Public diplomacy is an inherently social endeavour, engaging public audiences at home and abroad to shape perceptions and influence foreign policy outcomes. Social media has a part to play in this, with sites such as Facebook and Twitter gaining visibility and traction as ‘must-have’ tools for public diplomacy 2.0. This article casts light on the less visible but pervasive social media platform of Wikipedia. Taking a case-study approach, the article posits that Wikipedia holds a dual relevance for public diplomacy 2.0: first as a medium; and second, as a model for public diplomacy’s evolving process. Exploring Wikipedia’s folksonomy, crowd-sourced through intense and organic collaboration, provides insights into the potential of collective agency and symbolic advocacy. The article’s findings highlight the limitations within current approaches towards public diplomacy 2.0, and offer new approaches for public diplomacy’s more progressive agenda.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
john r. kelley, ‘the new diplomacy: evolution of a revolution’, diplomacy & statecraft, vol. 21, no. 2 (june 2010), p. 289; see also melissen, ‘public diplomacy’, pp. 192-207.
bruce gregory, ‘american public diplomacy: enduring characteristics, elusive transformation’, the hague journal of diplomacy, vol. 6, no. 3-4 (2011), p. 353.
evgeny morozov, ‘iran: the downside to the twitter revolution’, dissent (fall 2009), pp. 10-14; golnaz esfandiari, ‘the twitter devolution’, foreign policy (8 june 2010); malcolm gladwell, ‘small change’, the new yorker (4 october 2010); philip seib, real-time diplomacy: politics and power in the social media era (new york, ny: palgrave macmillan, 2012); and peter van ham, ‘social power in public diplomacy’, in rhonda zaharna, ali fisher and amelia arsenault (eds), connective mindshift: relational, networked and collaborative approaches to public diplomacy (london: routledge, 2013), pp. 17-28.
causey and howard, ‘delivering digital public diplomacy’, p. 150; sean aday, henry farrell, marc lynch, john sides and deen freelon, ‘blogs and bullets ii: new media and conflict after the arab spring’, peaceworks (washington, dc: united states institute of peace, july 2012); seib, real-time diplomacy; and fergus hanson, revolution at state: the spread of e-diplomacy (sydney, nsw: lowy institute for international policy analysis, march 2012), p. 17.
causey and howard, ‘delivering digital public diplomacy’, p. 145.
manuel castells, ‘the new public sphere: global civil society, communication networks and global governance’, annals of the american academy of political and social science, no. 616 (march 2008), p. 91.
geoffrey cowan and amelia arsenault, ‘moving from monologue to dialogue to collaboration: the three layers of public diplomacy’, the annals of the american academy of political and social science, no. 616 (2008), p. 26.
alireza noruzi, ‘folksonomies: (un)controlled vocabulary?’ knowledge organization, vol. 33, no. 4 (2006), p. 199.
stacey schiff, ‘know it all: can wikipedia conquer expertise?’, the new yorker (31 july 2006), available online at http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2006/07/31/know-it-all.
jimmy wales, ‘wikipedia founder jimmy wales responds’, slashdot (28 july 2004), available online at http://slashdot.org/story/04/07/28/1351230/wikipedia-founder-jimmy-wales-responds.
dan murphy, ‘monmouth: where it all started to go wrong’, wikipediocracy (2012), available online at http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=926.
melissa jones, ‘monmouthpedia could bring wikipedia to chepstow’, south wales argus (24 july 2012), available online at http://www.southwalesargus.co.uk/news/9832698.monmouthpedia_could_bring_wikipedia_effect_to_chepstow.
waleed aly, ‘one armenia, many wikipedia articles’, australian broadcasting corporation, radio national (4 august 2014), online at: http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/drive/one-armenia2c-many-wikipedia-articles/5647654.
bjola and jiang, ‘social media and public diplomacy’, p. 73. see also stuart murray, ‘evolution not revolution: the digital divide in american and australian contexts’, in corneliu bjola and marcus holmes (eds), digital diplomacy: theory and practice (new york, ny: routledge, 2015), pp. 127-144.
jim macnamara, ‘public communication practices in the web 2.0-3.0 mediascape: the case for prevolution’, prism, vol. 7, no. 3 (2010), p. 3, available online at http://www.prismjournal.org.
geoffrey cowan and amelia arsenault, ‘moving from monologue to dialogue to collaboration: the three layers of public diplomacy’, annals of the american academy of political and social science, vol. 616, no. 1 (march 2008), p. 22.
zaharna, fisher and arsenault (eds), connective mindshift, p. 7.
zaharna, fisher and arsenault (eds), connective mindshift, p. 8.
anne-marie slaughter, ‘a new theory for the foreign policy frontier: collaborative power’, the atlantic (30 november 2011), available online at http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2011/11/a-new-theory-for-the-foreign-policy-frontier-collaborative-power/249260/.
All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 1025 | 177 | 26 |
Full Text Views | 281 | 15 | 0 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 84 | 26 | 0 |
Public diplomacy is an inherently social endeavour, engaging public audiences at home and abroad to shape perceptions and influence foreign policy outcomes. Social media has a part to play in this, with sites such as Facebook and Twitter gaining visibility and traction as ‘must-have’ tools for public diplomacy 2.0. This article casts light on the less visible but pervasive social media platform of Wikipedia. Taking a case-study approach, the article posits that Wikipedia holds a dual relevance for public diplomacy 2.0: first as a medium; and second, as a model for public diplomacy’s evolving process. Exploring Wikipedia’s folksonomy, crowd-sourced through intense and organic collaboration, provides insights into the potential of collective agency and symbolic advocacy. The article’s findings highlight the limitations within current approaches towards public diplomacy 2.0, and offer new approaches for public diplomacy’s more progressive agenda.
All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 1025 | 177 | 26 |
Full Text Views | 281 | 15 | 0 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 84 | 26 | 0 |