Limitations & Suggestions

As noted by Johansen within the political marketing context, the product is only the facilitator of value – the real value is found in the relationship and interactions created. The products in this sense are websites and social media content, and the real value is found when a relationship is formed between the viewer/user and the communicator, especially when the

viewer/user comments on, likes or shares content. The number of people ‘following’ and ‘liking’

the various sites noted demonstrates significant growth in many cases. This study interest is focused on what images Russia itself tries to promote. As it seems very difficult to identify Facebook and Twitter interactions as positive and negative reactions because of specific nature of news that are posted in social media accounts, a new research system should be developed for further research. Future studies can be focused on examining the extent to which engagement takes place between ministries and their followers as well as their interactivity and how they are tailored and understood by local audiences.

This study is also limited by time period. That period of time was chosen because it is noticed that Russian diplomatic efforts have been intensified on a global scale due information confrontation with the United States of America, escalation of Syrian conflict and continuous negotiations over Minsk agreements and Ukrainian crisis.

While public diplomacy may represent a conceptual shift in the practice of nation branding, its effectiveness remains unknown. Future studies should examine the extent to which local and international audiences accept nations' branding. Barriers to such acceptance may be the belief that social media content published by foreign ministries is nothing more than propaganda. Likewise, studies should evaluate the effectiveness of nation branding campaigns delivered through SNS as opposed to those delivered through traditional media (e.g., print, television). It is also of paramount importance to examine whether engagement and listening do indeed challenge people's stereotypes regarding certain countries, and whether engagement on SNS with a foreign diplomat is tantamount to a personal encounter with someone from a foreign country. Finally, nation branding research should evaluate whether countries have been able to associate their brand with certain values by using public diplomacy.

Despite the fact that in the last decade and a significant amount of work has been done by the Russian authorities to form a state image abroad, it is worth noting that the fact that the goal is far from being achieved. Moreover, the image of the Russian Federation by the eyes of the international community is estimated by some experts rather as a negative (Simons, 2017).

Undoubtedly, work in this direction should be intensified.

While it is beyond the scope of this thesis to assess whether Russia has been successful in altering its global image, such an assessment can be made by social media directors at both the embassy and ministry level. Doing so necessitates that operators of digital diplomacy accounts continuously monitor the manner in which nation branding messages are received and further disseminated by their online followers.

An important direction of activity at the moment has been working on the Internet. The creation of the accounts of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia in Twitter and Facebook allowed to improve communications between ministry and audience to a considerable extent, to ensure the speediness of information exchange, which increased the efficiency of messages, more importantly, from the point of view of creating a positive image of the state. It made information more accessible for people, both in Russia and abroad.

Such a concept, according to the image communication scheme, should define the message (the desired "image"), the addressee, the addressee (or all actors), the code, the communication channel and the result. Each of these components is extremely important and can be of great importance in the final result of the implementation of the entire program for the formation of a positive image of the state.

REFERENCES

Aghaei, S. (2012). Evolution of the World Wide Web: From Web 1.0 to Web 4.0. International journal of Web & Semantic Technology, 3(1), pp.1-10.

Batanova, O. (2013). The Russian World. International Affairs, 1, pp.116-122.

Carnegie. (2016). Russia 2020: Scenarios for the Future Event at Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (Vol. April 21, 2011). Washington, DC.

Cull N.J. (2011) WikiLeaks, Public Diplomacy 2.0 and the State of Digital Public Diplomacy.

Place Branding and Public diplomacy, 7, pp.1-8.

Dizard W. (2001). Digital Diplomacy: U.S. Foreign Policy in the Information Age. Westport, Praeger Publishers.

Edelman, M. (1993). Contestable Categories and Public Opinion. Political Communication, 10, pp.231-242.

Entman, R. M., Page, B. I. (1994). The News Before the Storm: The Iraq War Debate and the Limits to Media Independence. Taken by Storm: The News Media, Public Opinion and U.S.

Foreign Policy in the Gulf War. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Entman, R. M. (1991). Framing U.S. Coverage of International News: Contrasts in Narratives of the KAL and Iran Air Incidents. Journal of Communication, 41(4), pp.6- 26.

Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), pp.51-58.

Gass, R.H., Seiter, J.S. (2009). Credibility and public diplomacy. In N. Snow & P.M. Taylor (Eds.), The public diplomacy handbook, pp. 154-165.

Glassman, J.K. (2008). Public Diplomacy 2.0: A New Approach to Global Engagement.

Gudjonsson, H. (2005) 'Nation branding', Place Branding, 1(3), pp. 283-298.

Hanson, F. Revolution @State: The Spread of E-diplomacy. Retrieved from http://lowyinstitute.cachefly.net/files/hanson_revolution_state_web.pdf

Internet User Forecast by Country. An Estimate and Forecast of Internet Users in 57 Countrues and 6 Regions of the World. (2017). Retrieved from

http://www.etforecasts.com/products/ES_intusersv2.htm IT Strategic Plan. Fiscal years 2011-2013. Retrieved from

http://www.state.gov/m/irm/rls/148572.htm#goal1

Iyengar, S., Reeves, R. (1997). Do the Media Govern? Ca., p.380

Jarol, В., Manheim S., Robert В. (1984). Changing National Images: International Public Relations and Media Agenda Setting. American Political Science Review, 78, pp.641- 657.

Jenes,B. (2007): Connection between the ecologically oriented consumer behavior and country image. Marketing és Menedzsment, 6, pp.34-43.

