Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.

 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate


On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.


RSS 2.0

The Iranian elections and public diplomacy 2.0: a tale of untapped potential

By Helle Dale - posted Wednesday, 24 June 2009

An opportunity in Iran

Iran's elections and their dramatic aftermath provided the Obama Administration a unique opportunity to put into action key elements of the government's public diplomacy strategy. Unfortunately, as President Obama has carefully positioned himself on the fence between the alleged winner, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and the candidate supported by Iran's hundreds of thousands of protestors, Hossein Mousavi, the message from the US government has been muted.

While Web 2.0 technology has the potential to play a role similar to that played by fax machines in the Solidarity uprising in Poland in the 1980s and cell phones in Ukraine's Orange Revolution, America has done too little to support Iran's widespread and growing democracy movement. A golden opportunity to reach out to a population trapped in a positively medieval political system is being missed.

So far, US government outreach has been limited to the State Department's revelation that it requested that the social Web site Twitter postpone its scheduled maintenance operation in the days after the election as protesting Iranians were relying heavily on its service to communicate - causing some to suggest that these protests could end up being called the Twitter Revolution. Undoubtedly, this action was important, but given the resources of the US government, it was hardly proactive.


Other US Government-funded media

The Internet is not, of course, the only means through which the US government can reach out to foreign populations such as that of Iran. However, the record is spotty on other fronts as well. On the plus side, Radio Free Europe is doing yeoman's work broadcasting 24 hours a day into Iran in Farsi through its service surrogate Radio Farda, providing critical information from the outside world for embattled Iranians listening on short wave radio. Operating as a surrogate service, Radio Farda provides a platform for Iranian exile journalists to broadcast back into their country with otherwise censored information.

Under severe budget constraints, Voice of America (VOA) - whose mandate is to provide both the news and an American perspective on world events - recently closed down its Radio Farsi service along with a number of other critically important language services, such as those in Russian and Georgian. Needless to say, these cuts did not send positive signals about American engagement in countries like Russia and Iran, where free media are under pressure.

Television in Farsi is still being broadcast from VOA headquarters, but it is being blocked on the Internet by the Iranian government, which clamped down on Internet access the day after the election and has restored only limited access since. TV satellite dishes remain a target of the Iranian authorities, making possession a highly dangerous proposition.

The potential of the new media

The fact that the Administration so far has chosen to take a hands-off approach in Iran, where its engagement could make a real difference, means that the potential of its tech-savvy approach to public diplomacy is not being realised. Were these new technologies being implemented efficiently, they could have significant potential as an addition to other more traditional means of communication.

In its first months in office, the Obama Administration indicated that it is committed to using 21st-century technology in various forms as an integral component of public diplomacy efforts. In a similar fashion to strategies employed in last year's US presidential campaign, a wide variety of social networking and communication mediums can be employed in order to maximise the exposure and resonance of US outreach attempts.

As part of this effort to make the US brand more marketable and accessible to foreign populations, Obama appointed Judith McHale, former president/CEO of Discovery Communications, as undersecretary of state for public diplomacy and public affairs. The selection of McHale - who molded Discovery into a global giant with 1.4 billion subscribers in 170 countries and 35 different languages - speaks volumes about what form Obama envisions public diplomacy taking.


When asked about what made Discovery so effective in the global market, McHale stressed the need for understanding target audiences and conveying information in user-friendly ways. McHale has called the then-new technologies a “game-changer.” Indeed, they could be if the political backbone is there.

Perhaps the greatest testament to Obama's commitment to technology as a vital mechanism of public diplomacy and to McHale's initiative was the mass distribution of the President's recent speech in Cairo by means of various communication and networking technologies. In an effort to disseminate Obama's call for improved US-Arab/Muslim relations to as large an audience as possible, various government agencies used a variety of Internet applications, including social networking sites, podcasts, and a live Webcast on the White House's Web site. Additionally, updates via text message were an extremely well-utilised tool, reaching over 20,000 users worldwide.

The focus of this particular service, which was funded by the State Department, was clearly on the citizens of nations abroad, as it was unavailable to US citizens. The text messages themselves were available in Arabic, Farsi, Urdu, and eight other languages, reaching over 200 countries. This effort to allow people to hear Obama in their native tongue was not limited to text messages. Translated versions of the speech in both text and video were available on such sites as YouTube, Facebook, and MySpace, as well as the popular South Asia networking site Orkut.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All

The web memo was produced with the valuable assistance of Heritage intern Jonathan Liedl. First published by The Heritage Foundation on June 19, 2009.

Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

21 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Helle C. Dale is Director of the Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies and Deputy Director of the Davis Institute for Foreign and Defense Studies of the Heritage Foundation.

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 21 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy