For PD’s sake: seriously, let’s not do this again.

October 28th, 2009  |  by  |  published in Public Diplomacy & Strategic Communication

As a student of rhetoric and argument studies (among other things), I am inclined to believe that controversy is a good thing. It reveals important fault-lines in public discourse, and may prove to be a productive resource for shaping and intervening in the public understanding of subjects under contention.
Not all public argument can be enlightening or productive. Case in point, the bemusing little dust up over on John Brown’s Notes and Essay’s Blog, where angry students at USC took issue with Brown’s insinuation about what constitutes a “serious” university, and the pretense of USC students of public diplomacy to organize themselves as the Association of Public Diplomacy Scholars.
Here is my response to the episode:

Blogroll

Journals

Research Institutions

Resources

Services

Tags

Afghanistan Al-Jazeera AL-Jazeera English alec ross Ali Fisher Bagram Air Base China Cultural Diplomacy debate Development diplomacy DOD domestic politics foreign policy Freedom of the Press Gaza Hedley Bull international relations Iran Iraq lame McHale media power networks new media persuasion practice public diplomacy public diplomacy 2.0 public opinion Religion rhetoric Robin Brown self-promotion statecraft State Department statesmenship Steven Corman strategic communications strategy technology theory US USC War on Islam

  • Amb. Casamitjana: I sign off on prearranged tweets & post myself. I don't share personal info. Convey fopo of Mex. Govt.
  • How can groups like Sister Cities benefit from social media? Get the message out!
  • : must think broadly about interlocutors for diplomacy. Social media can help connect/identify.
  • Mex amb. Casamitjana : states suffering from legitimacy crisis for public policy. Sounds like Castells on network power.
  • : social media punishes moderation. Rewards extremist politics. Don't know where this is going.

Blogroll