Blog Page 264

KLM Royal Dutch Airlines Introduces Payment Via Twitter And Facebook

KLM Royal Dutch Airlines Introduces Payment Via Twitter And Facebook

Picture the scene: you’re looking to travel somewhere nice for your vacation, and you’re using Twitter to search out good ideas from friends and contacts. You find the perfect place, but, oh… you have to leave Twitter to actually book your flight, like some kind of savage.

Not no more. KLM Royal Dutch Airlines has developed a method of payment which enables customers using Twitter or Facebook to book or rebook a flight, make a seat reservation, or to arrange extra baggage, can now pay through these channels.

Here’s how it works: KLM sends a link to the customer in a private message on Facebook or Twitter. The customer can then select their preferred method of payment and complete the transaction. The social media service agent at KLM then receives a message to say that payment has been received and the customer in turn receives confirmation of the payment.

KLM Royal Dutch Airlines Introduces Payment Via Twitter And Facebook

The 130 social media agents at KLM answer around 35,000 queries on Facebook and Twitter every week. Last week KLM welcomed its five-millionth Facebook fan, making KLM the airline with the most fans in the world.

KLM Royal Dutch Airlines was founded in 1919, making it the world’s oldest airline still operating under its original name.

Emerging Nations Embrace Internet, Mobile Technology

Cell Phones Nearly Ubiquitous in Many Countries

Survey Report

Technology 09In a remarkably short period of time, internet and mobile technology have become a part of everyday life for some in the emerging and developing world. Cell phones, in particular, are almost omnipresent in many nations. The internet has also made tremendous inroads, although most people in the 24 nations surveyed are still offline.

Meanwhile, smartphones are still relatively rare, although significant minorities own these devices in countries such as Lebanon, Chile, Jordan and China.

People around the world are using their cell phones for a variety of purposes, especially for texting and taking pictures, while smaller numbers also use their phones to get political, consumer and health information. Mobile technology is also changing economic life in parts of Africa, where many are using cell phones to make or receive payments.

Technology 31While the internet still has a limited reach in the emerging and developing world, once people do gain access to the internet, they quickly begin to integrate it into their lives. A significant number of people in these nations say they use the internet on a daily basis, including roughly half of those polled in Lebanon, Russia and Argentina. At least 20% use the internet daily in 15 of the 24 nations surveyed.

In 21 of 24 nations, a majority of internet users also participate in sites like Facebook and Twitter (see here for a country by country list of social networking sites).

People are using social networking sites to stay in touch with family and friends and to share their views on an array of topics, including popular culture, religion and politics.

These are among the main findings of a Pew Research Center survey conducted among 24,263 people in 24 emerging and developing economies from March 2, 2013 to May 1, 2013. All interviews were conducted face-to-face.

The survey also finds that using the internet – like many other forms of communication technology – is significantly more common among young people (see here for data on age differences for several key technology usage questions). In 14 of 24 nations, at least half of 18-29 year-olds say they are online. Internet use is also correlated with national income, as richer nations tend to have a higher percentage of internet users.

Similarly, smartphone ownership is more common in countries with higher levels of per capita income. Traditional cell phones still outnumber smartphones, although roughly three-in-ten or more Lebanese, Chileans, Jordanians, Chinese, Argentines, South Africans, Malaysians and Venezuelans now own a smartphone.

People use their cell phones for many things, but texting is especially popular. In 22 of 24 countries, most cell phone owners send text messages. Mobile phones are also widely used for taking pictures or video – at least half of cell phone owners use their devices for this in 15 nations.

Technology 3While making or receiving payments is one of the least common cell phone activities, it is much more common in the region where mobile money is a phenomenon – Africa, and more specifically, Kenya and its neighbor Uganda. Nearly seven-in-ten Kenyans (68%) who own a cell phone say they regularly use their mobile device to make or receive payments. Half in Uganda say this as well. Meanwhile, even though only 29% of mobile owners in South Africa and 24% in Senegal say they use their phones for monetary transactions, these are still among the highest percentages across all the countries surveyed. Only in Russia (24%) do as many cell owners use their device for such purposes. In the 18 countries surveyed outside of sub-Saharan Africa, a median of only 8% use their cell phones for making and receiving payments.

Cell Phone and Smartphone Ownership

More than half of the population in each of the nations surveyed say they own a cell phone. Roughly nine-in-ten or more own mobile phones in Jordan (95%), China (95%), Russia (94%), Chile (91%) and South Africa (91%).

Cell phone ownership rates have skyrocketed in the last decade in most of the nations where data on trends is available. The pervasiveness of cell phone ownership in these nations is in part due to a lack of landline connections. Across the 24 countries, a median of only 23% say they have a working landline telephone in their house, including as few as 1% in Ghana and Kenya. Instead, many emerging and developing nations have skipped landlines and moved straight to mobile technology.

