Trend Analysis of Strategic Communication from The Perspective of Nation Branding: The Journal of Communication and Diplomacy Case

Year 2024, , 49 - 64, 23.12.2024

Atalay Bahar , Ebru Caymaz

https://doi.org/10.54722/iletisimvediplomasi.1545399

Abstract

Strategic communication encompasses planned, long-term, and goal-oriented communication strategies used to influence and direct public opinion in a country’s domestic and foreign policies and has gained great significance over time. In this regard, the establishment of the Presidency of the Republic of Türkiye Directorate of Communications (the Directorate of Communications in short) in 2018 to empower the Türkiye brand stands out as one of the most concrete steps in the institutionalization process of strategic communication. The Journal of Communication and Diplomacy, published by the Directorate of Communications, is important in that it serves as a platform that guides scientific research on strategic communication policies. This study aims to reveal the strategic communication perspective prioritized by the Directorate of Communications by examining the 12 issues of the Journal of Communication and Diplomacy published between 2013 and 2024 using the trend analysis method. In this study, in addition to the content, the most and least mentioned strategic communication subjects were determined; the most frequently mentioned subjects were "local election", "social media", and "new media", and the least mentioned topics were "political advertising", “post-truth”, and “digital diplomacy”. While the journal's frequent coverage of important issues of strategic communication such as disinformation and social media reflects its sensitivity to current issues and its effort to raise awareness on these issues, it has been concluded that there is a need for more comprehensive interdisciplinary studies on matters that are covered relatively less frequently, especially science diplomacy, perception management, and post-truth.

Keywords

strategic communication, trend analysis, new media, nation branding, Türkiye brand

Ülke Markalama Perspektifinden Stratejik İletişime Yönelik Bir Trend Analizi: İletişim ve Diplomasi Dergisi Örneği

Abstract

Stratejik iletişim, bir ülkenin iç ve dış politikasını, kamuoyunu etkilemek ve yönlendirmek amacıyla kullanılan planlı, uzun vadeli ve hedefe yönelik iletişim stratejilerini kapsayan ve son yıllarda büyük önem kazanan bir kavramdır. Bu minvalde, Türkiye markasını güçlendirmek amacıyla 2018 yılında Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Cumhurbaşkanlığı İletişim Başkanlığı’nın (kısaca İletişim Başkanlığı) kurulması, stratejik iletişimin kurumsallaşma sürecinde atılan en önemli adımlardan biri olarak öne çıkmaktadır. İletişim Başkanlığı tarafından yayımlanan İletişim ve Diplomasi Dergisi ise stratejik iletişim politikalarına ilişkin bilimsel araştırmalara yön veren bir platform işlevi görmesi bakımından önemlidir. Bu çalışmanın amacı; 2013 ve 2024 yılları arasında İletişim ve Diplomasi Dergisi’nin yayımlanan 12 sayısını trend analizi yöntemiyle inceleyerek İletişim Başkanlığı tarafından öncelik verilen stratejik iletişim perspektifini ortaya koymaktır. Dergide yer verilen içerik odakları ile en sık ve en az değinilen stratejik iletişim konularının da belirlendiği bu çalışmada en sık değinilen konu başlıklarının “yerel seçim”, “sosyal medya” ve “yeni medya” olduğu, en az değinilen konu başlıklarının ise “siyasal reklam”, “hakikat sonrası” ve “dijital diplomasi” olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Derginin dezenformasyon ve sosyal medya gibi stratejik iletişimin önemli konularını sıklıkla işlemesi, güncel konulara duyarlılığını ve bu konulardaki farkındalığı artırma çabasını yansıtırken, nispeten daha az sıklıklarda işlenen bilhassa bilim diplomasisi, algı yönetimi ve hakikat sonrası konularına yönelik daha kapsamlı disiplinlerarası çalışmalara ihtiyaç olduğu sonucuna ulaşılmıştır.

