Facilitating the Conversation

Abstract

The elections of president Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012 provided pivotal moments in U.S. relations with foreign publics. Examining the kind of communication cultivated between public diplomacy practitioners and publics, this article focuses on social media discourse about the 2012 U.S. election posted to U.S. diplomacy efforts on Facebook. We analyze information generated by U.S. embassy sites in Bangladesh, Egypt, and Pakistan to understand the qualities of the communication engendered by these public diplomacy overtures, the nature of public argument via the media platform, and how the election served as a process to further contemporary U.S. public diplomacy. We found that the discussion that took place in response to the announcement of Obama’s reelection did not resemble a deliberative forum for debating U.S. foreign policy or regional implications. Rather, much of the messaging on these sites constituted what we term “spreadable epideictic.” Implications are charted for research and practice.

Keywords

public diplomacy epideictic U.S. presidential election international relations Facebook

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Agnew

(2008). “The day belongs to the students”: Expanding epideictic’s civic function. Rhetoric Review, 27(2), 147-164. doi:10.1080/07350190801921768

Aristotle. (2007). On rhetoric: A theory of civic discourse. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Baek

Y. M.

Wojcieszak

Carpini

M. X. D.

(2012). Online versus face-to-face deliberation: Who? Why? What? With what effects? New Media and Society, 14(3), 363-383. doi:10.1177/1461444811413191

Ball-Rokeach

S. J.

Kim

Y.-C.

Matei

(2008). Storytelling neighborhood. Communication Research, 28(4), 392-428. doi:10.1177/009365001028004003

Banks

(2011). A resource guide to public diplomacy evaluation. Los Angeles: University of Southern California, Center on Public Diplomacy.

Baym

N. K.

boyd

(2012). Socially mediated publicness: An introduction. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 56(3), 320-329. doi:10.1080/08838151.2012.705200

Bostdorff

D. M.

(2011). Epideictic rhetoric in the service of war: George W. Bush on Iraq and the 60th anniversary of the victory over Japan. Communication Monographs, 78(3), 296-323. doi:10.1080/03637751.2011.589458

Brooke

C. G.

(2009). Lingua fracta: Toward a rhetoric of new media (New dimensions in computers and composition). New York, NY: Hampton Press.

Burke

(1969). A rhetoric of motives. Berkeley: University of California Press.

10.

Comor

Bean

(2012). America’s “engagement” delusion: Critiquing a public diplomacy consensus. International Communication Gazette, 74(3), 203-220. doi:10.1177/1748048511432603

11.

Condit

C. M.

(1985). The functions of epideictic: The Boston massacre orations as exemplar. Communication Quarterly, 33(4), 284-298. doi:10.1080/01463378509369608

12.

Corman

Trethewey

(2007, April 3). A 21st century model for communication in the global war of ideas. COMOPS. Retrieved from http://csc.asu.edu/2007/04/03/a-21st-century-model-for-communication-in-the-global-war-of-ideas/

13.

Couldry

(2012). Media, society, world: Social theory and digital media practice. Cambridge, UK: Polity.

14.

Cowan

Arsenault

(2008). Moving from monologue to dialogue to collaboration: The three layers of public diplomacy. ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 616(1), 10-30. doi:10.1177/0002716207311863

15.

Cull

N. J.

(2009). Public diplomacy: Lessons from the past. Los Angeles, CA: Figueroa Press.

16.

Danisch

(2006). Power and the celebration of the self: Michel Foucault’s epideictic rhetoric. Southern Communication Journal, 71(3), 291-307. doi:10.1080/10417940600846078

17.

Entman

R. M.

(2008). Theorizing mediated public diplomacy: The U.S. case. International Journal of Press/Politics, 13(2), 87-102. doi:10.1177/1940161208314657

18.

Fisher

(2010). Looking at the man in the mirror: Understanding of power and influence in public diplomacy. In Lucas

Fisher

(Eds.), Trials of engagement: The future of US public diplomacy (pp. 271-296). Leiden, Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff.

19.

Fitzpatrick

K. R.

(2010). The future of U.S. public diplomacy: An uncertain fate. Leiden, Netherlands: Brill.