Smartphone ownership pales by contrast – there is no country in the study where even half of the population owns a smartphone. Still, this relatively new technology is gaining a foothold in many emerging and developing nations. At least 20% have a smartphone in 11 countries.

In every country polled, there is a significant age gap on smartphone ownership, with people under age 30 much more likely than others to own an iPhone, BlackBerry, or Android device. For instance, 69% of 18- 29 year-olds in China have a smartphone, as do half or more in Lebanon (62%), Chile (55%), Jordan (53%) and Argentina (50%).

Education is also associated with smartphone ownership. In 10 nations, those with a college degree are significantly more likely to own a smartphone than are those who have not graduated from college. This is especially true in the Middle East – in Egypt, for example, 72% of college graduates have a smartphone, compared with only 13% of Egyptians without a college degree.  A huge gap is also found in China, where 83% of college graduates say they own a smartphone, while just 37% of those without a college degree say the same.

Texting Most Popular Use of Cell Phones

Cell phone owners describe a wide variety of uses for their devices. Large majorities in most countries say that they regularly send text messages. Overall, a median of 78% of mobile phone users across the 24 countries send texts, making it the most popular cell phone activity (other than making calls) included on the survey.

Technology 37Taking pictures and video is also a popular activity among cell phone owners, with a median of 54% saying they do this regularly. Compared with text messaging, though, there are a wider variety of responses to this question across the countries. Cell phone owners in Latin America generally are more likely than those in other countries to use mobile phones for this purpose. For instance, two-thirds or more of cell phone owners in Venezuela (77%) and Chile (67%) say they regularly snap pictures or shoot video with their phones. But less than four-in-ten mobile owners in Tunisia (36%), Lebanon (35%), Uganda (27%) and Pakistan (19%) say the same.

A median of only one-in-four cell phone users across the countries surveyed say they access a social networking site regularly on their phone, although a third or more do so in Chile (37%), Venezuela (37%), Lebanon (36%) and Nigeria (34%). This is less popular elsewhere, with as little as 3% in Pakistan and 10% of cell phone owners in Uganda saying they regularly use social networking sites (SNS) on their mobile device such as Facebook, Twitter, and other country-specific examples (see here for full list). Generally, this activity is more popular in Latin America and the Middle East than in Asia and Africa.

Other activities that are less popular across regions include getting political news and information (a median of 16%), getting consumer information such as the prices and availability of products (16%), getting information about health and medicine (15%) and making or receiving payments (11%).

However, there are certain countries and regions where using cell phones to get political and other information is more widespread. For instance, getting political news and information is relatively popular among cell phone owners in Venezuela (39%) and China (31%).

Getting consumer information, such as prices or availability of products, is not a very common activity among cell phone owners in any of the countries surveyed. Still, a quarter or more in Venezuela (29%), Russia (28%) and Chile (25%) say they do this regularly. Similar numbers of mobile users in Venezuela (30%) and Nigeria (28%) say they get information about health and medicine for themselves or their family.

Making or receiving payments is one of the least-used cell phone activities among the countries surveyed, but it is much more common in Africa, especially Kenya (68% of cell phone owners) and Uganda (50%). In the 18 countries surveyed outside of sub-Saharan Africa, a median of only 8% say they use their cell phones for making and receiving payments.

Internet Usage and Social Networking

Technology 5Across the 24 emerging and developing nations surveyed, the percentage of people who are online varies widely. In six nations, half or more use the internet, at least occasionally. In contrast, 25% or less go online in Indonesia (23%), Uganda (12%) and Pakistan (8%).

People who do go online tend to become avid users. Half or more of internet users in most of the countries surveyed say they use it daily.

Consistently, internet usage rates are higher among young people. In every nation surveyed, there are double digit age gaps between adults under age 30 and those 50 and older. And in 19 countries, the gap is more than 30 percentage points.

Internet usage is also strongly correlated with income. Generally, the higher a country’s GDP per capita, the higher its percentage of internet users. The three nations with the highest per capita incomes in this survey – Chile, Argentina and Russia – also have the highest internet usage rates. Meanwhile, these rates are especially low in two of the poorest countries surveyed, Pakistan and Uganda, where roughly nine-in-ten never go online. Some nations, such as Kenya, Jordan, Egypt and Bolivia have more people online than might be anticipated, given their per capita income.
Technology 6
Once people have access to the internet, they tend to engage in social networking. The most popular way in which people use social networking is staying in touch with family and friends. A near-universal median of 96% among social networking users across the 22 countries analyzed say they use SNS for this purpose (Pakistan and Uganda are excluded due to insufficient sample size). Sharing views about pop culture is also common, with a median of 73% saying they use social networks to post opinions on music and movies.
Technology 7
Technology 8Across 22 countries, a median of 38% among social networkers say they share views about politics using social media sites. While not as popular as staying in touch with friends or sharing music and movies, political discourse online is particularly popular in the Middle East and sub-Saharan Africa. In Lebanon, 72% of social networkers say they share views about politics. Six-in-ten or more in Egypt (64%), Jordan (63%) and Tunisia (60%) say they talk about politics on social networks. This activity is also popular in Kenya (68%) and Nigeria (62%).

Religion, like politics, is not at the top of the list of topics for social network users in emerging and developing nations. A median of 43% say they share views about religion on websites like Facebook and Twitter. But again, this activity is more popular in the Middle East and sub-Saharan Africa. Six-in-ten or more social networkers in Nigeria (69%), Jordan (64%), Egypt (60%), and Kenya (60%) share views about religion online. Elsewhere in Asia and Latin America, the practice is less common.

For many in emerging and developing nations, online political dialogue leads to discoveries about the political leanings of people they know. In nine countries, half or more of social networkers say they have learned that someone’s political beliefs were different than they thought, based on something that person posted on a site like Facebook or Twitter. This type of discovery is particularly common in sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America. It happens less often in Egypt, China, Jordan and Turkey.

http://www.pewglobal.org/files/2014/02/Pew-Research-Center-Global-Attitudes-Project-Technology-Report-FINAL-February-13-20146.pdf

 

Twitter for Diplomats: A Guide to the Fastest Growing Digital Diplomacy Tool

Twitter is not only the fastest growing form of social media around, but also a veritable initiation to digital diplomacy for most ambassadors around the globe. Indeed, 140 characters have changed the way we see the world. It has changed how foreign policy is shaped to better respond to new international challenges. In ancient Rome, the phenomenon was called Vox Populi; today it goes under many different names: from ediplomacy to Twiplomacy.

Published online by Diplo, “Twitter for Diplomats” is the first publication to analyze how social media diplomacy helps create – and maintain – a true conversation between policymakers and citizens, between diplomats and foreign publics.

The book is not a manual, nor a list of what to do or not to do. It is rather a collection of information, anecdotes, and experiences. It recounts a few episodes involving foreign ministers and ambassadors, as well as their ways of interacting with the tool and exploring its great potential. It wants to inspire ambassadors and diplomats to open and nurture their accounts – and it wants to inspire all of us to use Twitter to better listen and open our minds.

From Twitterati like US Representative to the United Nations @AmbassadorRice, on the social site since January 2009, to novices like British Ambassador to the United States @PeterWestmacott and his Greek colleague @C_Panag – who both joined earlier this month, it is no secret that all diplomats are looking at Twitter as a way to engage with foreign publics as well as their own citizens.

“Social media exposes foreign policymakers to global audiences while at the same time allowing governments to reach them instantly,” explains Italy’s Foreign Minister @GiulioTerzi in his preface to the book. “Twitter has two big positive effects on foreign policy: it fosters a beneficial exchange of ideas between policymakers and civil society and enhances diplomats’ ability to gather information and to anticipate, analyze, manage, and react to events.”

Whatever we might call this new trend in diplomacy, social media tools such as Twitter have forced diplomats and communicators alike to rethink and redesign diplomacy while putting it in to a different context. In a way, it is as if Twitter diplomacy has been altering the DNA of diplomacy: a sort of genetic adaptation to new technologies.

Adapting, however, takes time, and for diplomacy it might take even longer. Twitter is a very hands-on experience for beginners, but not everybody feels comfortable using it. This is why the need for more research and training is becoming more and more evident. In order to make the most of any digital agenda – and thus of the Twitter experience – it is key to understand how the practice of ediplomacy can contribute to a better foreign policy strategy, both at the bilateral and multilateral level, and how traditional diplomacy can be complemented by new tools.

While information technologies – and advances in the mobile sector in particular – are providing a way to better harness information, it is important to highlight the fact that diplomacies around the world are not moving away from traditional tools; rather, they are exploring new innovative ways to integrate their efforts. It is also important to notice that technology represents the means, not the reason. It is the result of ideas and as such it needs to be directed to better serve our scopes. As volatile as technology can be – mostly because it evolves constantly – what we need to focus on is not technology itself, but the nature of innovation.

Of course diplomats are not technology geeks. Nobody is expecting them to be. Rather than studying technology and applying it to their practice, the job of a diplomat must be to understand how technology can complement diplomacy. The inner working of platforms, clouds, apps, online communities, and social networks is certainly not in the nature of the diplomat’s job.

What matters is to understand how those technologies can be manipulated and shaped around foreign policy goals. As a simple guide on how everyday practitioners use Twitter to interact with people around the globe, “Twitter for diplomats” has a case-oriented approach that makes the publication “particularly useful to understand the dynamics of Twitter diplomacy,” as Foreign Minister @GiulioTerzi said.

