I had the honor this week to moderate a panel on “Public Diplomacy in an Age of New Media” for The Washington Center for Internships and Academic Seminars. More than 300 students from all over the country attended, and the panel was the best Washington has to offer:
Juan Zarate, former Deputy Assistant to the President and Deputy National Security Adviser for Combating Terrorism; Jared Cohen, member of Secretary of State Clinton’s Policy Planning Staff; David Nassar, Executive Director of the Alliance for Youth Movements; and Helle Dale, Senior Fellow for Pubilc Diplomacy at the Heritage Foundation.
The basic question was how to make America better understood around the world at a time when governments have little credibility as trustworthy communicators.
The challenge for our government is how best to communicate “the fundamental idea of America” and to counter extremist rhetoric when terrorists find it possible to steal the news media agenda even when they fail. Indeed, the “underwear bomber” at Chistmas failed in his misson but still made headlines that frightened travelers all over the world!
The panel members who were or are now in government argued that empowering third parties outside of government to use new and social media is the best approach. Facebook, Twitter, and cell phones enable groups and indviduals to communicate basic values and ideas interactively. Thus messages can flow in and out of places like Iran and North Korea, and they have more credibility when the source is not the government.
This fundamental truth about the credibility of “the messenger” has led some of us to yearn again for an organization like the US Information Agency. The USIA, which was eliminated by the Clinton administration, was an agency of government that communicated the “idea of America” around the world, pretty much people to people. It was independent of the State Department, which was and is still seen as the communicator of the foreign policy of the administration in power.
“Diplomacy” can be defined as “government to government” communication, and “public diplomacy” can be defined as either government to people OR people to people communication.
I believe the best way for the US to communicate with maximum credibility around the world is to reinstate a USIA-like organization as the organizer of a more neutral people to people initiative. There are a number of compelling ideas floating around Washington that are public private partnerships, or even private foundations.
One thing for sure: The credibiity of the source, be it an individual or an organization, either reinforces or totally cancels out the message.
Larry D. Lauer 
The messaging trend is definitely from “spin” toward “authentic,” with message consumers becoming increasingly more savvy and discriminating. (Where have we heard this before??) Thanks for the great blog, Larry.
Love the new blog, Larry — thanks for spreading your wit and wisdom!
Tim McD.
ACE
I totally agree with your panelists. Another example of social media communication that involves public diplomacy efforts is occurring in the Haiti rebuild right now. Fascinating to see how different groups from the nonprofit and government arenas are connecting virtually to combine resources and consider how best to get aid to the people most in need. My hope is that it will prove to be an amazing case study of “what worked” in years ahead.
Great post, as always – thanks, Larry!