CELEBRITY SOCIAL MEDIA ACCOUNTS AS PUBLIC DIPLOMACY TOOLS

Öz

The evolution of traditional diplomacy carried out during the formal visits or summits of permanent representative agencies or high level protocols in a relatively closed, neatly planned, and procedural environments to a more open, flexible, and accessible way of a public diplomacy, which is based on  mutual communication, interaction, and creation of a common value would not have been possible without the transformation of communication technologies. Digital media, especially, has not only enabled the online representation of official actors but offered every citizen and non-state actors the opportunity to interact. Similarly, Turkish TV celebrities, the faces of the global phenomenon which became an example of cultural diplomacy by itself,  have also had the chance to be in touch with their global fans. This paper aims to understand whether their social media accounts have the potential to function as a tool of Turkish digital diplomacy. To do this, the Instagram account of the famous actress, Beren Saat, has been analysed. The content analysis depicts that celebrity social media accounts have the characteristic of a global public sphere in a micro level and they have the potential to contribute to digital diplomacy and they can be used as a strategic communication channel. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

• digital diplomacy,public diplomacy,social media,turkish soap operas,strategic communication,public sphere,global celebrity

CELEBRITY SOCIAL MEDIA ACCOUNTS AS PUBLIC DIPLOMACY TOOLS

Öz

Bir ülkeden diğerine resmi ziyaretler, yerleşik temsilcilikler ya da üst düzey devlet görevlilerinin görüşmeleri gibi daha kapalı, önceden çizilmiş üslupların ve iletişim yollarının titizlikle takip edildiği geleneksel diplomasinin karşılıklı iletişime, etkileşime ve ortak değer üretimine dayalı daha açık, esnek ve ulaşılabilir kamu diplomasisine evriminde, kitle iletişim teknolojilerinin rolü kaçınılmazdır. Özellikle dijital medya, diplomasinin sadece resmi aktörlerinin çevrimiçi temsilini ve daha kolay temasını mümkün kılmakla kalmamış, aynı zamanda toplumların her kesim ve düzeyinden yurttaşa etkileşim imkanı tanımıştır. Kendiliğinden bir kültürel diplomasi başarı hikayesine dönüşen Türk dizilerinin artık dünyaca tanınan oyuncuları da, sosyal medyada dünyanın dört bir yanından takipçileriyle etkileşim halindedir. Bu olgunun, Türkiye’nin yabancı kamuoyu ile temasında dijital diplomasi aracı olarak nasıl bir potansiyel taşıdığını anlamak için “Fatmagül’ün Suçu Ne?” dizisi ile 5 kıtadaki şöhretini sağlamlaştıran oyuncu Beren Saat’in Instagram hesabı incelenmiştir. Bu içerik analizi, uluslararası ölçekte tanınan dizi yüzlerinin dijital hesaplarının global bir mikro kamusal alan niteliği taşıdığını ve daha etkili dijital diplomasi iletişim stratejisi için verimli bir kaynak oluşturduğunu göstermiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• kamusal alan,dijital diplomasi,kamu diplomasisi,stratejik iletişim,Türk dizileri

Kaynakça

1. Acar, D.Ş. (2006). "Küreselleşen Dünyada Diplomasi", Selçuk Üniversitesi Meslek Yüksek Okulu Dergisi, 9 (1-2): 417-439.
2. Arbatlı, M. Said& Kurar, İ. (2015). Türk Dizilerinin Kazak- Türk Kültürel Etkileşimine ve Türkçe’nin Yaygınlaşmasına Etkisi. Turkish Studies, International Periodical For The Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic Volume 10(2), 31-48.
3. Armstrong, C. Matthew. (2009). Operationalizing Public Diplomacy. Handbook Of Public Diplomacy. Ed. Nancy Snow.
4. Benkler, Y. (2006). The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom. New Haven: Yale University Press.
5. Bennett, W. L., & Segerberg, A. (2012). The Logic of Connective Action. Information, Communication & Society. 15(5), 739–768.
6. Castells, M. 2008; The New Public Sphere: Global Civil Society, Communication Networks, and Global Governance, The Annals of American Academy of Political and Social Science,616(1):78-93.
7. Cull, Nicholas J. (2009). Public Diplomacy: Lessons from the Past. CPD Perspectives on Public Diplomacy. Los Angeles: Figueroa Press.
8. Çevik, Senem. B. (2014), Turkish Soap Opera Diplomacy: A Western Projection by a Muslim Source. Exchange: The Journal of Public Diplomacy, 5(1), 78-103.

9. Dahlberg, L. (1998). Cyberspace and the Public Sphere: Exploring the Democratic Potential of the Net. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 4(1), 70–84.
10. Demir, Mehtap. (2017). Music as a Cultural Diplomacy Between Israel and Turkey(2008-2016). idil. 6(32), 1225-1240.
11. Demir, V. (2012). Kamu Diplomasisi ve Yumuşak Güç. İstanbul: Beta
12. Deniz, A. Ç. (2010). Gümüş dizisinin Arap kamuoyuna etkileri: Bir sosyal medya incelemesi. Uşak Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 3(1), 50-67.
13. Fitzpatrick, Kathy R. (2007). Advancing New Public Diplomacy: A Public Relations Perspective. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 2, 187-211.
14. Habermas, J. (1989). The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a category of Bourgeois Society. Cambridge: Polity
15. Kaynak, Selcan. (2015). Turkey’s Public Diplomacy, Çevik, S. & Seib, P. içinde Noor and Friends: Turkish Culture in the World. (s.233-253). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Kellner, D.(2010). Celebrity diplomacy, spectacle and Barack Obama. Celebrity Studies, 1 (1): 121–3.
16. Köse, Esra. (2017). The Impact of Digital Diplomacy on Socio-Economic and Socio-Politic Structure. The Journal of Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences. 22(15), 2347-2370.
17. Kraidy, Marwan M.& Al-Ghazzi, Omar. (2013). Neo-Ottoman Cool: Turkish popular Culture in the Arab Public Sphere. The International Journal of Media and Culture. 11(1), 17-29.
18. Manor, Ilan. (2017). The Digitalization of Public Diplomacy. Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan.
19. McLuhan M. (1964). Understanding the Media:The Extensions of Man. London: Routledge.
20. Nye, Joseph S. (2005). Yumuşak Güç, Ankara: Elips Kitap.
21. Nye, Joseph. (2004). Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics. New York: Public Affairs.
22. Nye, Joseph. (2003). The Velvet Hegemon. Foreign Policy 136(June). 74-75.
23. Oates, S. (2008). An Introduction to Media and Politics. London: Sage.
24. Özalpman, Deniz. (2017). Transnational Consumers of Turkish Television Drama Series. Transnational Marketing Journal, 5(1), 25 – 43.
25. Pamment, J. (2013). New Public Diplomacy in the 21st Century. New York: Routledge.
26. Papacharissi, Z. (2002). The Virtual Sphere: The Internet as a Public Sphere. New Media and Society, 4(1), 9-27.
27. Potter, Evan. (2009). Branding Canada:Projecting Canada’s Power through Public Diplomacy. McGill-Queen’s University Press.
28. Purtaş, F. (2013). Türk Dış Politikasının Yükselen Değeri: Kültürel Diplomasi. Gazi Akademik Bakış, 7(13):1-14.
29. Rousselin, M. (2013). Turkish Soap Power: International Perspectives and Domestic Paradoxes. Euxeinos, 10(May), 16-22.
30. Salem, Paul. (2011). Turkey’s Image in the Arab World. TESEV Foreign Policy Programme, May.
31. Sancak, Kadir. (2016). Yumuşak Güç Kaynağı Olarak Kültür ve Türkiye’nin Yumuşak Gücünde Kültür Faktörü. Balkan and Near Eastern Journal of Social Sciences. 02(04), 16-26.
32. Schaefer, Mike S. (2015). The International Encyclopedia of Political Communication, Mazzoleni, G. içinde Digital Public Sphere (s.322-328). Wiley.
33. Seib, P. (2012). Real-Time Diplomacy: Politics and Power in the Social Media Era. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
34. Sen, B. (1976). Diplomacy in the Historical Perspective and the Third World. Turkish Yearbook of International Relations. (16), 265-273.
35. Signitzer, Benno. (2008). Public Relations Research: European and International Perspectives and Innovations. Zerfass, A.& Van Ruker, B.& Sriramesh, K. içinde, Public Relations And Public Diplomacy: Some Conceptual Explorations (s. 205-218). Netherlands: VS.
36. Signitzer, Benno H. & Coombs, Timothy. (1992). Public Relations and Public Diplomacy: Conceptual Covergences. Public Relations Review 18(2), 137-147.
37. Signitzer, B.& Wamser, C. (2006). Public Relations Theory II. Botan, H.& Hazleton, V. içinde “Public Diplomacy: A Specific Govermental Public Relation Function (435-464). NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
38. Storie, K. L. (2015). Lost Publics in Public Diplomacy:Antecendents for Online Relationship Management. Public Relations Review. Vol: 41(2), 315-317.
39. Straus, N., Kruikemeier, S., Van der Meulen, H., ve Van Noort, G. (2015). Digital Diplomacy in GCC Countries: Strategic Communication of Western Embassies on Twitter. Government Information Quarterly. 32, 369-379.
40. Sunstein, C. (2001). Republic.com. Princeton & London: Princeton University Press.
41. Szondi, Gyorgy. (2008). Public Diplomacy And Nation Branding: Conceptual Similarities and Differences. Clingendael: The Hague by Nederland Institute Of International Relations.
42. Tuncer, H. (1995). Eski ve Yeni Diplomasi. Ankara: Ümit Yayıncılık.
43. Von Eschen , Penny M. (2009). Satchmo Blows Up the World: Jazz Ambassadors Play the Cold War. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. The Cultural Turn in US Diplomatic History.
44. Waller, M. (Ed.). (2007). The Public Diplomacy Reader. Washington, D.C.:Institute of World Politics Press.
45. Wheeler, Mark. (2011). Transnational Celebrity Activism in Global Politics: Changing the World. Tsaliki, L. & Christos, A. içinde Celebrity Politics and Cultural Citizenship: UN Goodwill Ambassadors and Messengers of Peace. Bristol UK: intellect.
46. Yağmurlu, Aslı. (2007). Halkla İlişkiler Yöntemi Olarak Kamu Diplomasisi. iletişim: araştırmaları. 5(1):9-38.
47. Yörük, Z. & Vatikiotis, P. (2013). Soft Power or Illusion of Hegemony:The Case of the Turkish Soap Opera “Colonialism”. International Journal of Communication 7(Jan), 2361-2385.
48. Zaharna, Rhonda. (2010). Battles To Bridges. New York. Palgrave Macmillan.
49. Zhong, X. &Lu, J. (2013). Public Diplomacy Meets Social Media: A Study of the U.S. Embassy’s Blogs and Micro Blogs. Public Relations Review. 39(5), 542-548.