Wednesday 10 November 2010

Public Diplomacy and the Case of Nation Branding


Public diplomacy has strong links with the idea of soft power. According to Joseph Nye ‘soft power works by convincing others to follow, or getting them to agree to, norms and institutions that produce the desired behaviour. Soft power can rest on…the ability to set the agenda in ways that shape the preferences of others’. (Riordan 2003: 120)

Public diplomacy tries to influence nationals in foreign countries but much of the effectiveness of this depends on the acceptance of the receiving audience. (Nye 2004: 99)

Public diplomacy involves building long-term relationships to create enabling environments for government policies through both daily and strategic communications. The development of lasting relationships can be build through scholarships, exchanges, training, seminars, conferences and access to media channels. However, a large part of public diplomacy also deals with selling a positive image of a country. (Ibid.107-9)

This idea of selling an image or nation branding was something that I found extremely interesting. Belinda H.Y Chiu has written an eye-opening article about this topic called Brand USA: Democratic Propaganda in the Third Social Space.

At the most basic level there is nothing new about nation branding or the promotion of positive images of one’s country. However, Chiu goes a lot further than this and claims that ‘traditional approaches to foreign relations are being replaced by marketing strategies to brand nations by enriching their image and reputation’. She claims that in fact ‘every nation is already a brand’. She goes on to compare nation branding to traditional consumer product branding, with the only difference being that ‘the consumers are a diversified set of global citizens and politicians, the company is substituted with the state, and the government acts as the management team’. (Chiu 2007)

The use of commercial terms when talking about what seems to be public diplomacy, was very confusing at first. I thought that Chiu might go too far, but yesterday I spent some time reading some of Alexander Stubb’s (Finland’s Minister of Foreign Affairs) articles and there it was... A whole article called Branding Finland! And there were many more. Apparently Stubb has even set up a panel of experts to ‘brainstorm and develop Finland’s brand by the end of 2010’. The results should be published some time soon. Strikingly Jorma Ollila (the chairman of Nokia) was chosen to head the group, with other well-known figures like Martti Ahtisaari (ex president of Finland and a Nobel price winner). Apparently Chiu is not that wrong and Nation branding is serious stuff right now!

Branding Finland:

http://www.alexstubb.com/artikkelit/2009-01%20BW%20Stubb%20Brand.pdf

A general article about the branding project, from the ministry for foreign affairs of Finland web page:

http://formin.finland.fi/Public/default.aspx?contentid=167928&nodeid=15148&contentlan=2&culture=en-US

Apparently, according to Chiu the importance of this branding is that it allows states to influence (or even craft) how others perceive them. However, she points out in many occasions that a strong brand is not misleading! It is crucial that the brand and product must match. ‘From a marketing standpoint, no matter how sleek and sophisticated the packaging, if the product is bad or broken, the brand will not be successful’. (Chiu 2007) I think that this notion of accuracy is very important for both nation branding and public diplomacy in general, as it might be the only thing that sets them apart from propaganda.

Of course, some argue that this is all mere propaganda. G. R. Berridge seems to think that there is no such thing as public diplomacy. He argues that ‘propaganda is the manipulation of public opinion for political ends and that ‘public diplomacy’ is the modern name for this action’. He goes on to suggest that public diplomacy, as a nametag only exists because of the negative association of propaganda with the systematic spread of lies. (Berridge 2010: 179-181)

Sources

Chiu, B., ‘Brand USA: Democratic Propaganda in the Third Social Space’ in The Whitehead Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations Vol. 8, No. 2, Summer/Fall 2007

G.R. Berridge, 2010. Diplomacy Theory and Practice, 4th Ed. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan

Joseph S. Nye, 2004. Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics. New York: Public Affairs

Shaun Riordan, 2003. The New Diplomacy. Cambridge: Polity Press

Branding Finland:

http://www.alexstubb.com/artikkelit/2009-01%20BW%20Stubb%20Brand.pdf

http://formin.finland.fi/Public/default.aspx?contentid=167928&nodeid=15148&contentlan=2&culture=en-US

2 comments:

  1. Hi Mimi!
    This is a great blog entry! Firstly, your depictions of soft power and public diplomacy are very compelling and secondly, thanks so much for pointing me to Chiu's article.
    Your examples about Finland are very intriguing, too.
    The article which got me interested into nation branding was "Brand USA is in trouble" by Naomi Klein, also using business language and a very fitting comparison between a McDonald's Campaign and US public diplomacy efforts.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2005/mar/18/guardianweekly.guardianweekly11

    Having a look at that article, many of Naomi Klein's articles,actually, might be interesting for it offers a good comparison for your example of Finland!
    Great Job!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree with Berigde point that public diplomacy is synonym to propaganda. We can see that in most Hollywood war movies where American soldiers are penetrated as heroes and world savers.

    ReplyDelete