A major theme in public diplomacy, or international communication writ-large, is the conception of 'the other'. Scholar Edward Said had articulated 'the other' as a battle between the Western worldview and the Eastern worldview, with history regarding the Western tradition as of late.
We see this pattern in public diplomacy strategies around the world. Democracy has taken hold in many nations and the strong influence (whether intentional or not) from the United States has had a vast Westernizing effect where, not by coercion but by attraction, nations have jumped on the American model. However, China and Chinese soft power is now beginning to play counter to that notion.
According to Yiwei Wang's "Public Diplomacy & The Rise of Chinese Soft Power" the cultural characteristics of collectivisim have dictated the methodology of Chinese soft power. Whereas the Western tradition of public diplomacy has the tendency to be splitting, identifying the differences of other parties and seeking to assimilate them, the Chinese tradition is to be introspective and multiplicitous, seeing many versions of 'other' and seeking to change themselves to adapt to the environment.
This deeper-level philosophy would seem to work very well in public diplomacy, as other nations would appreciate China not seeking to change them, but rather altering themselves and engaging in such things as cultural exchange to gain influence. These messages are also coming from a highly centralized and strong (politically and economically) government, so their communications are far-reaching and backed by plenty of resources.
However, there have been many setbacks in China that have conflicted with this understanding of public diplomacy.
For having a society based upon morality, exchange and understanding China has had a number of human rights issues in such areas as the workplace, social roles and natural disaster management. There is also a complete disconnect in the realm of media diplomacy, which is popular in the Western tradition but is only starting to catch on in China with agencies like CCTV. China has a history of engaging in censorship of information for the protection of their own citizenry, but as of late this has become more of a problem for the Chinese government to control given the opening of information access worldwide.
I think China's interpretation of soft power is so widely talked about because its political and economic sectors are so strong. However, because initial studies have shown Chinese soft power strategies are not having a positive effect, I think it is safe to say their conception of public diplomacy needs tweaking and must become consistent with their domestic efforts in order to provide a harmonious message to the world. This must also be considered a long-term effort, despite China's realtively quick rise politically and economically.
We see this pattern in public diplomacy strategies around the world. Democracy has taken hold in many nations and the strong influence (whether intentional or not) from the United States has had a vast Westernizing effect where, not by coercion but by attraction, nations have jumped on the American model. However, China and Chinese soft power is now beginning to play counter to that notion.
According to Yiwei Wang's "Public Diplomacy & The Rise of Chinese Soft Power" the cultural characteristics of collectivisim have dictated the methodology of Chinese soft power. Whereas the Western tradition of public diplomacy has the tendency to be splitting, identifying the differences of other parties and seeking to assimilate them, the Chinese tradition is to be introspective and multiplicitous, seeing many versions of 'other' and seeking to change themselves to adapt to the environment.
This deeper-level philosophy would seem to work very well in public diplomacy, as other nations would appreciate China not seeking to change them, but rather altering themselves and engaging in such things as cultural exchange to gain influence. These messages are also coming from a highly centralized and strong (politically and economically) government, so their communications are far-reaching and backed by plenty of resources.
However, there have been many setbacks in China that have conflicted with this understanding of public diplomacy.
For having a society based upon morality, exchange and understanding China has had a number of human rights issues in such areas as the workplace, social roles and natural disaster management. There is also a complete disconnect in the realm of media diplomacy, which is popular in the Western tradition but is only starting to catch on in China with agencies like CCTV. China has a history of engaging in censorship of information for the protection of their own citizenry, but as of late this has become more of a problem for the Chinese government to control given the opening of information access worldwide.
I think China's interpretation of soft power is so widely talked about because its political and economic sectors are so strong. However, because initial studies have shown Chinese soft power strategies are not having a positive effect, I think it is safe to say their conception of public diplomacy needs tweaking and must become consistent with their domestic efforts in order to provide a harmonious message to the world. This must also be considered a long-term effort, despite China's realtively quick rise politically and economically.
No comments:
Post a Comment