In fact, while Twitter’s origins are far from being linked to diplomacy – as its popularity first grew within Hollywood celebrities – it is safe to say it has certainly contributed to an increase of diplomacy’s relevancy in the media and beyond, and has certainly furnished it with better outreach capabilities.

Twitter and other social media tools are a way to abstract foreign policy from state-to-state interaction and instead ‘pivot to the people’ – to quote Princeton University’s @SlaughterAM, a former director of policy planning in the US State Department (2009–2011) and a former dean of the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs – as cabinet ministers, ambassadors, and diplomats try to engage with less traditional actors and players other than governments.

“Speaking directly to citizens – seeing a country’s people, as well as its government – is not just a rhetorical device”, explained Professor @SlaughterAM in a March 2012 article on Project Syndicate.

Twitter can be the first step in into digital diplomacy and open ourselves to a global conversation. But Twitter, Facebook, and the ocean of social media should not be the diplomatic adaptation process. We have to look beyond that. We need to realize how the power of ideas can create better results and transition traditional diplomacy to a new phase, where people are new players, and politicians and diplomats are not elites any longer.

Let’s use Twitter and all ediplomacy tools at our disposal to fully explore the digital potential and to actuate a true pivot, thus making diplomacy the most extraordinary tool our governments can have in fulfilling our foreign policy agendas and engaging with the world.

* Andreas Sandre is a Press and Public Affairs Officer at the Embassy of Italy in Washington DC. The views expressed in the article are the author’s only and do not necessarily reflect those of the Embassy of Italy. On Twitter: @andreas212nyc

By Andreas Sandre on 10 Feb 2013 | From the channel/s: E-diplomacy

http://www.diplomacy.edu/blog/twitter-diplomats-guide-fastest-growing-digital-diplomacy-tool

 

Ten Tips for Governments and Embassies Using Social Media

Earlier this week, APCO Worldwide and Diplomat Magazine hosted a well-attended breakfast event in London, featuring Matt Bostrom, social media expert and senior director of APCO Online, as the guest speaker. Matt shared his insights on how diplomats, embassies and governments could best use social media to achieve their communication goals. Here are his ten tips for governments and embassies looking to use social media in the most effective way. Read them here and download the graphic version at the end of this post.

1. Have a plan. The best communications start with a solid plan. Social media is no different. Planning needs to include consideration of the audience, differentiation, potential issues, and content.

2. Think about a topic of focus. It is difficult to cut through the clutter without any clear focus. Establishing a topic of focus based on your expertise will help you build a following more quickly.

3. Give and take. This is a dialogue, not a broadcast. A great way to build a following is to ask questions of your followers and answer questions they have. Invite them to ask questions.

4. Bring out your personality. Do not try to be funny if you are not funny. Do not simply broadcast news from official sources/channels. Personality goes beyond just writing in the first person; someone that follows you should get a sense of your personality.

5. Diversify channels. There is no point in setting up a specific social media channel just for the sake of it. With a good plan, you’ll know the audience you want to reach. The key is to be on the channels they are on. Don’t be afraid to experiment and try something new.

6. Provide calls to action. Ask your audience to do things. Share their thoughts, attend events, advocate or contribute stories. Build a bridge between your online audience and your offline world.

7. Share specific insights or newsworthy events. You can give your social media audience a reason to follow you by breaking news or sharing items first through social channels.

8. Train staff. It is important that the staff who support social media are well-trained in communications, social media, and crises. They should know what to do in any circumstance.

9. Apologise when needed. So many issues that break online could be solved by a simple apology. Nobody expects perfection.

10. Don’t be afraid to ask for help. The largest companies and most social savvy governments in the world use outside resources to help them get it right. Don’t be afraid to ask for help inside and outside of the organization.

Matt Bostrom is a senior director at APCO Worldwide based in London. You can follow him on Twitter @mbostrom.

http://www.apcoforum.com/ten-tips-for-governments-and-embassies-using-social-media/

Tim Berners-Lee: we need to re-decentralise the web

Tim Berners-Lee with David RowanChris Woods / chrismwoods.com

 

 

Twenty-five years on from the web’s inception, its creator has
urged the public to re-engage with its original design: a
decentralised internet that at its very core, remains open to
all.

Speaking with Wired editor David Rowan at an event launching the
magazine’s March
issue
, Tim Berners-Lee said that although part of this is about
keeping an eye on for-profit internet monopolies such as search
engines and social networks, the greatest danger is the emergence
of a balkanised web.

“I want a web that’s open, works internationally, works as well
as possible and is not nation-based,” Berners-Lee told the
audience, which included  Martha Lane Fox,  Jake Davis (AKA Topiary) and  Lily Cole. He suggested one example to the contrary: “What I
don’t want is a web where the  Brazilian government has every social network’s data stored on
servers on Brazilian soil
. That would make it so difficult to
set one up.”

It’s the role of governments, startups and journalists to keep
that conversation at the fore, he added, because the pace of change
is not slowing — it’s going faster than ever before. For his part
Berners-Lee drives the issue through his work at the Open Data
Institute, World Wide Web Consortium and World Wide Web Foundation,
but also as an MIT professor whose students are “building new
architectures for the web where it’s decentralised”. On the issue
of monopolies, Berners-Lee did say it’s concerning to be “reliant
on big companies, and one big server”, something that stalls
innovation, but that competition has historically resolved these
issues and will continue to do so.

The kind of balkanised web he spoke about, as typified by
Brazil’s home-soil servers argument orIran’s
emerging intranet, is partially being driven by revelations of
NSA and GCHQ mass surveillance. The distrust that it has brewed,
from a political level right down to the threat of self-censorship
among ordinary citizens, threatens an open web and is, said
Berners-Lee,  a greater threat than censorship. Knowing the NSA  may be breaking commercial encryption services could
result in the emergence of more networks like China’s Great
Firewall, to “protect” citizens. This is why we need a bit of
anti-establishment push back, alluded to by Berners-Lee.

He reiterated the need to  protect whistleblowers like Edward Snowden that leak
information only in extreme circumstances “because they have this
role in society”. But more than this, he noted the need for
hackers.

“It’s a really important culture, it’s important to have the
geek community as a whole think about its responsibility and what
it can do. We need various alternative voices pushing back on
conventional government sometimes.”

In the midst of so much political and social disruption, the man
who changed the course of communication, education, activism and so
much more, and in so many ways, remains dedicated to fighting for a
web founded in freedom and openness. But when asked what he would
have done differently, the answer was easy. “I would have got rid
of the slash slash after the colon. You don’t really need it. It
just seemed like a good idea at the time.”

 

 

Read more about The Web @ 25 in the March issue
of Wired
.

The False Promise of Digital Democracy

Katinka Barysch

Katinka Barysch is Director of Political Relations at Allianz SE.

MUNICH – Most people used to think of the Internet as a force for good. It was supposed to allow us not only to shop, stay in touch with former classmates, and find a new sushi restaurant; it was also supposed to empower us politically by allowing the disenfranchised to make their voices heard, help activists mobilize supporters, and enable ordinary citizens to publicize evidence of official corruption or police brutality.

But doubts have crept in – and not only since the revelations of government agencies’ use of the Internet to spy on us, our leaders, and one another. The Internet’s impact on politics is deeply ambiguous. Unless and until it becomes a space where rules and rights apply like they do in the real world, that is unlikely to change.

Early enthusiasts dreamed that mere access to the Internet would help spread democracy. This did not happen. At the end of the 1990’s, 4% of the world’s population was using the Internet; today, almost 40% do. But the share of countries classified as “not free” or “partly free” by the democracy watchdog Freedom House has hardly changed over the same period. In the battle between networks and hierarchies, the hierarchies seem to be winning more often than not.

One reason is that governments have become as skillful at using the Internet and modern communications technology as activists. Autocratic governments use it to track down protest and opposition leaders, as we have recently seen in Ukraine. They employ armies of people to vet and skew online conversations. Some people even argue that the Internet acts as a political release valve that helps dictators stay in power.

But even the most determined autocrat cannot fully control political activity online. Tech-savvy young people tend to circumvent attempts at official censorship. And yet Internet activists are not necessarily gaining power.

Internet-inspired movements usually have lasting impact only if they generate traditional political activity, such as street protests or the establishment of political parties. For this, they need leadership, which net activists tend to reject, because they view themselves as pure grassroots movements. In the absence of viable strategies and clear direction, most Internet-aided uprisings have dissipated quickly.

The Internet has thus turned out to be less potent than expected in the fight against tyranny. Nor is its effect on established democracies straightforward. While democracies have arguably become more vibrant, their politics have become more volatile.

Consider the media. Only 16% of Americans in their 40’s read (print) newspapers these days; the share among 20-somethings is 6%. Digital media offer great diversity, easy access, and opportunities to comment. But they encourage people to retrieve only information and commentaries that fit their existing views. While traditional media can present their readers with balanced coverage, digital media can fuel political polarization.

Moreover, political firebrands, populists, and radicals, from Italy’s Beppe Grillo to American Tea Party members, use social media and the blogosphere to appeal directly to potential supporters. The Internet allows many political upstarts to amass a large following quickly, only to disappear just as fast. But the ebb and flow can unsettle established politics – for example, when centrist parties move to the right to lure voters away from more extreme parties.

At the same time, young people seem to think that they have exhausted their civic duties by tweeting and blogging. They no longer join political parties, trade unions, and other interest groups. The average age of party members in Germany is over 50. In the United Kingdom, a retiree over 60 is more likely to be a trade-union member than a worker under 30 is. Without civil-society organizations, politics becomes more fragmented and less cohesive – and finding workable compromises becomes harder.

