Kamu Diplomasisinde Ağ Yaklaşımı: Kitle Toplumu Pratikleri Bağlamında Eleştirel Bir Yaklaşım

Year 2022, , 729 - 746, 22.07.2022

Abdulsamet Günek

https://doi.org/10.17680/erciyesiletisim.1131930

Abstract

Kitle toplumu kavramı genel olarak bireyin toplum içindeki yitimine bir vurgudur. Gustave Le Bon’un olumsuz yaklaşımı kitle toplumunu sürü psikolojisi ile hareket eden, güdülenmiş topluluklar olarak tanımlamaktadır. Günümüzde ise bireyin çeşitli açılardan evirilerek, aydınlanma ve demokrasiyle birlikte sorgulamayan ve düşünmeyen kitle insanından, eleştiren ve karşı çıkan bireye evirildiği varsayılmaktadır. Jan Van Dijk ve Manuel Castells’e göre; teknoloji ve küreselleşme ile birlikte üretim ve iletişim biçimi organize ve karmaşık bir ağ biçimine bürünmüştür. Ağ toplumu yaklaşımının kamu diplomasi faaliyetlerine uyarlanmış hali olan kamu diplomasisinde ağ yaklaşımı (Metzl, 2001; Hocking, 2005; Zaharna R. , 2007; 2010) etkili bir kamu diplomasi yaklaşımı olarak ön plana çıkmaktadır. Gönüllük, sinerji, tamık aidiyeti, esneklik ve yatay katılım temeline dayanan bu yaklaşım mesaj üretimini ve mesajın sistem içinde sürekli dolaşımını esas almaktadır.
Bu çalışmada kamu diplomasisi faaliyetlerinde ağ yaklaşımı eleştirel bir bağlamda ele alınarak, ağ yaklaşımının temel esasları olan ‘gönüllük’, ‘sinerji’, ‘takım aidiyeti’, ‘esneklik’ ve ‘yatay katılım’ gibi kavramlar kitle toplumu yaklaşımının temelleri üzerinden karşılaştırılmalı olarak eleştirel bir analize tabi tutulmaktadır. Araştırmada ağ temelli kamu diplomasinin öncülleri kabul edilen (Metzl, 2001; Hocking, 2005; Zaharna R. , 2007; 2010)çalışmaları temel alınmıştır.

Keywords

Ağ yaklaşımı, kamu diplomasisi, kitle toplumu, sinerji, grup aidiyeti.

Network Approach in Public Diplomacy: A Critical Analysis in the Context of Mass Society Practices

Abstract

The concept of mass society is generally considered as an emphasis on the loss of the individual in society. Gustave Le Bon defines mass society as mindless, motivated masses. Today, it is assumed that the individual in the society can think independently, be rational and question. The network society approach is based on the idea of an independent and organized individual. According to Jan Van Dijk and Manuel Castells, with the help of technology and globalization, the way of production and communication has taken the form of a more organized and complex network. The network approach in public diplomacy (Metzl, 2001; Hocking, 2005; Zaharna R. , 2007; 2010) is accepted as an effective approach of public diplomacy. The approach, which is planned around volunteerism, synergy and team belonging, is based on the production of messages and the continuous circulation of the message within the system. In this study, the activities regarding the network society approach in public diplomacy is discussed through a critical perspective. The concepts of 'volunteering', 'synergy', 'team belonging', ‘flexibility` and ‘horizontal participation’, which constitute the basic principles of the network approach, were analyzed on the basis of the mass society approach. Purpose of the study: To critically consider the network-based public diplomacy approach and to analyze the concept of network society according to the principles of the mass society approach.

Keywords

Network approach, public diplomacy, mass society, synergy, group belonging

References

• (tarih yok) .
• Jia , R., & Li, W. (2020). Public diplomacy networks: China’s public diplomacy communication practices in twitter during Two Sessions. Public Relations Review, 1(46).
• Adorno, T. W. (2007). Kültür Endüstrisi Kültür Yönetimi. İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları.
• Bon, G. L. (2001). The Crowd: A Study of the Populer Mind. Botoche Books, Ticher.
• Castells, M. (2013). İsyan ve Umut Ağları: İnternet Çağında Toplumsal Hareketler. (E. Kılıç, Trans.) İstanbul: Koç Üniversitesi Yayınları.
• Dijk, V. (2018). Ağ Toplumu. (Ö. Sakin, Trans.) İstanbul: Kafka Kitap.
• Fisher, A. (2013). A Network Perspective on Public Diplomacy in Europe: EUNIC. J. Melissen içinde, European Public Diplomacy: Palgrave Macmillan Series in Global Public Diplomacy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Fisher, A. (2013). Collaborative Public Diplomacy: How Transnational Networks. New york: PALGRAVE MACMILLAN.
• Flew, T., & Hartig, F. (2014). Confucius Institutes and the Network Communication Approach to Public Diplomacy. The IAFOR Journal of Asian Studies, 1(1).
• Frued, S. (2019). Kitle Psikolojisi. (K. Şipal, Trans.) İzmir: Cem Yayınları.
• Gasset, O. J. (1957). The Revolt of The Masses . (N. G. Işık, Trans.) New York : W.W. Norton Company INC.
• Granovverter, M. (1973). The Strenght of Weak Ties. American Journal of Sociology(78), 1360-1380.
• Günek, A. (2017). Türk Kamu Diplomasisinin Stratejik İletişim Bağlamında Yapılandırılması Bir Model Önerisi. Atatürk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü.
• Günek, A. (2021). Ethical and Impact Issue in Machine-Centered Public Diplomacy. TRT Akademi, 6(13), 768-787.
• Günek, A. (2021). Makine Merkezli Kamu Diplomasisinde Etik ve Etki Sorunsalı. TRT AKADEMİ, 6(13), 768-787.
• Held, D., & McGrew , A. (2008). Küresel Dönüşümler Büyük Küreselleşme Tartışması. In D. Held, & A. McGrew, Küresel Dönüşümler (pp. 7-71). Ankara: Phonix Yayınevi.
• Hill, R. A., & Dunbar, M. (2005). Social Network Size in Humans. Human Nature, 1(14), 53-72.
• Hocking, B. (2005). Reconfiguring Public Diplomacy: From Competition To Collabration. 4 15, 2022 tarihinde clingendael.org. . adresinden alındı
• Horkheimer, M., & Adorno, T. W. (2002). Dialectic of Enlightenment. (E. Jephcott, Trans.) Standford California: Standford University Press.
• Huang, Z. A., & Wang, R. (2019). Building a Network to “Tell China Stories Well”: Chinese Diplomatic Communication Strategies on Twitter. International Journal of Communication, University of Southern California, Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism , 2984 - 3007.
• Ilan Manor. (2018). Using the Logic of Networks in Public Diplomacy. (U. C. Diplomacy, Ed.) Retrieved 4 10, 2022, from https://uscpublicdiplomacy.org/blog/using-logic-networks-public-diplomacy
• Metzl, J. f. (2001). Network Diplomacy. Georgetown Journal of International Affairs, 1(2), 77-87.
• Morozov, V., & Shebalina, E. (2020). Network Diplomacy: Theory. SSRN. Retrieved 4 5, 2022, from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3516590
• Ociepka, B., & Arendarska, J. (2021). Cultural Diplomacy as a Network and Networking in International Relations: The Case of Cultural Diplomacy in Russia. SAGE Open, 1-12.
• Özmen, A. F. (2015). Gustave Le Bon ve Sigmund Frued'ün Işığında Kitle Psikolojisi ve Gezi Hareketi'nin Psikolojisi. Alternatif Politika, 1(7), 182-205.
• Park , J. S., & Lim, Y. S. (2014). Information networks and social media use in public diplomacy: a comparative analysis of South Korea and Japan, Asian Journal of Communication. 24(1), 79-98.
• Sarvestani, S. F., Ameli, S. R., & Izadi, F. (2019). Israeli public diplomacy toward the United States: a network and narrative approach. Asian Journal of Communication,, 29(2), 181-200.
• Sejung, P., Dahoon , C., & Park, H. W. (2019). Analytical framework for evaluating digital diplomacy using network analysis and topic modeling: Comparing South Korea and Japan. Faculty Bibliography.
• Shi, L. (2015). Analysis of the Network Communication Approach to Public Diplomacy: Case Study of the Confucius Institute at Carleton University . tial Fulfilment of Requirements, For the Degree Master of Arts Department of Communacation.
• Tesnkov, A. N. (2019). Psychology of Masses In Sigmund Frued's Interpretation. International e-Conference on Studies in Humanities and Social Sciences, (pp. 237-278). Serbia- Belgrade.
• Weidong, J. R. (2020). Public diplomacy networks: China’s public diplomacy communication practices in twitter during Two Sessions. Public Relations Review, 1(46).
• Zaharna, R. (2005). The Network Paradigm of Strategic Public Diplomacy. (F. F. In, Ed.) Retrieved 2 3, 2022, from https://universityofleeds.github.io/philtaylorpapers/pmt/exhibits/2272/v10n01pubdip.pdf
• Zaharna, R. (2007). The Soft Power Differential: Network Communication and Mass Communication In Public Diplomacy. The Huge Journal of Public Diplomacy, 2(3), 213-228.
• Zaharna, R. (2010). Battles to Bridges: U.S. Strategic Communication and Public After 9/11. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Zaharna, R. (2014). China’s Confucius Institutes: Understanding the Relational Structure & Relational Dynamics of Network Collaboration. In J. Wang, Confucius Institutes and the Globalization of China’s Soft Power. (pp. 9-31). Los Angeles: Figueroa Press.