Public Diplomacy and the Digital Society

  • Ilan ManorEmail author
Part of the Palgrave Macmillan Series in Global Public Diplomacy book series (GPD)


When examining how digital technologies influence the practice of public diplomacy, scholars often explore how technology facilitates or disrupts diplomatic activities. This book offers a different departure point by arguing that one cannot understand the influence of digital technologies on public diplomacy without first characterizing the digital society. This is because diplomats are social beings and foreign ministries are social institutions. Events and processes that impact society invariably shape diplomats and their institutions. Presently, diplomats are members of digital societies or societies that have been fundamentally reshaped by digital technologies. Thus, understating contemporary public diplomacy calls for analyzing the norms, values and behaviors that are celebrated by the digital society. This chapters reviews these norms and values, and demonstrates how they come to shape public diplomacy activities.


  1. Anderson, B. (2006). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. New York: Verso Books. Google Scholar
  2. Arsenault, A. (2013). Networks of freedom, networks of control: Internet policy as a platform for and an impediment to relational public diplomacy. In R. S. Zaharna, A. Arsenault, & A. Fisher (Eds.), Relational, networked and collaborative approaches to public diplomacy (pp. 192–208). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  3. Bauman, Z. (2000). Modernity and the Holocaust. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bauman, Z., & Lyon, D. (2016). Remoteness, distancing and automation. In Z. Bauman & D. Lyon (Eds.), Liquid surveillance (pp. 76–99). Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  5. Beck, U. (1992). Risk society: Towards a new modernity. London: Sage. Google Scholar
  6. Beer, D. (2013). Popular culture and new media: The politics of circulation. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bernal, V. (2014). Nation as network: Diaspora, cyberspace, and citizenship. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bjola, C. (2016). Diplomacy as world disclosure: A fractal theory of crisis management. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 18(2), 335–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bjola, C. (2017, August 8). Diplomatic crisis management in the digital age [Blog]. Retrieved from
  10. Bjola, C., & Jiang, L. (2015). Social media and public diplomacy: A comparative analysis of the digital diplomatic strategies of the EU, US and Japan in China. In C. Bjola & M. Holmes (Eds.), Digital diplomacy theory and practice (pp. 71–88). Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  11. Broadbent, S. (2017). Approaches to personal communication. In H. A. Horst & D. Miller (Eds.), Digital anthropology (pp. 127–145). London: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
  12. Cassidy, J., & Manor, I. (2016). Crafting strategic MFA communication policies during times of political crisis: A note to MFA policy makers. Global Affairs, 2(3), 331–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Castells, M. (2000a). Materials for an exploratory theory of the network society. The British journal of sociology, 51(1), 5–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Castells, M. (2000b). The contours of the network society. Foresight, 2(2), 151–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Castells, M. (2002). The internet galaxy: Reflections on the internet, business, and society. Oxford: Oxford University Press on Demand.Google Scholar
  16. Castells, M. (2006). The network society: From knowledge to policy. In M. Castells & G. Cardoso (Eds.), The Network Society From Knowledge to Policy (pp. 3–22). Washington, DC: Center for Transatlantic Relations.Google Scholar
  17. Causey, C., & Howard, P. N. (2013). Delivering digital public diplomacy. In R. S. Zaharna, A. Arsenault, & A. Fisher (Eds.), Relational, networked and collaborative approaches to public diplomacy (pp. 144–156). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  18. Cheney-Lippold, J. (2011). A new algorithmic identity: Soft biopolitics and the modulation of control. Theory, Culture & Society, 28(6), 164–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Clark, K. (1987). Civilization: A personal view. London: BBC Books.Google Scholar
  20. Clegg, B. (2017). Big data: How the information revolution is transforming our lives. London: Icon Books.Google Scholar
  21. Copeland, D. (2013). Taking diplomacy public: Science, technology and foreign ministries in a heteropolar world. In R. S. Zaharna, A. Arsenault, & A. Fisher (Eds.), Relational, networked and collaborative approaches to public diplomacy (pp. 56–69). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  22. DeNicola, L. (2017). Geomedia: The reassertion of space within digital culture. In H. A. Horst & D. Miller (Eds.), Digital anthropology (pp. 80–100). London: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
  23. Geary, P. J. (2003). The myth of nations: The medieval origins of Europe. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Gershon, I. (2010). The breakup 2.0: Disconnecting over new media. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Guardian Staff. (2016, April). CV of failures: Princeton publishes resume of his career lows. The Guardian. Retrieved from
  26. Haynal, G. (2011). Corporate diplomacy in the information age: Catching up to the dispersal of power. In J. G. Stein (Ed.), Diplomacy in the digital age: Essays in honour of Ambassador Allan Gotlieb (pp. 209–224). Ontario: Signal.Google Scholar