20.

Fitzpatrick

K. R.

(2011). U.S. public diplomacy in a post-9/11 world: From messaging to mutuality. Los Angeles: University of Southern California.

21.

Foldi

(2012). Public diplomacy in the next four years [Event transcript]. George Washington University, Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://www.gwu.edu/~ipdgc/events/2012_11_13_PostElectionPD/PDN4Y%20Transcript.cfm

22.

Glassman

J. K.

(2012). Public diplomacy in the next four years [Event transcript]. George Washington University, Washington DC. Retrieved from http://www.gwu.edu/~ipdgc/events/2012_11_13_PostElectionPD/PDN4Y%20Transcript.cfm

23.

Goodnight

G. T.

(2003). Predicaments of Communication, Argument, and Power: Towards a Critical Theory of Controversy. Informal Logic, 23(2). Retrieved from http://amr.uwindsor.ca/ojs/leddy/index.php/informal_logic/article/view/2163

24.

Golan

G. J.

Yang

S.-U.

(2013). Diplomat in Chief? Assessing the Influence of Presidential Evaluations on Public Diplomacy Outcomes Among Foreign Publics. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(9), 1277–1292. doi:10.1177/0002764213487735

25.

Gregory

(2011). American public diplomacy: Enduring characteristics, elusive transformation. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 6(3/4), 351-372. doi:10.1163/187119111X583941

26.

Hanson

(2012). Baked in and wired: eDiplomacy@State (Policy Paper No. 30). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.

27.

Hanson

(2013). U.S. Embassy Pakistan: First to pass one million fans on Facebook. Retrieved August 9, 2013, from http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/up-front/posts/2013/06/05-us-embassy-pakistan-facebook-hanson

28.

Hayden

(2011a). Beyond the “Obama effect”: Refining the instruments of engagementthrough U.S. public diplomacy. American Behavioral Scientist, 55(6), 784-802. doi:10.1177/0002764211400571

29.

Hayden

(2011b). The rhetoric of soft power: Public diplomacy in global contexts. New York, NY: Lexington Books.

30.

Hayden

(2013). Logics of narrative and networks in US public diplomacy: Communication power and US strategic engagement. Journal of International Communication. Advance online publication.

31.

Hocking

Melissen

Riordan

Sharp

(2012). Futures for diplomacy: Integrative diplomacy in the 21st century (No. 1). The Hague, Netherlands: Clingendael, Netherlands Institute of International Relations. Retrieved from http://www2.lse.ac.uk/internationalRelations/dinamfellow/conf2012/HOCKING-Futures-of-Diplomacy.pdf

32.

Hudson

(2013). OMG! State Department dropped $630,000 on Facebook “likes.” Foreign Policy Blogs. Retrieved from http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/07/02/omg_state_department_dropped_630000_on_facebook_likes

33.

Jenkins

Ford

Green

(2013). Spreadable media. New York: New York University Press.

34.

Kelley

J. R.

(2010). The new diplomacy: Evolution of a revolution. Diplomacy and Statecraft, 21(2), 286. doi:10.1080/09592296.2010.482474

35.

Khatib

Dutton

W. H.

Thelwall

(2011). Public diplomacy 2.0: An exploratory case study of the US Digital Outreach Team. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1734850

36.

Kraidy

(2009). Arab media and US policy: A public diplomacy reset. Policy analysis brief, Stanley Foundation, Muscatine, IA.

37.

Lord

Lynch

(2010). America’s extended hand: Assessing the Obama administration’s global engagement strategy. Washington, DC: Center for New American Security.

38.

Marunowski

(2008). “United in diversity”: Inscribing a European ideal. China Media Research, 4(3), 53-61.

39.

McHall

(2013, February 4). Coordinator of U.S. International Information Programs presentation to the Public Diplomacy Council, Washington, DC.

40.

Melissen

(2011). Beyond the new public diplomacy (Clingendael Paper No. 3). The Hague, Netherlands: Clingendael, Netherlands Institute of International Relations.

41.

Palczewski

C. H.

(2005). When times collide: Ward Churchill’s use of an epideictic moment to ground forensic argument. Argumentation & Advocacy, 41(3), 123-138.