Kononenko, V. (2009). Sozdat’ obraz Rossii? [ Create image of Russia?]. Rossiya v globalnoi politike, 2. Retrieved from http://www.globalaffairs.ru/number/n_6562

Kosachev K. (2012). Chto takoe obshestvennaya diplomatiya I zachem ona nyzhna Rossii? [ What is public diplomacy and why Russia needs it?]. Retrieved from http://russiancouncil.ru/inner/?id_4=791#top

Kosicki, G. M., Pan, Z. (1985). Framing Analysis: An Approach to News Discourse. Political Communication, 10, pp.55-75.

Kosobokova, T. (2008). Obshestvennaya Diplomatiya. Novaya komissiya Obshestvennoi palati.

[ Public diplomacy: A new commission of Common chamber]. VZGLYAD, Retrieved from http://www.vz.ru/politics/2006/2/14/22534.html

Kotler, P., Haider, D., & Rein, I. (1993). Marketing Places: Attracting Investment and Tourism

to Cities, States and Nations. The Free Press, 3, pp.76-87.

Kotler, P & Gertner, D (2002) 'Country as brand, product, and beyond: A place marketing and brand management perspective'. Brand Management, 9(4-5), pp. 249-261.

Lebedenko, V. (2004). Russia's National Identity and Image-Building. International Affairs, 50(4), pp. 71-77.

Lozansky, E. (2008). The Limitations of Russian Public Diplomacy. Discovery Institute:

Russia Blog, Retrieved from

http://www.russiablog.org/2008/03/cant_buy_love_the_limits_of_ru.php

Martin, I. M., Eroglu, S. (1993): Measuring a Multi-Dimensional Construct: Country Image.

Journal of Business Research, 28, p. 193.

Nye, J. S. (2004). Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics (1st ed.): Public Affairs.

Nye, J. S. (2014). What China and Russia Don’t Get About Soft Power? Retrieved from http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/04/29/

Polegkyi O. (2011). Changes in Russian Foreign Policy Discourse and Concept of «Russian World» // PECOB’s Papers Series. № 16.

Putin, V. (2005). Annual Address to the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation.

Kremlin: Presidential Speeches. Retrieved from

http://archive.kremlin.ru/eng/speeches/2005/04/25/2031_type70029type82912_87086.sht ml

Rasmussen, S. (2009). Discourse Analysis of EU Public Diplomacy Messages and Practices.

Discussion papers in Diplomacy, Netherlands Institute of International Relations

‘Clingendael’.

Rogozin, D. (2010). Russia Challenged by 'Public Diplomacy' of the West. International Affairs, 5, pp.84-90.

Rossotrudnichestvo. (2010). Rossotrudnichestvo v Mire: O deyatelnosti Rossotrudnichestva v ramkakh programm sodeistviya mezhdunarodnomu razvitiyu [ Rossotrudnichestvo in the world: The work of Rossotrudnichestvo in terms of international development]. Department of Information, Moscow: Rossotrudnichestvo.

Rukavishnikov, V. O. (2004). Otnoshenie Amerikantsev k Sovremennoi Rossii. [ The Americans’ attitude to modern Russia]. Sotsiologicheskie Issledovaniya. Retrieved from http://www.ecsocman.edu.ru/socis/msg/16590288.html

Russia Beyond the Headlines. (2017). Russia wants Donbass to remain part of Ukraine – Lavrov, 15 December. Retrieved from

http://rbth.com/news/2014/12/15/russia_wants_donbass_to_remain_part_of_ukraine_lavro v_42265.html, accessed 17 January 2018.

Seib, P. (2009). Towards A New Public Diplomacy: Re-directing U.S. Foreign Policy. New York: Palgrave-MacMillan.

Seib, P. (2012). Real-Time Diplomacy: Politics and Power in the Social Media Era. New York:

Palgrave-MacMillan.

Shershnev I.L. (2011). Obshestvennaya diplomatiya: strategicheskiy resurs geopolitiki Rossii [ Public diplomacy: strategic resource of Russian geopolitics]. Retrieved from

http://mir-politika.ru/148-obschestvennaya-diplomatiya-strategicheskiy-resurs-geopolitiki-rossii.html

Simons, G. (2014). Taking the new public diplomacy online. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 22, pp.1-14.

Simons, G. (2017). Attempting to rebrand the branded: Russia’s international image in the 21st century. Russian Journal of Communication 4(Nos. 3/4), pp.322–350.

Tsvetkova, N.A. (2011). Programmy Web 2.0 v publichnoy diplomatii SShA [Web 2.0.

Programs in the US Public Diplomacy]. SShA i Kanada: ekonomika, politika, kultura, 3, pp.109-122.

Tsygankov, A. P. (2009). Russophobia. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

Tsygankov, A. P. (2010). Russia's Foreign Policy: Change and Continuity in National Identity (2 ed.): Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

Twittercounter. Twitter Top 100 Most Followers. Retrieved from https://twittercounter.com/pages/100

Wolf, Ch. Jr., Rosen, B. (2013). Public Diplomacy: How to Think about and Improve It RAND corporation, Retrieved from

http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/occasional_papers/2004/RAND_OP134.pdf Xin Zhonga, Jiayi Lua. (2013). Public diplomacy meets social media: A study of the U.S.

Embassy's blogs and micro-blogs. Public Relations Review, 39(5), pp.542–548.