The revelations of snooping by the US National Security Agency (NSA) will hasten a more realistic assessment of the Internet’s effect on politics, providing a welcome opportunity to consider what has gone wrong and what could be put right.

A multitude of small steps could help – such as giving pro-democracy movements the technology needed to evade autocrats, presenting digital media in a balanced way, and making political parties more responsive to their members. But the fundamental challenge is to suffuse the Internet with the same rules, rights, and values that pervade our democracies.

Freedom cannot be absolute, whether online or offline. Human rights, and not only the right to personal privacy, must be respected in cyberspace. Because no single body or government sets rules for the entire Internet, any digital code of conduct would have to emerge from the grassroots – and thus would be highly imperfect. But perhaps the NSA has helped start the discussion: though we may not know which rules we want, we may now have gained a much better idea of which rules we do not want.

http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/katinka-barysch-explains-why-the-internet-has-not-led-to-better-politics
Read more at http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/katinka-barysch-explains-why-the-internet-has-not-led-to-better-politics#9Olw0mq0GSXMhFDz.99

Engaging North Korea with Science Diplomacy

Engaging North Korea with Science Diplomacy

By Linda Staheli

When one thinks of diplomatic engagement with North Korea – officially the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) – what comes to mind are countless official and unofficial dialogues and negotiations regarding its nuclear capabilities peppered with various incentives, typically in the form of food, fertilizer, and energy assistance. At this particularly unsettling time in relations with the DPRK, where key official communication avenues are increasingly limited, it is more important than ever to open new channels of engagement. Non-official exchanges, involving non-governmental organizations (NGOs), universities, and private companies, can and do play a critical role. These must be expanded, however, as citizens often have the potential to do what governments cannot. Fortunately, such citizen-to-citizen engagements generally have been encouraged by both governments: in recent years, the DPRK has sent economic, medical, and sports related delegations to the United States; and a number of official and unofficial U.S. delegations have traveled to the DPRK, including the New York Philharmonic, former President Jimmy Carter, former Governor Bill Richardson, Google Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt, and most recently, retired basketball star Dennis Rodman.

US-DPRK Science Consortium delegation to Pyongyang in 2009 ©Linda Stahelil

Among the many avenues for engagement, science diplomacy deserves special recognition. Scientists, engineers, and innovators are problem solvers who speak a common global language and value transparency, fairness, logic, reasoning, and questioning. While cultural diplomacy such as music and sports can be a source of entertainment and enrichment, science diplomacy via research partnerships in such areas as agriculture, health, or environmental sciences can help – albeit over a long time period – give a country the ability to prosper, grow, and deepen practical ties. Over the past 20 years, I’ve had the privilege of witnessing the multitude of benefits of engaging globally to tackle challenging issues by implementing science and innovation engagements with Japan, South Korea, Russia, South Africa, Mexico, and various European countries.

CRDF Global Charles Dunlap presents on Virtual Science Library (VSL) to the President of Kim Chaek University, at Syracuse University in 2010 ©Linda Stahelil

CRDF Global, an NGO created by the U.S. Congress that specializes in building global science engagements, helped to found the U.S.-DPRK Scientific Engagement Consortium with colleagues from Syracuse University, the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), the Pacific Century Institute (PCI), and the DPRK State Academy of Sciences (SAOS). We spent two years building understanding and trust with our DPRK colleagues – on a foundation established by Syracuse University, by meeting with senior leadership of the DPRK United Nations Mission (the only official representative in the U.S.), and bringing these officials to AAAS annual meetings in Boston, Chicago, and San Diego. In 2009, we were the first U.S. science delegation hosted by the SAOS in Pyongyang, where we visited scientific institutes, met with students, gave and listened to lectures, and signed an agreement that resulted in a DPRK delegation traveling to Atlanta, GA in 2011. During that exchange we continued to build our understanding of how best to establish U.S.-DPRK partnerships in non-sensitive but critical areas of research. This involved scientists and officials from other organizations and universities, including the Carter Center, Emory University, Georgia Institute of Technology, Johns Hopkins University, Stanford University, University of Georgia, and the University of Missouri.

DPRK delegation scientists engage with agricultural scientist at Univ. of Georgia in 2011 ©Linda Staheli

Following these reciprocal delegation visits and with the support of the Henry Luce Foundation, we then launched a number of capacity-building efforts outlined in our joint agreements, including training DPRK scientists in the English language and enabling internet access to global publications via a virtual science library. The next step is to identify one of a number of proposals the DPRK presented at a workshop CRDF Global organized on behalf of the Consortium in 2012 at the Rockefeller Foundation’s Bellagio Center in Italy, aimed at building possible collaborations in non-sensitive areas of research, such as watershed management, deforestation, biodiversity, salmon hatcheries, and ecology restoration. Projects like these have the potential to address critical issues of environmental insecurity in the DPRK and make a tangible impact on the quality of lives of its citizens.

Author signs second agreement with DPRK SAOS in Atlanta in 2011 ©Linda Staheli

While our DPRK counterparts have had limited funding, they have been incredibly responsive, knowledgeable, resourceful, hospitable, and shown a deep interest and commitment to our joint collaboration. Science diplomacy has ambitious objectives, but its ability to bring people together, irrespective of geopolitical factors, is remarkable. Our informal interactions have included playing ping pong in Pyongyang‘s Koryo Hotel, sharing stories of our children, singing songs in an Atlanta brew house, and listening to “American Pie” by Madonna in the Grand People’s Study House. We watched as our Nobel Laureate delegation leader sang the periodic table in his toast at the welcome dinner, and later presented as a farewell gift the tie that he wore when he received the Nobel Prize in Chemistry. Through many conversations and engagements, we have come to learn that our science colleagues in the DPRK are not so different from us. They want peace and prosperity, respect, and the ability to solve their own challenges. Despite this desire, the DPRK’s isolation means that it lacks the ability to transform its economy without outside assistance. Development aid, such as fertilizer or food, has an important humanitarian function and can support relations during negotiations, but collaboration with scientists and engineers is fundamentally necessary to support the long-term development of the state. Engagement on technical issues is thus an essential requirement for future transformation of the DPRK.

CDRF Global Stuart Politi leads English Language for SAOS scientists in Pyongyang in 2012 ©Linda Staheli

In sum, while science engagement is not a panacea for the tensions that have recurred between the U.S. and the DPRK, it has the potential over the long term to significantly boost joint objectives in understanding critical scientific challenges, while helping the DPRK move into the global science community. At the same time, it gives the U.S. a window into a country that we need to better understand, in the hopes that over time we can build a stronger foundation and move together toward a more hopeful, secure and amicable future.

DPRK SAOS opens internet to its students in 2012 in preparation for VSL ©Linda Staheli

CRDF Global specializes in building global science engagements, particularly in challenging environments. Starting with the states of Eurasia then branching out to Iraq, other Middle Eastern countries, and now globally, CRDF Global works in over 40 countries to build capacity, research exchanges, and innovation engagements that give hope to countries seeking to build peace and prosperity. For more information on science diplomacy click here. The Consortium website can be found by clicking here.

Below is a selected collection of recent news articles on North Korea and public diplomacy aggregated by the PDiN news team. To full a full list of PDiN articles on North Korea, visit #north korea:

Ditching Pyongyang More Disastrous Option
Global Times

A Rare Glimpse of North Korea’s Version of Facebook
The Washington Post

Dennis Rodman: North Korea ‘Pretty Much Like Any Other Country’
Los Angeles Times

In North Korea, Diplomacy Walks a Tightrope
The Reporter

Google Chief Presses North Korea on Internet Access
The Wall Street Journal

To view CPD’s work in Science Diplomacy, click here.

Author Biography
CRDF Global Senior Staff Associate Linda Staheli has more than twenty years of experience advancing international science engagements and another ten years addressing arms control and national security issues. She has been with CRDF Global for the past 14 years managing governmental relations and science diplomacy outreach, including founding and serving as secretariat (2007-2012) for the US-DPRK Science Engagement Consortium. Before joining CRDF Global, Ms. Staheli directed the NIH Division of International Relations at the Fogarty International Center, managed international relations for the President’s Science Advisor at the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), and then served at the US Department of State managing US government S&T relations with Japan and South Korea and then managing the Central and East European Joint S&T Funds. Other employers include RAND, Council for a Livable World, and the Democratic National Committee. Ms. Staheli has served in various volunteer capacities, including co-President of Women in International Security (WIIS), the Global-HELP Advisory Board, and on as a Member of the National Committee on North Korea. Ms. Staheli holds an M.A. in Public Management with a focus on national security studies from the School of Public Affairs, University of Maryland, and a B.A. in International Studies from the Jackson School of International Studies, University of Washington in Seattle.

http://uscpublicdiplomacy.org/index.php/pdin_monitor/article/spring_2013_the_view_from_cpd1/

Soccer diplomacy

Mesut Özil, Anja Mittag, Otto Pfister – many German coaches and players work abroad and are viewed as representatives for their country. The 2013 German football ambassador is to be named at a ceremony on May 13.

German football ambassadors 2013

Many German footballers represent their country abroad. The German football ambassador initiative is to honor their involvement and has nominated 11 players for the audience award. You can choose your favorite at http://www.fussballbotschafter.de/voting.

