Reaction to the new US Public Diplomacy Strategy – Part I

March 22nd, 2010  |  by  |  published in Public Diplomacy & Strategic Communication

I finally got around to reading the new strategic template for US public diplomacy as put together by the State Department – ostensibly the agency tasked with managing and directing US public diplomacy. The strategy is in a handy powerpoint presented by US Undersecretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs, Judith McHale. She spoke of it again on March 10, 2010 before the Senate Foreign Relations committee. A few things from the document and the speech stand out in my mind.
I admit I came to the document a bit skeptical. Supposedly, it took many months to prepare – and feedback was kept to a minimum (bloggers were invited to talk about the plan AFTER it was released). And indeed my initial reading was somewhat disappointing. It read like McHale’s crack team of strategic planners had planned to step out of the TARDIS time machine in 2001 rather than, say, 2010. Simply put, the document reads too much as a dated conception of message management designed to counter or compete with the actions of other actors like China, Russia, and extremists groups (nevermind that their respective programs are for decidedly different objectives and have questionable effectiveness – they are doing stuff, so should we!). Aren’t US public diplomacy planners done with the “there’s a media war going on” kind of talk?


  • 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.