Keywords

stratejik iletişim, trend analizi, ülke markalama, yeni medya, Türkiye markası

References

• Anholt, S. (2011). Beyond the nation brand: The role of image and identity in international relations. Journal of Public Diplomacy, 2(1), 6-12.
• Aronczyk, M. (2013). Branding the nation: The global business of National Identity. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Baden, C., & Meyer, O. C. (2018). Dissecting media roles in conflict. In R. Frohlich (Ed.), Media in War and War Conflict: A Transactionist Process Model of Conflict News Production, Dissemination and Influence. New York: Routledge.
• Bean, H. (2017). Strategic communication and U.S. national security affairs: Critical-cultural and rhetorical perspectives. In Anthony Dudo and LeeAnn Kahlor (Ed.), Strategic Communication: New Agendas in Communication. New York: Routledge.
• Benkler, Y. (2006). The wealth of networks: How social production transforms markets and freedom. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.
• Bennett, W. L. & Segerberg, A. (2012). The logic of connective action: digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5), 739-768.
• Bjola, C. & Holmes, M. (2015). Digital diplomacy: Theory and practice. London: Routledge.
• Castells, M. (2013). Communication power. London: Oxford University Press.
• Castello, E., & Mihelj, S. (2018). Selling and consuming the nation: Understanding consumer nationalism. Journal of Consumer Culture, 18(4), 558–576.
• Chatfield, C. (2004). The analysis of time series: An introduction. New York: CRC Press. Christensen, L. T., & Christensen, C. M. (2018). Strategic communication: An introduction. London: Sage Publications.
• Coombs, W. T. (2014). Ongoing crisis communication: Planning, managing, and responding. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
• Cornelissen, J. P. (2020). Corporate communication: A guide to theory and practice. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
• Cornish, P., Lindley-French, J. & Yorke, C. (2011). Strategic communications and national strategy. London: Chatham House.
• Cumhurbaşkanlığı İletişim Başkanlığı. (2024). Resmî web sitesi. Retrieved from https://www.iletisim.gov.tr/turkce Erişim T. 14 Ağustos 2024.
• Fan, Y. (2010). Branding the nation: Towards a better understanding. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 6(2), 97-108.
• Grunig, J. E. (1992). Excellence in public relations and communication management. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Gregory, A. (2008). Competencies of senior communication practitioners in the UK: an initial study. Public Relations Review, 34(3), 215-223.
• Hallahan, K., Holtzhausen, D., van Ruler, B., Vercic, D. & Sriramesh, K. (2007). Defining strategic communication. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 1(1), 3-35.
• İletişim ve Diplomasi Dergisi. (2024). Arşivler ve yayımlanan sayılar. Retrieved from https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/iletisimvediplomasi Erişim T. 14 Ağustos 2024.
• Jenkins, H. (2006). Convergence culture: Where old and new media collide. New York: NYU Press.
• Johnson, L. K. (2015). Intelligence and national security: The secret world of spies. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Kaneva, N. (2011). Nation branding: Toward an agenda of critical research. International Journal of Communication, 5, 117-141.
• Kotler, P. & Gertner, D. (2002). Country as brand, product, and beyond: A place marketing and brand management perspective. Journal of Brand Management, 9(4), 249-261.
• Manheim, J. B. (2011). Strategy in information and influence campaigns: How policy advocates, social movements, insurgent groups, corporations, governments and others get what they want. New York: Routledge.
• Mihelj, S. (2011). Media nations: Communicating belonging and exclusion in the modern world. Basingtoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Nye, J. S. (2008). Public diplomacy and soft power. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 616(1), 94-109.
• Paul, C. (2011). Strategic communication: Origins, concepts, and current debates. Santa Barbara: Praeger.
• Pamment, J. (2013). Articulating influence: Toward a research agenda for interpreting the evaluation of soft power, public diplomacy and nation brands. Public Relations Review, 40 (1), 50-59.
• Pamment, J. (2015). Media influence, ontological transformation, and social change: Conceptual overlaps between development communication and public diplomacy. Communication Theory, 25 (2), 188-207.
• Rasmussen, R. K. & Merkelsen, H. (2012). The new PR of states: How nation branding practices affect the security function of public diplomacy. Public Relations Review, 38 (5), 810-818.
• Ruffini, P. B. (2017). Science and diplomacy: A new dimension of international relations. Paris: Springer.
• Ruler, B. (2020). An underrated pillar on which strategic communication rests. In Future Directions of Strategic Communication. London: Routledge.
• Seeger, M. W., Sellnow, T. L. & Ulmer, R. R. (2003). Communication and organizational crisis. Westport: Bloomsbury Academic.
• Shirky, C. (2008). Here comes everybody: The power of organizing without organizations. London: Penguin Books.
• Szondi, G. (2008). Public diplomacy and nation branding: Conceptual similarities and differences. The Hague: Netherlands.
• Toth, E. L. (2007). The future of excellence in public relations and communication management: Challenges for the next generation. New York: Routledge.
• Volcic, Z. & Andrejevic, M. (2011). Nation branding in the era of commercial nationalism. International Journal of Communication,5, 598-618.
• Werder, K. P., Nothhaft, H., Vercic, D., & Zerfass, A. (2020). Strategic communication as an emerging interdisciplinary paradigm. In Werder, K. P., Nothhaft, H., Vercic, D., & Zerfass, A. (Ed.), Future Directions of Strategic Communication. London: Routledge.
• Wilcox, D. L. & Cameron, G. T. (2012). Public relations: Strategies and tactics. London: Pearson.