Podolski, Özil, Khedira, Mertesacker

Germany is one of the world’s leading footballing nations and many of its players and coaches work abroad. While plying their trade internationally, they also serve as unofficial representatives of their country. The German Football Ambassador initiative honors the engagement of these coaches and players with annual awards. The football ambasssador for 2013 is to be chosen on May 13.

http://www.dw.de/soccer-diplomacy/g-16701476

Event Review: Ambassador Don Beyer on American Public Diplomacy

Don Beyer and Paul Hamill

On Tuesday, ASP Board Member Ambassador Don Beyer spoke on his experiences as Ambassador to Switzerland and Liechtenstein. Outlining the three roles of an ambassador as 1.) government to government diplomacy, 2.) economic statecraft, and 3.) public diplomacy, Beyer presented on a myriad of topics relevant to U.S. relations with Switzerland, ranging from the Iranian nuclear program to trade and business policy.

In discussing public diplomacy, Beyer broke the practice into three elements: listening, learning and leading.

To employ these elements, Beyer suggested taking the approach of a political campaign, breaking Switzerland down into its local political entities and applying a strategy become a presence in as many of these states and districts as possible.

During his remarks, Beyer made special emphasis of his efforts in listening, and seeking to build relationships and connections by decreasing the “degrees of separation” between himself and the Swiss people. This included visiting all 26 cantons (states), and making himself as accessible as possible: including being seen places you wouldn’t expect to see an American ambassador. Demonstrating his openness in Switzerland, Beyer hosted over 6000 visitors and more than 400 overnight guests at his home.

He also commented on the importance of learning, noting his concurrence with many foreign services officers that it was incredibly important for an ambassador to become the expert on the host country. That means knowing the culture, the history, and the language(s) of that country, as well as the subtleties of its political system.

Beyer also covered many lessons about Switzerland that he felt could be beneficial to the U.S. to better understand. This included, but was not limited to, policies related to passing a balanced budget, education spending, concordance politics, land use planning, farming, and business practices.

Don BeyerIn leading public diplomacy efforts, Beyer contended that influence in public diplomacy comes through building relationships and being able to tell the American story. More effective at accomplishing strategic ends than simply advocating U.S. policy, Beyer felt that better explaining the intricacies of America’s story beyond its sometimes misleading outward appearance tends to help change minds. This includes the role of women in politics and business, immigration, American efforts to combat climate change, and more.

Additionally, Beyer spoke briefly on some of the institutional challenges that the foreign service and U.S. missions overseas face. For instance, the restrictions placed on building web content as a U.S. mission means that the U.S. reacts and produces content much more slowly than private industry. While this is improving, private industry has much more freedom to act promptly and readily than the U.S. Government. Of particular note, Beyer noted that the relatively short terms served by Ambassadors in-country tends to make building effective relationships difficult.

Overall, Ambassador Beyer presented a compelling and informative case about how Ambassadors are elemental to the practice of diplomacy, whether traditional or public. If you missed the event, please be sure to check the video, audio, and photos included below.


Ranking of Governments Engaged in Digital Diplomacy Through Social Media

The concept of Digital Diplomacy (sometimes called Virtual Diplomacy) is fairly new, arguably coming to the forefront of international affairs as a result of the failed Green Revolution in Iran in 2009 where social media played a role, albeit ambiguously in its effect. Then came the Arab Spring and the use of Facebook and other tools. Today, the most active governments are the U.S. and UK in using social media as Digital Diplomacy tools. Below we’ve provided a ranking of which democratic and non-democratic countries are most active in terms of international relations through digital media in Cyberspace.

Democratic Governments Using Social Media for Digital Diplomacy
As the graph below shows, the U.S. government leads the way with a foreign affairs department using social media actively to promote its foreign policy with a close second from the UK FCO. Australia is third but coming up fast. For the most part however, most governments tend to “broadcast” and not engage in dialogue. This graph “ranks” a government based on a) volume of content created and pushed across digital channels, b) number of channels they are active in and c) number of “entities” or people that push out content from that department. The highest a government can achieve for activity is a 9.

 

 

Democratic Governments Engaging in Dialogue with Foreign Citizens for Digital Diplomacy
Without a doubt, Australia leads in terms of responding to inquiries and having, albeit short, bursts of engagement with citizens from other countries. Behind them is the Netherlands and then the UK. We term “engagement” as responding to inquiries and questions and occasionally in Twitter, re-tweeting content from someone else. Engaging in dialogue however, can be a challenge for a government in international affairs as there can be serious implications. Over time, as diplomatic services become more familiar with and comfortable in the use of social media, engagement levels will likely change.

Methodology
For this research we used our proprietary software to analyze the Twitter accounts of confirmed government foreign affairs departments and then looked at traffic and engagement across blogs, Facebook and any other social networks such as YouTube. Rankings are designed to understand the level of activity use by each government in a channel. Human analysts then completed the work through link and data verification.

– See more at: http://www.mediabadger.com/2012/04/ranking-of-governments-engaged-in-digital-diplomacy-through-social-media/#sthash.wpCfNlNr.dpuf

 

 

Канцеларија за јавну и културну дипломатију