re: "February 11"

Thanks to John Brown at Public Diplomacy Press and Blog Review, Version 2.0 ("particularly interested in the relationship between public diplomacy and propaganda") for the mention and the quote:

"PUBLIC DIPLOMACY

The State Department Staff at the Baghdad Embassy is Embarrassing Itself - Jeff Emanuel, redstate.com: "So the wizards at State has suddenly realized that constructing a 104-acre, $750,000,000.00 embassy complex and building up the embassy staff to 16,000 people (including 2,000 diplomats and several times more contractors), without running either by the Iraqis first, 'may have been ill advised.' [Comment by] Consul_At_Arms ... Embassies are the U.S. government representation in a foreign country. They house not only an ambassador and various State Dept. functions (consular, management, political, economic, and public diplomacy) and the activities (communication, security, etc.) necessary to support them, but various 'tenant agencies' housed along with them. Overseas, those range from the routine (IRS, FAA, GSA, military attaches and liaison/assistance officers) to the exotic (DEA, Marshal Service, Library of Congress). Much of the Baghdad mission is likely (I have no personal knowledge of this) engaged in various USAID and other development/reconstruction activities with the Iraqis." "

re: "June 7"

John Brown at John Brown's Public Diplomacy Press and Blog Review, Version 2.0 ("ideas about public diplomacy") shared a great quote:

"No wonder people are nostalgic for USIA: at least it had a
name."

re: "Can the State Department Facebook?"

Peter Spiro at Opinio Juris ("a forum for informed discussion and lively debate about international law and international relations") has an interesting, and brief, post about the Department's use of Facebook.
_____

Hat tip to John Brown at Public Diplomacy Press and Blog Review, Version 2.0.

re: "The Bottleneck at State"

Thanks to John Brown's Public Diplomacy Press and Blog Review, Version 2.0 for the link.

re: "Are you a blogger interested in foreign affairs? Want a job?"

Matt at Mountain Runner ("on public diplomacy and strategic communication in the 21st century") evaluates the Department's official social media setup.

Money quote(s):

"State’s DOT, which is more interesting than Defense’s DOTs to discuss, the 8-10 person team engages audiences based beyond America’s borders through Web 2.0 to correct misinformation, clarify policies and perhaps put them into context as officials of the State Department. They are a reactive group, much like the practice of public affairs in general, posting comments and replies on blogs and discussion boards and operating largely if not completely independently of the other Web 2.0 programs at State, like DipNote, America.gov, ExchangesConnect, etc. At only 8-10 people, the team should be much, much larger. Tell me, does any globally engaged organization with the size and mission of the State Department have only eight people to work with newspapers and television? Unlike “true” public affairs officers, the members of State’s Digital Outreach Team remain anonymous as individuals, undermining their effectiveness in a social media regime based on personalized engagement."

(DOT = "Digital Outreach Team." Note: This apparently has nothing to do with "spirit fingers." - CAA)

_____

Hat tip to John Brown's Public Diplomacy Press and Blog Review, Version 2.0.

re: "Kudos For Senator Lugar's Call To Re-Establish International American Centers"

Michael at Across The Pond ("American and European foreign policy from a transatlantic perspective") appreciated our previous public diplomacy efforts.

Money quote(s):

"I witnessed the closure of all U.S. government run America Centers in Germany over the years, with the last Amerika Haus operated by the U.S. government closing in Cologne in 2007. Sure, many of them have reopened through private initiative and do a great job in fostering transatlantic understanding. But I have always felt that for an issue that is as important for the U.S. as public diplomacy (as everyone has come to understood at least after 9/11) Washington should put its money where its mouth is."

&

"(T)he internet and other modern information tools as well as private sponsors are and should be a big part of public diplomacy. But can and should they replace a live forum, a marketplace of ideas where people in cities across the world can meet, talk and debate with Americans, not in a virtual chat room, but in a real reading room? I think not."


_____

Hat tip to John Brown at Public Diplomacy Press and Blog Review.