This article introduces public diplomacy worldviews of realism, international liberalism, and sociological globalism, revisiting the traditional notion of public diplomacy as a two-step, cross-border, communication process. It predicts that sociological globalism will be a new background of future public diplomacy, in an era of people flow—migration. The predictions include: (a) Through direct and total contacts, soft power (attraction) does matter more than mediated messages about the attraction, and the openness of civil society will matter more than the role of governments; (b) sociological public diplomacy will become domesticated toward “inside border” foreign publics as part of government’s public affairs; and (c) the real substances of soft power in sociological public diplomacy will not be reserves at a country’s disposal but rather be “constructivist and fluid capacity” to create mutual trust and benefit.
Amnesty International. (2005). Europe: Migrants workers denied fundamental rights. Retrieved March 23, 2007, from http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/EUR01/005/2005
2.
Amnesty International. (2006). Living in the shadows: A primer on the human rights of migrants. London: Author.
3.
Arquilla, J., & Ronfeldt, D. ( 1999). The emergence of Noopolitik: Toward an American information strategy. Santa Monica, CA: RAND .
4.
Baxter, L., & Bishop, J. ( 1998). Uncharted ground: Canada, middle-power leadership, and public diplomacy. Journal of Public and International Affairs , 9, 84-101.
5.
Fisher, G. ( 1987). American communication in a global society. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
6.
Gardels, N. ( 2005). The rise and fall ofAmerican soft power. New Perspectives Quarterly, 22, 7-19.
7.
Gilboa, E. ( 1998). Media diplomacy: Conceptual divergence and applications . Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 3(3), 56-76.
8.
Herz, J.H. ( 1950). Idealist internationalism and the security dilemma. World Politics, 5, 157-180.
9.
International Labor Organization. (2004). Towards a fair deal for migrant workers in the global economy. Geneva: Author.
10.
International Labor Organization. (2006). International labor migration and development: The ILO perspective. Geneva: Author.
11.
International Organization for Migration. ( 2005). Migration in an interconnected world: New directions for action. Geneva: Author.
12.
Jeffe, E.D., & Nebenzahl, I.D. (2001). National image and competitive advantage: The theory and practice of country-of-origin effect. Copenhagen, Denmark: Copenhagen Business School Press .
13.
Johnson, M.A. ( 2005). Five decades of Mexican public relations in the United States: From propaganda to strategic council. Public Relations Review, 31, 11-20.
14.
Keohane, R.O., & Nye, J. ( 1977). Power and interdependence: World politics in transition . Boston: Little, Brown.
15.
Kunczik, M. ( 1997). Images of nations and international public relations . Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
16.
Leonard, M., Small, A., & Rose, M. ( 2005). British public diplomacy in the "age of schisms." London: The Foreign Policy Centre.
17.
Leonard, M., & Vidhya, A. ( 2000). Going public: Diplomacy for the information society. London: Foreign Policy Centre.
18.
Lord, C. ( 1998). The past and future of public diplomacy. Orbis, 42, 49-72.
19.
Malone, G.D. ( 1988). Political advocacy and cultural communication: Organizing the nation’s public diplomacy. Boston: University of Press of America.
20.
Manheim, J.B. ( 1994). Strategic public diplomacy and American foreign policy: The evolution of influence. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
21.
Manheim, J.B., & Albritton, R.B. (1984). Changing national images: International public relations and media agenda setting. American Political Science Review, 78, 641-654.
22.
Metzl, J. ( 2001). Network diplomacy. Georgetown Journal of International Affairs, 2, 77-87.
23.
Ninkovich, F.A. ( 1996). U.S. information policy and cultural diplomacy. New York: Foreign Policy Association.
24.
Nye, J. ( 2002). Hard and soft power in a global information age. In M. Leonard (Ed.), Re-ordering the world: The long-term implications of September 11th (pp. 2-10). London : Foreign Policy Centre.
25.
Nye, J. ( 2003). The velvet hegemon. Foreign Policy, 136, 74-75.
26.
Nye, J. ( 2004). Soft power: The means to success in world politics. New York: Public Affairs.
27.
Pratt, C. (Ed.). (1989). Internationalism under strain: The north-south policies of Canada, the Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden. Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto Press.
28.
Reinhard, K. ( 2004). Testimony before the House subcommittee on national security, emerging threats, and international relations: Hearing on the 9/11 commission recommendations on public diplomacy. Retrieved March 23, 2007 , from http://www.businessfordiplomaticaction.org/action/written_testimony.pdf
29.
Salter, C.A., & Teger, A.I. ( 1975). Change in attitudes toward other nations as a function of the type of international contact. Sociometry, 38, 213-222.
30.
Singer, P. ( 2004). The Saudis’ $20 million image campaign. National Journal, 36, 2248-2249.
31.
Stalker, P. ( 2000). Workers without frontiers: The impact of globalization on international migration. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
32.
Tuch, H.N. ( 1990). Communicating with the world: U.S. public diplomacy overseas . New York: St. Martin’s.
33.
U.S. Department of State. (2007). Private sector summit on public diplomacy: Models for action. Retrieved April 22, 2007, from http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/82818.pdf
34.
Van Dinh, T. ( 1987). Communication and diplomacy in a changing world. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
35.
Vickers, R. ( 2004). The new public diplomacy: Britain and Canada compared . British Journal of Politics & International Relations , 6, 182-194.
36.
Viotti, P.R., & Kauppi, M.V. ( 1999). International relations theory. Boston : Allyn & Bacon.
37.
Watanabe, Y. ( 2006). Sofuto pawa ron saiho [Revisiting soft power]. Wochi Kochi, 13, 64-68.
38.
Zaharna, R.S. ( 2005). The network paradigm of strategic public diplomacy. Washington, DC: Foreign Policy in Focus.
39.
Zhang, J., & Benoit, W.L. ( 2004). Message strategies of Saudi Arabia’s image restoration campaign after 9/11. Public Relations Review, 30, 161-167.
