New Public Diplomacy, Social Media and Non-State Actors

Yıl 2022, Sayı: 72, 92 - 108, 22.04.2022

Elif Karahan Toker , Cengiz Çağla

https://doi.org/10.51290/dpusbe.1023068

Öz

Some of the discussions in political science and international relations have clustered around the impact of individuals and non-state actors, especially on how and how much they affect public diplomacy. As a result of the great and rapid change in information and communication technologies, and the growing importance of civil society, new public diplomacy has started to include non-state actors. Yet, the differences and disagreements among perspectives in public diplomacy, blurs the place of non-state actors in public diplomacy. This study, drawing attention to this ambiguity in the literature, examines the role of non-state actors, especially individuals, in the new public diplomacy with the use of social media. In this context, literature review and qualitative research method were applied. In the first part of the article, the change and transformation in the new understanding of public diplomacy and especially the effect of social media are emphasized. In the second part; attention has been drawn to the existence of non-state actors in the new public diplomacy and the importance of their changing and increasing roles over time. In conclusion, the study claims that if different perspectives are combined in a common view, the new public diplomacy will become both more understandable and more accurate, otherwise – if the uncertainty surrounding the place of non-state actors in public diplomacy continues- “the rise of a new academic field” will not be possible.

Anahtar Kelimeler

New Public Diplomacy, Non-State Actors, Social Media, Citizen (public) Diplomat

Yeni Kamu Diplomasisi, Sosyal Medya ve Devlet Dışı Aktörler

Öz

Siyaset bilimi ve uluslararası ilişkiler alanındaki tartışmaların bir bölümü, bireylerin ve devlet dışı aktörlerin, kamu diplomasisini hangi yollarla ve ne kadar etkilediği noktasında yoğunlaşmaktadır. Bilgi ve iletişim teknolojilerinde yaşanan büyük ve hızlı değişim ve sivil toplumun rolünün giderek artması sonucu, yeni kamu diplomasisi, devlet dışı aktörleri daha fazla içerir hale gelmiştir. Bununla birlikte, kamu diplomasisi alanındaki perspektifler arasındaki farklılıklar nedeniyle, devlet dışı aktörlerin alandaki yerlerinin tam olarak tanımlanması mümkün olamamıştır. Bu çalışma, literatürde söz konusu olan bu belirsizliğe dikkat çekerek, sosyal medyanın kullanımıyla yeni kamu diplomasisinde devlet dışı aktörlerin, özellikle bireylerin aktör rolü üstlenmelerini incelemektedir. Bu çerçevede literatür taraması ve nitel araştırma yöntemi uygulanmıştır. Makalenin ilk bölümünde yeni kamu diplomasisi anlayışında yaşanan değişim ve dönüşüm ile özellikle sosyal medyanın etkisi üzerinde durulmuştur. İkinci bölümde ise; yeni kamu diplomasisinde devlet dışı aktörlerin varlığı, zaman içerisinde değişen ve artan rollerinin önemine dikkat çekilmiştir. Sonuç olarak çalışma, farklı perspektiflerin ortak bir görüşte birleştirilmesi halinde, yeni kamu diplomasisinin hem daha anlaşılır hem de daha doğru işler duruma geleceğini, aksi takdirde -devlet dışı aktörlerin kamu diplomasisi içerisindeki konumu hususundaki belirsizliğin sürmesi durumunda- “yeni bir akademik alanın doğuşunun” mümkün olamayacağını iddia etmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Yeni Kamu Diplomasisi, Devlet Dışı Aktörler, Sosyal Medya, Vatandaş Diplomat

Kaynakça

• Adesina, O. S: (2017). Foreign policy in an era of digital diplomacy. Cogent Social Sciences, 3(1), 1297175.
• Alterman, J. B. (2011). The revolution will not be tweeted. Washington Quarterly, 34 (4), 103-116.
• Ayhan, J. K. (2019). The boundaries of public diplomacy and nonstate actors: a taxonomy of perspectives. International Studies Perspectives, 20(1), 63–83.
• Batora, J. (2005, Şubat). Multi-stakeholder public diplomacy of small and medium-sized states: Norway and Canada compared. The International Conference on Multi-stakeholder Diplomacy sempozyumunda sunulan bildiri. Mediterranean Diplomatic Academy, Malta, 11-13.
• Brown, R. (2013). The politics of relational public diplomacy. R.S. Zaharna, A. Arsenault ve Fisher A. (Ed). Relational, Networked and Collaborative Approaches to Public Diplomacy: The Connective Mindshift içinde (ss. 44-55). New York: Routledge.
• Castells, M. (2008). The new public sphere: Global civil society, communication networks and global gowernance. The Annals of the American Academy of Political, 616(1), 78-93.
• Cull, N. J. (2008). Public diplomacy: Taxonomies and histories. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 616(1), 31–54.
• Cull, N. J. (2019). Public diplomacy: Foundatins for global engagement in the digital era. New York, NY.
• Etling, B., Kelly, J., Faris, R.ve Palfrey, J. (2014). Maping the arabic blogosphere. L. Hudson, A. Iskandar ve M. Kirk (Ed.). Media Evoulution on the eve of the Arab Spring içinde (ss. 49-74). Georgetown University: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Fitzpatrick, K. (2012). Defining strategic publics in a networked world: Public diplomacy's challenge at home and abroad. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 7 (4), 421-440.
• Gilboa, E. (2002). Real-Time diplomacy: Myth and reality. Evan H. Potter (Ed). içinde Cyber-diplomacy: Managing foreign policy in the twenty-first century içinde (ss. 83-109). Montreal: McGill-Queen University Press.
• Gilboa, E. (2008). Searching for a theory of public diplomacy. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 616(1), 55-77.
• Gregory, B. (2008). Public diplomacy and governance: Challanges for scholars and practitioners. A. F: Coope, B. Hocking ve W. Maley (Ed.). Global Governance and Diplomacy: Worlds Apart? içinde (ss. 241-256). Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Gregory, B. (2011). American public diplomacy: Enduring characteristics, exlusive transformation. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 6(3–4), 351-372.
• Gullion, E. (2020). Edward R. Murrow Center of Public Diplomacy: Definitions of Public Diplomacy. Erişim adresi: http://fletcher.tufts.edu/Murrow/Diplomacy/%20Definitions
• Handelman, S. ve Chowdhury, J. (2017). The limits of political-elit diplomacy: Leaders, people and social conflicts. Israel Affairs, 23(3), 468-495.
• Hayden, C. (2012). The rhetoric of soft power: Public diplomacy in global contexts. Lexington Books.
• Hermida, A. (2017). Herkese söyle: Sosyal medyada neden paylaşımda bulunuruz. (A. Sabancı, Çev ). Kafka Epsilon Yayınevi.
• Hocking, B. ve Donna, L. (2011). Diplomacy. D. Berg-Schlosser, B. Badie ve L. Marlino (Ed.). International Encyclopedia of Political Science içinde (ss. 659-669). Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications.
• Hocking, B., Melissen J., Riordan S. ve Sharp, P. (2012). Futures for Diplomacy: Integrative Diplomacy in the 21st Century. The Hague: Netherlands Institute of International Relations Clingendael.
• Iriye, A. (2002). Global community: The Role of international organizations in the making of the contemporary world. Los Angeles, CA University of Colifornia.
• Kassim, S. (2012). Twitter revolution: How the Arab spring was helped by social media. Erişim adresi: http://www.policymic.com/articles/10642/twitter-revolution-how-the-arab-spring-washelped-bysocial-media
• Keduri, Y. ve Segal, A. (2018). The impact of facebook communities on international conflict resolution. Rising Powers Quarterly, 3(3), 197-215.
• Kelly, J. (2010). The new diplomacy: Evolution of a revolution. Diplomacy and Statecraft 21 (2), 286-305.
• Kelly, J. (2014). Agency change: Diplomatic action beyond the state. Rowman ve Littlefield.
• La Porte, T. (2012). The impact of 'Intermestic' non-state sctors on the conceptual framework of public diplomacy. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 7 (4), 441-458.
• Lee, G. (2010). The clash of soft powers between China and Japan: Synergy and dilemmas at the six-party talks. Asian Perspective, 34 (2), 113-139.
• Malone, G. (1988). Political advocacy and cultural communications: Organising the nation’s public diplomacy. Lanheim, University of America.
• Manheim, J. B. (1994). Strategic public diplomacy and American foreign policy: The evolution of influence. New York, NY: Oxford University.
• Manor, I. (2016). Are we there yet: Have MFAs realized the potential of digital diplomacy?. Brill Research Perspectives in Diplomacy and Foreign Policy, 1(2), 1-110.
• Manor, I. (2019). The digitalization of public diplomacy. New York: Springer International Publishing.
• McConnell, F., Moreau, T. ve Dittmer J. (2012). Mimicking state diplomacy: The legitimizing strategies of unofficial diplomacies. Geoforum, 43, 804-814.
• Melissen, J. (2005a). The new public diplomacy: Between theory and practice. J. Melissen (Ed.), The New Public Diplomacy Soft Power in International Relations içinde (ss. 3-27). Palgrave Macmillan.
• Melissen, J. (2005b). The new public diplomacy: Soft power in international relations. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Neumann, B. I. (2013). Diplomatic sites:A critical enquiry. New York, NY: Oxford University Press
• Nye, J. S. (2004). Soft power: The means to success in world politics. New York: Public Affairs.
• Nye, J. S. (2008). Powers to lead. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Nye, J. S. (2021). Soft power: The evolution of a concept. Journal of Political Power, 1-13.
• Pamment, J. (2013). New public diplomacy in the 21st century: A comparative study of policy and practice. Abingdon: Routledge.
• Qin, Y. (2016). A relational theory of world politics. International Studies Review, 18(1), 33-47.
• Radsch, C. (2014). From brotherhood to blogosphere: Dynamics of cyberactivism and identity in the Egyptian Ikhwan. L. Hudson, A. Iskandar ve M. Kirk (Ed.). Media Evoulution on the Eve of the Arab Spring içinde (ss. 75-102). Georgetown University: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Roberts, W. R. (2007). What is public diplomacy? Past practices, present conduct, possible future. Mediterranean Quarterly, 18(4), 36–52.
• Ronfeldt, D. ve Arquilla J. (2007). The promise of noöpolitik. First Monday, 12(8). http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue12_8/ronfeldt/index.html.
• Seib, P. (2008). The Al Jazeera effect: How the new global media are reshaping world politics. Potomac Books, Inc..
• Seib, P. (2012). Real-Time diplomacy: Politics and media in the social media era. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Sending, O. J. ve Neumann I. B. (2006). Governance to governmentality: Analyzing NGOs, 31 States, and Power. International Studies Quarterly, 50 (3), 651-672.
• Sevin, E. (2015). Pathways of connection: An analytical approch to the impacts of public diplomacy. Public Relations Review, (41), 562-568.
• Sevin, E. (2017). Public diplomacy and the implementations of foreign policy in the US, Sweden and Turkey. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Sevin, E., Metzgar, E., ve Hayden, C. (2019). The scholarship of public diplomacy: Analysis of a growing field. International Journal of Communication, 13, 4814–4837.
• Sharp, P. (2005). Revolutionary States, Outlaw Regimes and the Techniques of Public Diplomacy. J. Melissen (Ed.). The New Public Diplomacy: Soft Power in International Relations içinde (ss. 106-123). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Snow, N. (2009). Rethinking Public Diplomacy. N. Snow ve P. Taylor (Ed.). Routledge Handbook of Public Diplomacy içinde (ss. 3–11). New York, NY: Routledge.
• Spry, D. (2018). Facebook diplomacy: Adata-driven, user-focused approach to facebook use by diplomatic missions. Media International Australia.,168(1), 62-80.
• Szondi, G. (2009). Central and Eastern European public diplomacy: A transitional perspective on national reputation management. N. Snow ve P. M. Taylor (Ed.). Routledge Handbook of Public Diplomacy içinde (ss. 292-313). New York: Routledge.
• Szostek, J.(2020). What happens to public diplomacy during information war? Critical reflections on the conceptual framing of international communication, International Journal of Communication, 14 (2020), 2728–2748.
• Tuch, N. (1990). Communicating with the world: U.S. Public Diplomacy Overseas. New York: St. Martin's Press.
• Weiss, T. G. (2000). Governance, good governance and global governance: Conceptual and actual challenges. Third World Quarterly, 21(5), 795-814.
• Wendt, A. (1999). Social theory of international politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Westcott, N. (2008). Digital diplomacy: The impact of the internet on international relations, Oxford Internet Institute, Research Report 16.
• Wiseman, G. (Ed), (2015). Isolate or engage:adversarial states, US foreign policy, and public diplomac. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
• Youmans, W. L. (2014), Al jazeera english’s networked journalism during the 2011 Egyptian uprising. S. Bebawi ve D. Bossio (Ed.) Social Media and the Politics of Reportage the Arab Spring içinde (ss. 56-78). London: Palgrave MacMillan.
• Zaharna, R. S. (2009). Mapping out a spectrum of public diplomacy initiatives: information and relational communication frameworks. N. Snow ve P. Taylor (Ed.). Routledge Handbook of Public Diplomacy içinde (ss. 86–100). New York, NY: Routledge.
• Zaharna, R. S. (2010). Battles to bridges: U.S. strategic communication and public diplomacy after 9/11. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Zaharna, R. S. (2016a). Beyond the individualism–collectivism divide to relationalism: explicating cultural assumptions in the concept of “Relationships”, Communication Theory, 26( 2), 190-211.
• Zaharna, R. S. (2019). Culture, cultural diversity and humanity-centred diplomacies, The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 14 (1-2), 117-133.