  27. Hobsbawm, E. (2001). The age of capital: 1848–1875. London: Abacus.Google Scholar
  28. Horst, H. A. (2017). New media technologies in everyday life. In H. A. Horst & D. Miller (Eds.), Digital anthropology (pp. 61–79). London: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
  29. Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs. (2017). Digital diplomacy conference summary (pp. 6–19). Retrieved from
  30. Kant, I. (2013). An answer to the question:What is enlightenment?’ London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  31. Khatib, L., Dutton, W., & Thelwall, M. (2012). Public diplomacy 2.0: A case study of the US digital outreach team. The Middle East Journal, 66(3), 453–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lally, E. (2002). At home with computers. Oxford: Berg Publishers.Google Scholar
  33. Lash, S. (2007). Power after hegemony: Cultural studies in mutation? Theory, Culture & Society, 24(3), 55–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lesk, M. (2013). Big data, big brother, big money. IEEE Security and Privacy, 11(4), 85–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Locke, M. (2018, April 25). How likes went bad [Blog]. Retrieved from
  36. Lupton, D. (2015). A critical sociology of big data. In D. Lupton (Ed.), Digital sociology (pp. 93–116). New York, NY: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Manor, I. (2016). Are we there yet: Have MFAs realized the potential of digital diplomacy? Brill Research Perspectives in Diplomacy and Foreign Policy, 1(2), 1–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Manor, I., & Soone, L. (2018, January). The digital industries: Transparency as mass deception. Global Policy. Retrieved from
  39. McNutt, K. (2014). Public engagement in the Web 2.0 era: Social collaborative technologies in a public sector context. Canadian Public Administration, 57(1), 49–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Melissen, J. (2005). The new public diplomacy: Between theory and practice. In J. Melissen (Ed.), The new public diplomacy: Soft power in international relations (pp. 3–27). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Metzgar, E. T. (2012). Is it the medium or the message? Social media, American public diplomacy & Iran. Global Media Journal, 12(21), 1.Google Scholar
  42. Miller, D. (2017). Social networking sites. In H. A. Horst & D. Miller (Eds.), Digital anthropology (pp. 146–164). London: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
  43. Miller, D., & Horst, H. A. (2017). The digital and the human: A prospectus for digital anthropology. In H. A. Horst & D. Miller (Eds.), Digital anthropology (pp. 3–38). London: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
  44. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark. (2017). Denmark names first ever tech ambassador. Retrieved from
  45. Morad, Y. (2014). Understanding Israeli digital diplomacy [In person].Google Scholar
  46. Pamment, J. (2013). New public diplomacy in the 21st century: A comparative study of policy and practice. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  47. Paraphrased from: le Carré, J. (1986). A perfect spy. London: Hodder & Stoughton.Google Scholar
  48. Powers, S., & Kounalakis, M. (2017). Can public diplomacy survive the internet? Bots, echo chambers, and disinformation. US Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy. Retrieved from
  49. Praiser, E. (2011, March). Eli Praiser: Beware onlinefilter bubbles” [Video file]. Retrieved from
  50. Ratson, E. (2018). Understanding Israeli algorithmic diplomacy [In person].Google Scholar
  51. Roberts, I. (2017). Diplomacy—A short history from pre-classical origins to the fall of the Berlin Wall. In I. Roberts (Ed.), Satow’s diplomatic practice (pp. 3–19). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Ruppert, E. (2011). Population objects: Interpassive subjects. Sociology, 45(2), 218–233. Cited in: Lupton, D. (2014). A critical sociology of big data.Google Scholar
  53. Seib, P. (2012). Real-time diplomacy: Politics and power in the social media era. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Seib, P. (2016). The future of diplomacy. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  55. Silver, D., & Massanari, A. (2006). Critical cyberculture studies. New York, NY: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  56. Slaughter, A. M. (2009). America’s edge: Power in the networked century. Foreign Affairs, 88(1) 94–113.Google Scholar
  57. Slaughter, A. M. (2017). The chessboard and the web: Strategies of connection in a networked world. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  58. Storr, W. (2018). Selfie: How the West became self-obsessed. London: Picador.Google Scholar
  59. Tucker, J., Guess, A., Barberá, P., Vaccari, C., Siegel, A., Sanovich, S., …, Nyhan, B. (2018). Social media, political polarization, and political disinformation: A review of the scientific literature. Hewlett FoundationGoogle Scholar
  60. Van Dijk, J. A. (2017). Digital divide: Impact of access. The International Encyclopedia of Media Effects, 1–11.Google Scholar
  61. Zaharna, R. S. (2013). Network purpose, network design: Dimensions of network and collaborative public diplomacy. In R. S. Zaharna, A. Arsenault, & A. Fisher (Eds.), Relational, networked and collaborative approaches to public diplomacy (pp. 173–191). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of International DevelopmentUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations