Journal of Public Diplomacy

The Korean Association for Public Diplomacy (한국공공외교학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Information Intervention: A Taxonomy & Typology for Government Communication

  • Received : 2021.01.28
  • Accepted : 2021.04.24
  • Published : 2021.06.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Where government communication in the early 20th century fell under the umbrella term, "propaganda," the post-WWII era saw a paradigm fracture into public affairs for domestic audiences, public diplomacy for foreign audiences, and psychological operations for hostile audiences. The continued diffusion of the Internet, however, has blurred such distinctions, mending this fractured paradigm. Based on in-depth interviews, this study typologizes government communication to contextualize how various tactics functions within the 21st century digital media ecology, through an "Information Intervention" taxonomy. In an age where state-sponsored disinformation and computational propaganda are tantamount threats, this paper elucidates the field's fundamental concepts by articulating who communicates with what audience, in what manner, with what intent, and with what desired outcomes.

Keywords

References

  1. Arceneaux, P. (2019, July 22). Information intervention: The mending of a fractured paradigm. USC Center for Public Diplomacy., from https://uscpublicdiplomacy.org/blog/information-intervention-mending-fractured-paradigm.
  2. Bazov, G. (2014, July 10). Eyewitness account of atrocities by Ukrainian Nazi Banderovtsy in Slavyansk. Slavyandgrad. https://slavyangrad.org/2014/07/10/atrocities-in-slavyansk/.
  3. Bischof, A., & Jurgens, Z. (2015). Voices of freedom - western interference? 60 years of Radio Free Europe. Gottingen, Germany: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht
  4. Bjola, C., & Manor, I. (2018). Revisiting Putnam's two-level game theory in the digital age: Domestic digital diplomacy and the Iran nuclear deal. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 31(1), 3-32. https://doi.org/10.1080/09557571.2018.1476836
  5. Bogner, A., Littig, B., & Menz, W. (2009). Introduction: Expert interviews - an introduction to a new methodological debate. In A. Bogner, B. Littig, & W. Menz (Eds.), Interviewing Experts, (pp. 1-16). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
  6. Bryant, J., & Miron, D. (2004). Theory and research in mass communication. Journal ofCommunication, 54(4), 662-704. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2004.tb02650.x
  7. Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London, England: Sage.
  8. Cowan, D., & Cook, C. (2018). What's in a name? Psychological operations versus military information support operations and an analysis of organizational change. Military Review. Available at: https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Journals/Military-Review/OnlineExclusive/2018-OLE/Mar/PSYOP/.
  9. Cowan, G., & Arsenault, A. (2008). Moving from monologue to dialogue to collaboration: The three layers of public diplomacy. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 616(1), 10-30. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716207311863
  10. Chong, D., & Druckman, J. (2007). A theory of framing and opinion formation in competitive elite environments. Journal of Communication, 57(1), 99-118. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00331.x
  11. Cooper, V. A. (2017). Media development, DAC, and China: Different approaches, same public diplomacy. Journal of Media Business Studies, 14(1), 25-37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/16522354.2017.1292714
  12. Cyr, D., Head, M. M., Lim, E., & Stibe, A. (2018). Using the elaboration likelihood model to examine online persuasion through website design. Information & Management, 55(7), 807-821. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2018.03.009
  13. Cull, N. J. (2008). Public diplomacy: Taxonomies and histories. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 616(1), 31-54. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716207311952
  14. Dalkey, N., & Helmer, O. (1963). An experimental application of the Delphi method to the use of experts. Management Science, 9(3), 458-467. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.9.3.458
  15. Donovan, J., Greene, J., & Kaye, D. (2020, August 6). Combating online misinformation. Council on Foreign Relations. https://www.cfr.org/event/combating-online-misinformation
  16. Douek, E. (2020, July 2). What does "coordinated inauthentic behavior" actually mean? Slate. https://slate.com/technology/2020/07/coordinated-inauthentic-behavior-facebook-twitter.html
  17. Dupuy, K., & Rustad, S. A. (2018). Trends in armed conflict, 1046-2017. Peace Research Institute Oslo. https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/Dupuy%2C%20Rustad-%20Trends%20in%20Armed%20Conflict%2C%201946%E2%80%932017%2C%20Conflict%20Trends%205-2018.pdf
  18. Ekici, B., & Akbulut, A. (2015). Revisiting asymmetric psychological warfare: Why the U.S. lost the battle of images after Iraq? Review of International Law & Politics, 11(44), 33-69.
  19. Euromaidan. (2015, August 25). Monument to Russian media fakes unveiled in Ukraine. Euromaidan Press. Retrieved on June 19, 2018, from http://euromaidanpress.com/2015/08/25/monument-to-russian-media-fakes-unveiled-in-ukraine/.
  20. Fitzpatrick, K. R. (2007). Advancing the new public diplomacy: A public relations perspective. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 2(3), 187-211. https://doi.org/10.1163/187119007X240497
  21. Gaffney, A M., Tomory, J. J., & Gold, G. J. (2016). The endorsement of commentator opinion: A case of manufactured consent. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 5(2), 194-202. https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000057
  22. Gilboa, E. (2008). Searching for a theory of public diplomacy. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 616(1), 55-77. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716207312142
  23. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New Brunswick, Canada: Aldine Transaction.
  24. Glassman, J. K. (2010, March 10). How to win the war of ideas. Foreign Policy. http://foreignpolicy.com/2010/03/10/how-to-win-the-war-of-ideas/
  25. Global Engagement Center. (2020). Special Report: Pillars of Russia's disinformation and propaganda ecosystem. U.S. Department of State. https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Pillars-of-Russia%E2%80%99s-Disinformation-and-Propaganda-Ecosystem_08-04-20.pdf
  26. Holbrooke, R. (2001, October 28). Get the message out. The Washington Post. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2010/12/13/AR2010121305410.html
  27. Hopkins, A. E. (2015). Government public relations: Public diplomacy or propaganda? Inquiries Journal, 7(3), 1-3. Available at: http://www.inquiriesjournal.com/articles/1012/government-public-relations-public-diplomacy-or-propaganda.
  28. Isaacson, W. (2010, September 28). America's voice must be credible and must be heard. Celebrating 60 Years of RFE. http://docs.rferl.org/en-US/2010/09/29/100928%20rferlisaacson.pdf
  29. Jordan, T. (2015). Information politics: Liberation and exploitation in the digital age. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
  30. Just, T. (2015). Public diplomacy and domestic engagement: The Jewish revival in Poland. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 11(4), 263-275. https://doi.org/10.1057/pb.2015.11
  31. Kaufman, E. (2002). A broadcasting strategy to win media wars. The Washington Quarterly, 25(2), 115-127. https://doi.org/10.1162/01636600252820171.
  32. Kearney, M. G. (2007). The Prohibition of Propaganda for War in International Law. Oxford, UK: University of Oxford Press.
  33. Knobloch-Westerwick, S., Mothes, C., Johnson, B. K., Westerwick, A., & Donsbach, W. (2015). Political online information searching in Germany and the United States: Confirmation bias, source credibility, and attitude impacts. Journal of Communication, 65(3), 489-511. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12154
  34. Kothari, A., & Tsakarestou, B. (2019). 'Hack the camp': An entrepreneurial public diplomacy and social intervention initiative to address the refugee crisis in Greece. International Communication Gazette, 83(1), 9-25. https://doi.org/10.1177/1748048519883508
  35. la Cour, C. (2020). Theorising digital disinformation in international relations. International Politics, 57(1), 704-723. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-020-00215-x
  36. Lakin, S. (2019, September 5). Lessons from the UN peacekeeping mission in Rwanda, 25 years after the genocide it failed to stop. The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/lessons-from-the-un-peacekeeping-mission-in-rwanda-25-years-after-the-genocide-it-failed-to-stop-122174
  37. Lennon, C. (2015). Detainees in the global war on terrorism aboard Guantanamo Bay. Touro Law Review, 31(4), 1013-1041.
  38. MacFarquhar, N. (2016). A powerful Russian weapon: The spread of false stories. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/29/world/europe/russia-sweden-disinformation.html
  39. Manor, I. (2020). How external shocks alter digital diplomacy's trajectory. USC Center for Public Diplomacy Blog. https://uscpublicdiplomacy.org/blog/how-external-shocks-alter-digital-diplomacys-trajectory
  40. Manor, I. (2021). Russia's digital diplomacy: The good, the bad and the satirical. Russland-Analysen, 1(398), 2-6. https://doi.org/10.31205/RA.398.01
  41. Martelle, M. (2018, August 13). Joint Task Force ARES and Operation GLOWING SYMPHONY: Cyber Command's Internet war against ISIL. National Security Archive. https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/cyber-vault/2018-08-13/joint-task-forceares-operation-glowing-symphony-cyber-commands-internet-war-against-isil
  42. Mattiacci, E., & Jones, B. T. (2020). Restoring legitimacy: Public diplomacy campaigns during civil wars. International Studies Quarterly, 64(4), 867-787. https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqaa065
  43. Nemr, C., & Gangware, W. (2019). Weapons of mass distraction: Foreign state-sponsored disinformation in the digital age. U.S. Department of State. https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Weapons-of-Mass-Distraction-Foreign-State-SponsoredDisinformation-in-the-Digital-Age.pdf
  44. Nye, J. S. (2004). Soft power: The means to success in world politics. New York, NY: Perseus Book Group.
  45. Pamment, J. (2014). Articulating influence: Toward a research agenda for interpreting the evaluation of soft power, public diplomacy and nation brands. Public Relations Review, 40(1), pp. 50-59. doi: 10.1016/j.pubrev.2013.11.019
  46. Pisarska, K. (2016). The domestic dimension of public diplomacy: Evaluating success through civil engagement. London, England: Palgrave Macmillan.
  47. Powell, A. (2012, March 30). Pinker explains 'The Long Peace.' The Harvard Gazette. https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2012/03/pinker-explains-the-long-peace/
  48. Powers, S., & Samuel-Azran, T. (2015). Conceptualizing international broadcasting as information intervention. In G. J. Golan, S. Yang, & D. F. Kinsey (Eds). International public relations and public diplomacy: Communication and engagement (pp. 245-166). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
  49. Rawnsley, G. D. (1996). Radio diplomacy and propaganda: The BBC and VOA in international politics, 1956-64. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
  50. Richards, D. (1996). Elite interviewing: Approaches and pitfalls. Politics, 16(3), 199-204. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9256.1996.tb00039.x
  51. Riordan, S. (2017, June 21). Stop inventing "new diplomacies." USC Center for Public Diplomacy. https://uscpublicdiplomacy.org/blog/stop-inventing-new-diplomacies
  52. Roose, K. (2018, July 19). U.S.-funded broadcaster directed ads to Americans. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/19/technology/facebook-ads-propaganda.html
  53. Shapiro, J. N., Nedashkovskaya, M. P., & Oledan, J. G. (2020). Collaborative models for understanding influence operations: Lessons from defense research. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. https://carnegieendowment.org/files/Shapiro_etal_InfluenceOps_Defense_Research.pdf
  54. Storie, L. K. (2018). Relationship cultivation in public diplomacy: A qualitative study of relational antecedents and cultivation strategies. Journal of Public Relations Research, 29(6), 295-310. https://doi.org/10.1080/1062726X.2018.1437443
  55. Szostek, J. (2017). The power and limits of Russia's strategic narrative in Ukraine: The role of linkage. Perspectives on Politics, 15(2), 379-395. https://doi.org/10.1017/S153759271700007X.
  56. Uttaro, R. A. (1982). The voices of America in international radio propaganda. Law and Contemporary Problems, 45(4), 103-112. https://doi.org/10.2307/1191297
  57. Walker, C. (2016). The authoritarian threat: The hijacking of "soft power". Journal of Democracy, 27(1), 49-63. Available at: https://www.journalofdemocracy.org/articles/the-authoritarian-threat-the-hijacking-of-soft-power/. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2016.0007
  58. Walker, C., & Ludwig, J. (2017). From 'soft power' to 'sharp power': Rising authoritarian influence in the democratic world. In J. P. Cardenal, J. Kucharcyzk, G. Meseznikov, & G. Plaschova. Sharp power: Rising Authoritarian Influence. International Forum for Democratic Studies. https://www.ned.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Sharp-Power-RisingAuthoritarian-Influence-Full-Report.pdf
  59. Walker, P. (2018, December 10). Foreign Office investigates reports that state-funded body targeted Corbyn. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/10/foreign-office-investigates-report-state-funded-body-targeted-corbyn
  60. Wanless, A., & Pamment, J. (2019). How do you define a problem like influence? Journal of Information Warfare, 18(3), 1-14. Available at: https://carnegieendowment.org/files/2020-How_do_you_define_a_problem_like_influence.pdf.
  61. Wardle, C., & Derakshshan, H. (2017). Information disorder: Toward an interdisciplinary framework for research and policy making. Council of Europe Report DGI(2017)09. https://rm.coe.int/information-disorder-toward-an-interdisciplinary-framework-for-researc/168076277c
  62. Woolley, S. C., & Howard, P. N. (2017). Computational propaganda worldwide: Executive summary. Computational Propaganda Research Project, Oxford Internet Institute. https://demtech.oii.ox.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/89/2017/06/Casestudies-ExecutiveSummary.pdf