used again during the 9/11 terrorist attacks29. Being under pressure of the television channels, reporters, and people, political leaders have to make decisions quickly and efficiently. Thus, the ability of global television networks to influence political decision-making and, often, to change the course of events, was called the "CNN effect".
It is worth to remark that researchers of the CNN effect use different definitions to describe this process. Seib (2002; p.27) states that the CNN effect "is presumed to illustrate the dynamic tension that exists between real-time television news and policymaking, with the news having the upper hand in terms of influence". Feist (2001, p. 713) notes: "The CNN effect is a theory that compelling television images, such as images of a humanitarian crisis, cause U.S. policymakers to intervene in a situation when such an intervention might otherwise not be in the U.S. national interest." According to Schorr (1998), the CNN effect is
"the way breaking news affects foreign policy decisions," while Livingston and Eachus (1995, p. 413) defined it "as elite decision makers" loss of policy control to news media".
Babak Bahador (2007), a media scholar, describes four types of the CNN effect: the agenda-setting effect, the impediment effect, the challenging effect, and the accelerant effect.
These categories define options of mass media impact on government policy and public opinion. First, the accelerant effect refers to the media’s ability to fasten policy decisions.
The impediment effect outlines how media can influence on military strategy. The third category, the agenda-setting effect, describes the procedure of how the news agenda can create a policy plan or change government’s course of action. The final type refers to news ability to force making decisions in order to alleviate human suffering during crises and wars that sometimes seem irrelevant to the national interest.
In other words, CNN effect may not only fasten policy decision making but also elaborate a policy agenda and become an impediment to the achievement of desired policy
29 The September 11 attacks (also referred to as 9/11) were a series of four coordinated terrorist attacks by the Islamic terrorist group al-Qaeda on the United States on the morning of Tuesday, September 11, 2001.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
goal. Significant examples of the CNN effect can be found in making political decisions related to genocide in Rwanda or Darfur massive genocide30, the war in Persian Gulf, 9/11 attacks, etc.
One should also point out that the CNN effect also represents a conflict of the pressure of public opinion on leaders who feel that they should make decisions based on expertise and rationality, rather than the news cycle (Livingston, Eachus, 1995; p. 414).
Therefore, this effect has both supporters and opponents. More about them will be discussed in this thesis.
Nowadays this term refers not only to the CNN information influence but also to other international news agencies as well.
6. CNN
CNN was the first in the world proposed the concept of a 24-hour news broadcast.
Subsequently, it reflected on the entire world. Cultural, political philosophy, mass communication and international relations experts acknowledged that CNN has become not only the bearer of the American-English language but also a symbol, such as Hollywood and McDonald’s, of the American penetration to all continents (Barber 2006; p.103). The New Encyclopaedia Britannica stresses the role of CNN in conducting the US influence on the process of globalization: "CNN has become an icon of globalization, showing the whole world to the US style of television news".31
Since the second half of the 80-s, CNN began to expand its audience in the world. It conducted live broadcasts from the Philippines, events supporting the opposition to the dictator Marcos32; showed a report about the shooting of students in Beijing Tyanyanmyn area33; transfer of Soviet troops in Afghanistan34 and the collapse of the Berlin Wall35. Since
Since the second half of the 80-s, CNN began to expand its audience in the world. It conducted live broadcasts from the Philippines, events supporting the opposition to the dictator Marcos32; showed a report about the shooting of students in Beijing Tyanyanmyn area33; transfer of Soviet troops in Afghanistan34 and the collapse of the Berlin Wall35. Since