Search

This article explores how strategic communication, public diplomacy, international governmental broadcasting, and social media networking can be brought together in a system of strategic influence and global engagement. The analysis offers a contrasting approach to various views of public diplomacy or strategic communication which privilege one form of governmental influence over others and treat partial aspects of national persuasion as complete pictures of government communication aimed at foreign audiences. Because so much of public diplomacy literature today emphasizes social media, it is necessary to determine how specific tools of influence such as international broadcasting, can be used in ways that fit new thinking in public diplomacy as well as continuously emerging new media ecologies. (author's abstract)

The communication revolution has shifted the paradigm of diplomacy by emphasizing the role of public diplomacy, at the same time complicating the environment within which state-managed public diplomacy is conducted. The rise of regional media has provided weaker states with opportunities to challenge the monopoly of information on the part of the more powerful states. Al-Hurra, the American sponsored channel to the Arab World, stands as evidence of the challenges facing US policies in this part of the world because of the influential role of regional media. It was particularly Al-Jazeera that transformed the media sphere in the Arab World as well as globally in what became known as “Al-Jazeera effect”. The paper argues that identity presentation plays a major role in determining performance of the public diplomacy of the media.

Dramatic symmetries in strategies and techniques of persuasion create challenges to the functioning of established actors in the global media ecology, including international broadcasters. This essay articulates an adaptation of the concept of asymmetric warfare to the field of propaganda, persuasion and recruitment. It examines the particular challenge of certain asymmetric entrants, including ISIS and categorizes how the more traditional entities and government institutions react to these new entrants in markets for loyalties. (author's abstract)

Advocates of elicitive conflict transformation (ECT) maintain that the parties to a conflict are the most important resource in efforts to render that conflict less violent. According to them, the transformation of the conflict is immanent to the conflict itself. The claim of ECT theorists is that classical conflict resolution has mostly aimed at overcoming a conflict by means of neutral mediation, while conflict transformation is not primarily concerned with terminating a conflict and considers the conflict worker as part of the conflict system. Although ECT is a communication-based model of conflict management and relies on human media, its media-theoretical aspects are not made explicit, raising the question of what role technological media play in the communicative processes that make up ECT techniques. Through an examination of the claimed differences between conflict resolution and conflict transformation, and focusing on the common roots of new media and the elicitive model in systems and cybernetic theory, this paper asks whether any peacebuilding potential of new media could be found in a specific anti-propagandistic quality of distributed technological media. It concludes by looking at any such potential in social media. (author's abstract)