Trying to differentiate Public Diplomacy from Propaganda may prove to be a not so straight forward task.
Firstly the whole concept of propaganda seems to be linked with a part trying to “sell” its ideals to other audiences. The simple fact that propaganda has as its main goal the influencing of peoples opinions, its itself a clear indicator of the lengths some nations are institutions are willing to go in order to win heart and minds of other people and nations.
On the other hand Public diplomacy when rightly applied focuses on a most informative Agenda. While Propaganda focuses on persuasion, Public Diplomacy has a more “neutral” role.
Public Diplomacy aims to inform/educate the audiences by providing third parts with accurate facts that reflect the reality of a country the way they are instead of reflecting it the way a nation would like it to be.
It provides information about the background and current reality of a determined nation to a foreign audience, affecting the formulation of foreign opinion instead of influencing it, so people can build an opinion regarding a certain country based on neutral information.
Public Diplomacy can and is applied both in home or foreign soil, being the latter the main focus of the nations practicing it.
According to a document written by the American National Security Decision in March 1984, the USA considers the role of Public Diplomacy extremely important in regards to its National security policy and strategy, public diplomacy is a “strategic instrument to shape ideological trends” (National Security Decision Directive 1984)
As mentioned before, the main difference in the practice of booth Public Diplomacy and Propaganda is the impartiality and accuracy of the information provided to a foreign audience, “the fundamental purpose of U.S. international information programs is to affect foreign in ways favourable to U.S National interest. Such programs can only be credible and effective by respecting accuracy and objectivity”
Unlike propaganda, the practice of Public Diplomacy is more concerned with providing information rather then influencing ones opinion, “ we are better at the inform than we are at influence”, Charlotte Beers[1].
References
J. Michael Waller, (2007)The Public Diplomacy Reader
[1] former Under secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs
It's a sliding scale....
ReplyDeleteI wrote my essay on the link between propaganda and public diplomacy. The best definition of propaganda I found was this by Nicholas Cull, quoted in Jan Melissen's 'The New Public Diplomacy'. As usual, I didn't find it until the essay was written and handed in...
ReplyDelete“… it first has to be divested of its pejorative connotations; In this view, propaganda should be seen a wide-ranging and ethically neutral political activity that is to be distinguished from categories such as information and education. What separates propaganda from education or information (…) is that it tries to tell people what to think. Information and education are concerned with broadening the audiences perspectives and opening their minds, but propaganda strives to narrow and preferably close them.” (18)