Rhetorical Traditions of Public Diplomacy and the Internet
In: The Hague Journal of DiplomacySearch for other papers by Mark Rolfe in
Current site
Google Scholar
Summary
Many calls have been made since 2001 for a ‘new public diplomacy’ of the information age that utilizes the internet to reach public opinion. They have been especially forthcoming from the Obama administration, although they have been just as popular with the political classes in the United States and elsewhere. However, such recent calls form only the latest instalment of a rhetorical tradition of public diplomacy that stretches back to Woodrow Wilson and beyond to the 1790s. There is a thematic recurrence in the rhetoric of public diplomacy, as there is in the rhetoric of democracy, and for the same reason: representative democracy has always involved a complex tension between, on the one hand, the political class of politicians and diplomats and, on the other, public opinion, which needs to be appeased since it confers legitimacy on representatives. This results in a recurring pattern of language involving suspicions of the political class, declarations of a new era of diplomacy and claims to credibility. There are hence frequent bouts of anti-politics politics and anti-diplomacy politics, sometimes utilizing a discourse of technological optimism, which politicians and diplomats attempt to assuage with similar calls for new political dawns.
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
-
4)
J. Mearsheimer, Why Leaders Lie: The Truth about Lying in International Politics (London: Duckworth, 2011), pp. 6 and 25-26.
-
11)
R. Hanson, The Democratic Imagination in America: Conversations with Our Past (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1985) pp. 23-24.
-
13)
W. Connolly, The Terms of Political Discourse (Oxford: Martin Robertson, 1983).
-
15)
Q. Skinner, Visions of Politics, Volume 1: Regarding Method (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), pp. 149-150.
-
16)
P. Sharp, ‘Herbert Butterfield, the English School and the Civilizing Effects of Diplomacy’, International Affairs, vol. 79, no. 4, 2003, p. 858.
-
17)
K. Fitzpatrick, ‘Advancing the New Public Diplomacy: A Public Relations Perspective’, The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, vol. 2, 2007, p. 188.
-
21)
B. Gregory, ‘American Public Diplomacy: Enduring Characteristics, Elusive Transformation’, The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 2011, vol. 6, p. 354.
-
22)
G. Wiseman, ‘Distinctive Characteristics of American Diplomacy’, The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, vol. 6, 2011, pp. 235-259.
-
23)
W. Wilson, In Our First Year of the War: Messages and Addresses to the Congress and the People, March 5, 1917 to January 6, 1918 (New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers, 2012), Kindle Locations 1423-1424.
-
25)
J. Der Derian, On Diplomacy: A Genealogy of Western Estrangement (Oxford: Blackwell, 1987), chapters 7 and 8.
-
26)
F. Gilbert, ‘The “New Diplomacy” of the Eighteenth Century’, World Politics, vol. 4, no. 1, October 1951, p. 28.
-
33)
R. Steel, Walter Lippman and the American Century (New York: Vintage, 1981), p. 134.
-
34)
R. Kraig, Woodrow Wilson and the Lost World of the Oratorical Statesman (College Station, TX: Texas A&M University Press, 2004), p. 119.
-
37)
J. Michael Sproule, Propaganda and Democracy: The American Experience of Media and Mass Persuasion (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1997), chapter 3.
-
38)
J. Shotwell, ‘The London Conference’, The New York Times, 12 March 1930, p. 26.
-
39)
S. Bercovitch, The American Jeremiad (Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press, 1978), chapter 1.
-
41)
J. Hirst, The Strange Birth of Colonial Democracy: New South Wales, 1848-1884 (Sydney: Allen & Unwin, 1988), p. 172.
-
43)
P. Joyce, Visions of the People, 1848-1914 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), pp. 72-73; and R. Jenkins, Gladstone: A Biography (New York: Random House, 1997), pp. 406-407.
-
44)
M. Bernard, Four Lectures on Subjects Connected with Diplomacy (London: Macmillan, 1868), pp. 111-112.
-
46)
H.G. Nicholls, The Forest of Dean: An Historical And Descriptive Account, Derived From Personal Observation, And Other Sources, Public, Private, Legendary, And Local (Albemarle Street, London: John Murray, 1858), p. 47.
-
52)
J. Comroff, ‘Populism and Late Liberalism: A Special Affinity?’, The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 2011, vol. 637, p. 100.
-
56)
M. Kazin, The Populist Persuasion: An American History (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1998), chapter 1.
-
57)
P. Taggart, Populism (Buckingham: Open University Press, 2000), pp. 1-3; M.M. Canovan, ‘Trust the People! Populism and the Two Faces of Democracy’, Political Studies, 1999, vol. XLVII; Joyce, Visions of the People, pp. 72-73; and F. Panniza, ‘Introduction’, in F. Panniza (ed.), Populism and the Mirror of Democracy (London: Verso, 2005).
-
58)
Kazin, The Populist Persuasion, pp. 12-28; and Robertson, The Language of Democracy, pp. 27-28, 30 and 39.
-
59)
N. Ferguson, Empire: How Britain Made the World (Camberwell, Australia: Penguin, 2008), p. 284.
-
60)
H.N. Brailsford, ‘The Control of Foreign Affairs’, The English Review, December 1909, pp. 123 and 127.
-
62)
M. Canovan, The People (Cambridge: Polity, 2005), pp. 122-123.
-
63)
J. Assange, Julian Assange: The Unauthorized Autobiography (Melbourne: Text Publishing Company, 2011), ebook, location 3213.
-
65)
S. Dreyfuss, Underground: Tales of Hacking, Madness and Obsession on the Electronic Frontier (Kew, Australia: Mandarin, 1997); and Assange, Julian Assange, location 2409.
-
67)
M. Sifry, Wikileaks and the Age of Transparency (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2011), pp. 16-17.
-
68)
D. Leigh and L. Harding, Wikileaks: Inside Julian Assange’s War on Secrecy (London: Public Affairs for Guardian Books, 2011), pp. 91 and 94.
-
69)
J. Naughton, ‘Live with the WikiLeakable World or Shut Down the Net. It’s Your Choice’, The Guardian, available online at http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/dec/06/western-democracies-must-live-with-leaks.
-
70)
H. Brooke, The Revolution Will Be Televized: Dispatches from the Information War (London: William Heinemann, 2011), p. 38.
-
75)
D. Kenner, ‘The YouTube Revolutions’, Foreign Policy, 30 March 2011, available online at http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/03/30/the_youtube_revolutions.
-
76)
E. Morozov, The Net Delusion: How Not to Liberate the World (London: Allen Lane, 2011), pp. 12-15.
-
77)
M. Campbell, ‘Hero of Egypt’s Digital Tsunami’, The Australian, 16 January 2012.
-
78)
N. Scola, ‘Ghonim: “Our Revolution Is Like Wikipedia” ’, Techpresident, 14 February 2011, available online at http://techpresident.com/blog-entry/ghonim-our-revolution-wikipedia.
-
79)
D. Edelstein and R. Krebs, ‘Washington’s Troubling Obsession with Public Diplomacy’, Survival, vol. 47, no. 1, spring 2005.
-
80)
P. Peterson, ‘Public Diplomacy and the War on Terror’, Foreign Affairs, September/October 2002, p. 78.
-
82)
C. Graffy, ‘Public Diplomacy: A Practitioner’s Perspective’, American Behavioral Scientist, 2009, vol. 52, p. 791.
-
85)
J. Comenetz, ‘Innovating Public Diplomacy For a New Digital World’, The Washington Diplomat, August 2011, available at http://www.washdiplomat.com/index.php?Itemid=428&catid=1476&id=7955:innovating-public-diplomacy-for-a-new-digital-world&option=com_content&view=article.
-
87)
R. Vickers, ‘The New Public Diplomacy: Britain and Canada Compared’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations, vol. 6, 2004, p. 182; and E. Potter, Canada and the New Public Diplomacy: Clingendael Discussion Paper in Diplomacy no. 81 (The Hague: Netherlands Institute of International Relations ‘Clingendael’, July 2002).
-
88)
M. Zubrow, ‘Obama Engages the World’, BBC News, 13 July 2009, available online at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8146286.stm, accessed 20 June 2012.
-
89)
For example, S. Levy, Hackers: Heroes of the Computer Revolution (Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly Media, 2010); and E. Goldstein, The Best of 2600: Hacker Odyssey (Indianapolis, IN: Wiley Publishing, 2008), chapter 9.
-
90)
See A.G. Coleman and A. Golub, ‘Hacker Practice: Moral Genres and the Cultural Articulation of Liberalism’, Anthropological Theory, vol. 8, 2008.
-
92)
Al Gore, ‘Forging the New Athenian Age of Democracy’, Intermedia, vol. 22, no. 2, 1994; and H. Rheingold, The Virtual Community (London: Secker & Warburg, 1994), p. 279.
-
95)
For an overview, see J. Juris, Networking Futures: The Movement Against Corporate Globalizations (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2008).
-
97)
Y. Breindl, ‘Critique of the Democratic Potentialities of the Internet: A Review of Current Theory and Practice’, tripleC, vol. 8, no. 1, 2010, p. 44, available online at http://triple-c.at/index.php/tripleC/article/viewFile/159/165.
-
98)
J. Pemberton, ‘New Worlds for Old: The League of Nations in the Age of Electricity’, Review of International Studies, vol. 28, 2002, p. 312.
-
99)
D. Ellwood, The Shock of America: Europe and the Challenge of the Century (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012), pp. 60-78.
-
100)
E. Gilboa, ‘Searching for a Theory of Public Diplomacy’, The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, vol. 616, March 2008, p. 58.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 1130 | 190 | 15 |
| Full Text Views | 265 | 6 | 1 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 120 | 18 | 2 |
Rhetorical Traditions of Public Diplomacy and the Internet
In: The Hague Journal of DiplomacySearch for other papers by Mark Rolfe in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Summary
Many calls have been made since 2001 for a ‘new public diplomacy’ of the information age that utilizes the internet to reach public opinion. They have been especially forthcoming from the Obama administration, although they have been just as popular with the political classes in the United States and elsewhere. However, such recent calls form only the latest instalment of a rhetorical tradition of public diplomacy that stretches back to Woodrow Wilson and beyond to the 1790s. There is a thematic recurrence in the rhetoric of public diplomacy, as there is in the rhetoric of democracy, and for the same reason: representative democracy has always involved a complex tension between, on the one hand, the political class of politicians and diplomats and, on the other, public opinion, which needs to be appeased since it confers legitimacy on representatives. This results in a recurring pattern of language involving suspicions of the political class, declarations of a new era of diplomacy and claims to credibility. There are hence frequent bouts of anti-politics politics and anti-diplomacy politics, sometimes utilizing a discourse of technological optimism, which politicians and diplomats attempt to assuage with similar calls for new political dawns.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 1130 | 190 | 15 |
| Full Text Views | 265 | 6 | 1 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 120 | 18 | 2 |