42.

Pamment

(2012a). New public diplomacy in the 21st century: A comparative study of policy and practice. New York, NY: Routledge.

43.

Pamment

(2012b). What became of the new public diplomacy? Recent developments in British, US and Swedish public diplomacy policy and evaluation methods. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 7(3), 313-336. doi:10.1163/187119112X635177

44.

Paris

(2013, June 19). The digital diplomacy revolution. Toronto, ON: Canadian International Council. Retrieved from http://opencanada.org/features/the-think-tank/essays/the-digital-diplomacy-revolution/

45.

Paul

(2011). Strategic communication: Origins, concepts, and current debates. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.

46.

Perelman

(1979). The new rhetoric: A theory of practical reasoning. In The new rhetoric and the humanities (pp. 1-42). Houton, Netherlands: Springer. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com.proxyau.wrlc.org/chapter/10.1007/978-94-009-9482-9_1

47.

Perelman

Olbrechts-Tyteca

(1969). The new rhetoric. (La nouvelle rhétorique). A treatise on argumentation. Notre Dame, IN: Notre Dame Press.

48.

Poulakos

(1987). Isocrates’s use of narrative in the Evagoras: Epideictic rhetoric and moral action. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 73(3), 317-328. doi:10.1080/00335638709383811

49.

Powers

Gilboa

(2007). The Public Diplomacy of Al Jazeera. In Seib

(Ed.), New media and the new Middle East (1st ed., pp. 53–80). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

50.

Powers

S. M.

Youmans

(2012). A new purpose for international broadcasting: Subsidizing deliberative technologies in non-transitioning states. Journal of Public Deliberation, 8(1), 13.

51.

Siles

Boczkowski

(2012). At the intersection of content and materiality: A texto-material perspective on the use of media technologies. Communication Theory, 22(3), 227-249. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2012.01408.x

52.

U.S. Department of State & Broadcasting Board of Governors Office of Inspector General. (2013). Inspection of the Bureau of International Information Programs (No. ISP-I-13-28). Retrieved from http://oig.state.gov/documents/organization/211193.pdf

53.

U.S. Government Accounting Office. (2010). Engaging foreign audiences: Assessment of public diplomacy platforms could help improve State Department plans to expand engagement. Retrieved from http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-767

54.

U.S. Government Accounting Office. (2009). U.S. public diplomacy: Key issues for congressional oversight (No. GAO-09-679SP). Retrieved from http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d09679sp.pdf

55.

Vanc

A. M.

(2012). Post-9/11 U.S. public diplomacy in eastern Europe: Dialogue via new technologies or face-to-face communication? Global Media Journal–American Edition, 11(21). Retrieved from http://journals.textual.info/index.php/gmj-american/article/view/9

56.

Vigsö

(2010). Extremist stickers : Epideictic rhetoric, political marketing, and tribal demarcation. Journal of Visual Literacy, 29(1), 28-46.

57.

Wallin

(2012). The new public diplomacy imperative: America’s vital need to communicate strategically. Washington, DC: American Security Project.

58.

Warnick

Heineman

D. S.

(2012). Rhetoric online: The Politics of new media (Frontiers in Political Communication, Vol. 22, 2nd ed.). Bern, Switzerland: Peter Lang.

59.

Yang

M. M.

(2011). President Nixon’s speeches and toasts during his 1972 trip to China: A study in diplomatic rhetoric. Rhetoric and Public Affairs, 14(1), 1-44. doi:10.1353/rap.2011.0012

60.

Zaharna

R. S.

(2005). The network paradigm of strategic public diplomacy. Foreign Policy in Focus, 10. Retrieved from http://www.fpif.org

61.

Zaharna

R. S.

(2007). The soft power differential: Network communication and mass communication in public diplomacy. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 2(3), 213-228.

62.

Zaharna

R. S.

(2009). Battles to bridges: U.S. strategic communication and public diplomacy after 9/11. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

63.

Zaharna

R. S.

Fisher

Arsenault

(2013). Relational, networked and collaborative approaches to public diplomacy: The connective mindshift. London, UK: Taylor & Francis.