I don’t want, nor do I really have the time right now, so read my chapter on Google Books that discusses the common use of the term before 1965. Despite this, there is surprisingly little serious inquiry let alone understanding into why “public diplomacy” emerged in 1965 as part of a name at a center established at Tufts University. The US Information Agency operated for more than a decade without this term, and the State Department had managed to run more than USIA’s relatively small portfolio for nearly a decade prior. The term in question is “public diplomacy,” and it was adopted – it was not “coined,” please stop writing it was “coined” 1 – in 1965 as part of a public relations campaign to further segregate and elevate the activities of one bureaucracy to be at least on par with another. I started to write a different article that opened with this question: Can a term represent both a symptom and cause of a dumpster fire? Yes, unequivocally. However, in the case of this post, it originated here at the MountainRunner blog in September 2018 before going to the substack, so now it has returned in a revised form. Posts are copied here when I get around to it. Subscribe to my free substack for new posts through email, the web, or through the substack app. It has been modified slightly for clarity. This post first appeared at on 7 February 2023. “ → No, the Smith-Mundt Act does not apply to the Defense Department, and it never did Continue reading “Talking about Strategic Influence and Stuff Isaiah “Ike” Wilson III, President of the Joint Special Operations University, moderated a panel with Tom Evans, Joint Staff J39 of the Joint Information Warfare Center, and me for an hour-long discussion starting with the question what is “strategic influence” and some of the problems we have in understanding, supporting, and conducting this stuff. “ → Talking about Strategic Influence and StuffĬome for the panel, stay for the carpet bombing of Smurfsīack on 6 December 2022, Dr. Continue reading “A Look at the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly: A Historical Look at the Politics of US Information Warfare One subsequent presentation, for example, checked all three boxes quickly, even as the presenter could have left out their (inaccurate) historical narrative without affecting anything. That was the hopeful intent to try to push conversations into either accurate and meaningful invocations of history in support of their arguments or leave aside the history they misread, don’t understand, or invent. Our panel was titled “The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly: A Historical Look at the Politics of US Information Warfare.” We immediately followed the Ambassador’s keynote to provide a kind of scene-setter (at the 1hr mark at the above link). The conference keynote was given by Ukrainian Ambassador to the US Oksana Markarova, whose comments are worth your time. Nick Cull, the discussant, and Jeff Trimble, the moderator, were both in-person. The event was held at the University of Texas at Austin, and while I was remote, Dr. I spoke at the #Connexions Conference on Global Media in Diplomacy and Foreign Policy this past Monday. Notes & details behind my 8-minute presentation “ → A Look at the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly: A Historical Look at the Politics of US Information Warfare Bartlett’s 1940 statement that, “People, the elements of culture, the media of economic existence, ideas-all these can move with a freedom never before matched in history.” Continue reading “Knowing why is far more important learning how Social media and other technologies that reduce the cost and time to move information and people reflect only the latest iterations of Dr. It is not a new reality that the success of United States foreign policies rely, in no small part, on awareness, perceptions, and attitudes about the US and what it is actually doing abroad and why. The substack version of this article includes substantial footnotes that were not copied to the version below. In other words, if you want to follow my writing, I suggest you subscribe to my substack where this post first appeared on 24 April 2023. However, these reposts, like the one you are about to read, will be neither timely nor include all of my substack work. The site will continue to exist, and I will occasionally repost articles from my substack here. Since mid-2022, my primary outlet has been. The issue is not that the US forgot how to “tell its story to the world,” but why
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |