In reply to Professor Graig Hayden's thoughtful article, "In the interest of informed debate," InterMap:
On the one side of the coin, you have what I'd call Twi'lek twitterers: 140 characters in cyberspace will solve American image/public diplomacy problems now! On the flip side you have academe's over-conceptualizers: what's needed are the latest social-science (often quantitative and survey-driven) studies of PD to make it effective and productive.
But let's consider the golden middle: in-depth discussions, face-to-face, on US public diplomacy -- and efforts to improve it -- based on history and experience, including the current realities of practicing public diplomacy today by American diplomats overseas.
Such a historical, "let's be-concrete" but substantive perspective does not exclude (well, not quite) mindless twittering or overly "mindful" conceptualizing. It just puts these two approaches -- quite similar in their avoidance of the complexities of life, one by superficiality, the other by abstraction -- in their proper intellectual/policy place.
As for academics engaged in arcane PD theory, examples of their work can be seen in abundance, and on a continuing basis, in Bruce Gregory's outstanding Updated Public Diplomacy Resources and the equally excellent Literature on Public Diplomacy of The Netherlands Institute of International Relations ‘Clingendael’ Library and Documentation Centre.
As for preparing for a public-diplomacy career, I think that, far more important than an advanced degree in public diplomacy, are the following: thinking and writing clearly; in-depth exposure to the humanities; a historical perspective; knowledge of foreign language(s); wide overseas experience; and keeping up to date with technological developments. Of course, a PD "degree" does not necessarily exclude these matters, but it's a question of what should be a priority.
Regarding professors' ability to engage persons in the last three feet, so important in public diplomacy, the legendary rudeness and bad manners of socially club-footed academics ("the mad professor" trope) -- uncouth behavior I have endured on perhaps too many occasions, while in academic settings, since leaving the Foreign Service -- are also in not infrequent evidence among university/think tank experts in public diplomacy. There are, of course, numerous exceptions, as is always the case in life, Craig Hayden being among them. Indeed, I was honored and delighted that he addressed and enlightened my Georgetown class.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Thanks for addressing my post on Intermap - and sorry that Intermap was again stubbornly refusing comments!
I think you raise some great points. It reminds me of a story I often tell to my students. When I was a grad student, a former bank president addressed a group of us students heading for careers with degrees in international relations. The subject was non-traditional IR careers outside of the academy. The man expressed interest in the kind of talents that IR students could bring to his company. "I can easily hire MBA graduates. I can also easily teach you how to run a credit report. I can't teach you how to to think or write." For him, the perfect new hire for his business had a BA in English and an MA in Philosophy. An MA in public diplomacy is not a one-stop shop for the practical wisdom of the profession - but it's not without merit either - as I think these programs do encourage people to Think and Write.
Which brings me back to the debate at hand. I think the twitterers are not devoid of wisdom, but they are certainly not the only source. Their insight is not new - just newly relevant to the modes of communication available. Aristotle himself recognized the importance of "now" and "timing" in his conception of persuasion (Kairos) - so we can't just disregard the importance of social media. It just cannot stand by itself.
I think what is important to keep in mind is that there are those who study public diplomacy and its history, those who focus on PD policy and those who practice PD. Each requires different tools and skills. By giving pd students a broader perspective, PD theory helps shape them into being a better public diplomats, if that is the route they choose to take. Not all do. The majority of students who pursue advanced pd degrees usually start with varying amounts of the aforementioned qualities and use the degree to further the skills, not as a means to start down the path.
Meanwhile, the theories help provides a wider perspective to view the whole field of public diplomacy. The theories and academic side ensure that PD is not just a field of tinkerers.
Paul makes a great point about "tinkerers." In my limited experience in the field, I've seen instances of failed experimentation that only end up wasting resources. Grounding practice in theory not only provides direction for programming, but it can also aid in short and long-term evaluation. Our services are viewed as more valuable if we can prove they are effective.
Post a Comment