See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/321488296

Digital Diplomacy for Image Building and Nation Branding: The Ethiopian
Context

Thesis · December 2017

CITATIONS READS

0 6,616

1 author:

Hibamo Ayalew Basha

Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ethiopia
6 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Hibamo Ayalew Basha on 04 December 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Ethiopian Civil Service University
School of Diplomacy & International Relations
(SDIR)

Digital Diplomacy for Image Building and Nation Branding: The Ethiopian Context

By

Hibamo Ayalew

ID No

ECSU 140073

A Thesis Submitted to the School of Diplomacy and International Relations

Ethiopian Civil Service University in partial Fulfilment of the
Requirements for the Masters of Art Degree in Diplomacy and
International Relations

Adviser

Boniface Cuthbert Bwanyire

(Associate Professor)

Ethiopian Civil Service University

27 February 2017
Digital Diplomacy for Image Building and Nation Branding: The Ethiopian Context

By

Hibamo Ayalew

Adviser

Boniface Cuthbert Bwanyire

(Associate Professor)

Ethiopian Civil Service University

27 February 2017
 DECLARATION

I declare that this thesis is my original work and that all sources of materials used in this
thesis have been duly acknowledged. I solemnly declare that this thesis has not been
submitted to any other institution anywhere for the award of any academic degree, diploma,
or certificate. This thesis has been submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the
Masters of Arts (MA) in Diplomacy and International Relations degree at the Ethiopian Civil
Service University (ECSU) and may be deposited at the University Library for access to
borrowers under rules of the Library.

Brief quotations from this thesis are allowable without special permission provided accurate
acknowledgement of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from
or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by relevant authorities
of the ECSU if it is deemed the proposed use of the material is in the interests of scholarship.
In all other instances, however, permission must be obtained from the author.

Name: Hibamo Ayalew Basha

Signature: .............................................

Place: Ethiopian Civil Service University

Date: 27 February 2017

 SCHOOL OF DIPLOMACY & INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
(SDIR)

ETHIOPIAN CIVIL SERVICE UNIVERSITY

(ECSU)

APPROVAL

We certify that the thesis prepared by:……………………………………………………,

entitled:
..................................................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................................................
...................................................................................................................., has undergone
due process of examination and hereby recommend that it be accepted as fulfilling the thesis
requirement for the degree of: Master of Arts (MA) in Diplomacy and International
Relations of the Ethiopian Civil Service University.

Name of Adviser D/Director: School of Diplomacy & International Relations

........................................................ ...............................................................................................

Signature: Signature:

........................................................ ...............................................................................................

Date: Date:
........................................................ ...............................................................................................
Acknowledgements
First of all, I would like to express my deepest appreciation to the respondents for their
cooperation. I am particularly grateful for the assistance given by my thesis adviser
Boniface Cuthbert Bwanyire (Ass. Prof.). My special thanks are extended to the staff of
Foreign Media Relations Directorate at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ethiopia for their
assistance with the collection of data.

A fronte praceipitium a tergo lupi

i
 Table of Contents
Acknowledgements .............................................................................................................. i
List of Acronyms/Abbreviations ....................................................................................... iii
List of Appendices ............................................................................................................. iv
Abstract ............................................................................................................................... v
Chapter One: Introduction to the Study .............................................................................. 1
1.0. Introduction .......................................................................................................... 1
1.1. Background of the Study ...................................................................................... 1
1.2. Problem Statement................................................................................................ 2
1.3. Research Gap ........................................................................................................... 3
1.4. Research Questions .................................................................................................. 3
1.5. Significance of the Study ......................................................................................... 4
1.6. Scope of the Study ................................................................................................... 4
1.7. Description of the Study Area .................................................................................. 5
1.8. Limitations ............................................................................................................... 5
1.9. Operationalization .................................................................................................... 6
1.10. Operational Definition of Terms ............................................................................ 6
1.11. Structure of the Study............................................................................................. 7
Chapter Two: Literature Review ......................................................................................... 8
2.0. Introduction .............................................................................................................. 8
2.1. Theoretical Literature Review .................................................................................. 8
2.2. Empirical Literature Review .................................................................................. 13
2.3. Challenges in Selfie Diplomacy in A Nutshell ...................................................... 32
2.4. Measuring National Brands .................................................................................... 35
Chapter Three: Research Design ....................................................................................... 37
3.0. Introduction ............................................................................................................ 37
3.2. Research Method .................................................................................................... 37
3.3. Sampling ................................................................................................................ 38
3.4. Data Collection Instruments ................................................................................... 39
3.5. Discussion of Instruments Applied ........................................................................ 39
3.6. Data Analysis Techniques ...................................................................................... 40
3.7. Ethical Considerations ........................................................................................... 40
Chapter Four: Data Analysis and Findings ....................................................................... 41
4.0. Introduction ............................................................................................................ 41
4.1. Discussion of Findings ........................................................................................... 41
5. Conclusions and Recommendations ............................................................................. 48
5.0. Introduction ............................................................................................................ 48
5.1. Conclusions ............................................................................................................ 48
5.2. Recommendations .................................................................................................. 49
References ......................................................................................................................... 51
Appendices ........................................................................................................................ 54
Appendix 1: Interview Guide ........................................................................................ 54

ii
List of Acronyms/Abbreviations
BBC – British Broadcasting Corporation
BDI – Federation of German Industries
BIS – Department for Business, Innovation, and Skills
CBI – Country Brand Index
DFA – Department for Foreign Affairs
DFAI – Canadian Defence and Foreign Affairs Institute
DFATD – The Canadian Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade, and Development
DIRCO – Department of International Relations and Cooperation
ETO – Ethiopian Tourism Organization
FCO – Foreign and Commonwealth Office
GCI – Good Country Index
GfK - Gesellschaft für Konsumforschung
IBEF – India Brand Equity Foundation
ICTs – Information and Communication Technologies
IMCSA – International Marketing Council of South Africa
IRSN – Zurich International Relations and Security Network
MCI – Ministry of Commerce and Industry
MEA – Ministry of External Affairs
MENA – Middle Eastern and North Africa
MFA – Ministry of Foreign Affairs
MINAFFET - Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation of Rwanda
MNCs – Multi-National Corporations
NB – nation branding
NBISM – Anholt-GfK Nation Brands IndexSM
PDCDG – Public Diplomacy and Communications Directorate General
PR – Public Relations
R&D – Research and Development
RSA – The Republic of South Africa
SNA – Social Network Analysis
SNS – Social Network Sites
SNT – Social Network Theory
UK – United Kingdom
UKTI – UK Trade and Investment
UNESCO – United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
WWW – World Wide Web

iii
List of Appendices

Appendix 1: Interview Guide……………………………………………………54

iv
Abstract

In the last few years, digital diplomacy has become a conduit of transformation within the
foreign ministry of Ethiopia. As states are competing on every front, it is helping them build
and project their nation’s soft power, viz. attractiveness and persuasiveness. In the same
fashion, many countries have engaged digital diplomacy to promote their country’s unique
national identity. They are striving to leverage the unprecedented opportunities digital
diplomacy presents and address the challenges it poses to create, project and evaluate their
country’s national brand.

Accordingly, this paper argues that the rudimentary nature of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
of Ethiopia’s digital diplomacy has severely hampered the branding Ethiopia initiative. By
employing the qualitative research approach this study has tried to address the problem
stated, the role digital diplomacy plays in building Ethiopia’s image and reputation. The
study also has identified the four key challenges – novelty, a wide digital divide, the absence
of a unique country brand and clear policy guidelines - that are hindering the efficacy of
digital diplomacy to brand Ethiopia. Considering these challenges and predicating on the
literature available on the role of digital diplomacy in nation branding, this study has
concluded that the Ethiopian MFA’s current model of digital diplomacy, if not transformed
to be more open and dialogue-driven, is ill-suited to the proper articulation and projection
of Ethiopia’s brand. This research will, hopefully, be advantageous to the MFA of Ethiopia
in its efforts to build an innovative and participatory digital diplomacy that fuels integrated
nation branding thereby enhancing the MFA’s and Ethiopia’s soft power.

Key words: Digital Diplomacy, Nation Branding, Selfie Diplomacy, Nation Brands Index,
Image, Reputation, Soft Power, Dialogue, Social Media, Public Diplomacy, Selfie Diplomacy

v
Chapter One: Introduction to the Study

1.0. Introduction

In his October 2014 interview (The Oxford Department of International Development, 2014)
with Corneliu Bjola, James Pamment, commenting on ways to deal with methodological
issues and practical challenges of conducting research on Public Diplomacy (PD) specified
three features of what has come to be known as New Public Diplomacy. According to him,
digital diplomacy, change in the expectations of people from the government and
globalization are the string pullers of the nascent field of PD.

Currently digital diplomacy (DD) is playing multifarious pivotal roles in the process of
nation branding. Nowadays, DD and nation branding (NB) are intricately related concepts
that gave life to the thriving practice of selfie diplomacy. As part of its efforts to address
various issues in the conduct of foreign relations Ethiopia lacks frameworks that could help
properly harness the opportunities offered by DD. Despite that, Ethiopia, especially through
its Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA, henceforth) is striving hard to put its unique country
brand or else diplomatic footprint on the world stage thereby promoting its positive and
multifarious image abroad though lacking in sophistication.

By way of introduction, this study will subsequently try to shed light on the conventional
issues related to the nature of DD vis-à-vis NB and image building, the theoretical
implications of DD, the concept of NB vis-à-vis image building, the impacts, pros, and cons
of DD and at last, the impacts and current state of its utilization at the Ethiopian MFA.

Put precisely, this chapter deals with the key issues of on what rationale the study is based,
why the issue under investigation is significant to various stakeholders and what relevant
questions are posed to explore the depth of the topic. In due process this chapter also unravels
the methodological limitations and the way the research design has been operationalized to
address the problem properly.

1.1. Background of the Study

The emergence of the Internet in the early ‘90s gave birth to social media. Ever since, these
new media platforms have been tremendously influencing the nature of human interactions.
Social media have provided a new public sphere characterized by multiplicity of actors,
instantaneous communication and non-hierarchicality. By enabling users to express
themselves publicly in ways never thought of before, they have bequeathed new power to

1
the individual. By providing a virtual public sphere that is relatively free from the strictures
of the physical public sphere, social media enticingly urge their users to boldly voice out
their opinions. They pressure the individual to put his voice out there in the echo chambers
of individualized discourses thereby influencing the nature of issue-related collective actions
and the public perception of a certain issue. By presenting the users with a myriad of
networking opportunities with people around the globe who share similar interests, these
tools have served as sources of new information and new ideas. As has been witnessed in
the last decade, the unprecedented opportunities offered by social media to the individual
have revolutionized political engagement and opinion formation. During the 2011 Arab
Spring, protestors (both activists and ordinary ones) used social media to inform, organize
and mobilize their cohorts and followers to bring about social changes in their respective
countries. This and other related social media empowered political upheavals from Ukraine
to the Philippines to Tunisia to Egypt and Libya have alerted states to reconsider their
reluctant and negligent position. In time states came to embrace social media as means of
tapping into, swaying, and often regimenting public opinion. This in turn has demanded that
governments also play an active role in creating, disseminating, and controlling their
narratives. These narratives gradually became the calibre for measuring the degree to which
countries are perceived – favourably or negatively – by their respective publics. Ironically,
a lot depends on how the public perceives a country’s rhetoric and actions. To properly lure
the public perception in their favour, states adopted DD. At the forefront of this venture are
foreign ministries.

Like any other novel practice the overall of process of adaptation to selfie diplomacy has
been replete with inertia. In spite of it, however, the MFA remains the principal conduit of
change and continuity. In extension, the MFA of Ethiopia has been duly selected as the
milieu of this research into DD fuelled NB. Apropos of the Ministry’s DD, the prime focus
is on the Digital Diplomacy Directorate (DDD) within the Public Diplomacy and
Communications Directorate General (PDCDG). The DDD as a body responsible for
handling the official social media outlets of the Ministry is tasked with the daunting task of
traversing the nascent and complex field of selfie diplomacy.

1.2. Problem Statement

Apart from the novelty of DD to the conventional modus operandi of the Ethiopian MFA’s
diplomacy, the urgent need for the creation of a conducive environment suited to the proper

2
formation of a reliable dialogic loop between the Ministry and its foreign publics make it an
interesting area of research. The innovative creation of a dynamic and grassroots dialogic
loop is a determinant element in the creation, articulation and projection of Ethiopia’s image
and reputation. Ethiopia’s image is in turn expressed through the presence or lack thereof a
comprehensively developed unique country brand.

As of the Ethiopian context, the concept of DD has so far been accorded a lukewarm
attention. Mostly it did not surpass the rudimentary application of social media tools to the
oft unattractive conduct of unsophisticated, monologue-laden global public relations.
Previously it could adamantly be stated that there were little or no holistic and national
efforts invested to the institutional and public understanding and the considerate application
of DD to the attainment of Ethiopia’s foreign policy interests. It could be best exemplified
by the construction of a reliable pool of soft power of Ethiopia and the MFA of Ethiopia
overseas.

Cutting to the chases, the intended or the otherwise unintended negligence of this budding
and at times unpredictable and challenging field of DD as an academic endeavour or policy
research could cost Ethiopia dearly. Here, it is also imperative that attention be paid to the
fact that despite its nascent nature Ethiopian DD’s level of innovativeness must be assessed.
It is, for instance, crucial to shed light on the MFA of Ethiopia’s DD’s extent of openness to
its followers’ participation. A good example in this respect could be to find out whether the
Ministry poses questions or asks for solutions to certain problems to its followers.

1.3. Research Gap

1. Very few researches conducted on the use of digital diplomacy at the time in Ethiopia
in general and the Ethiopian Ministry of Foreign Affairs

2. Little or no research into branding or re-branding from a diplomatic rather than

marketing approaches

3. An attempt to bridge the gap left behind by the negligence of the issue in the studies
conducted by various scholars and researchers in the country, especially in the fields
of diplomacy, international relations, public relations

1.4. Research Questions

Predicating on the problem articulated above, the following questions are posed.

1. What is the relationship between DD and NB?

3
 2. What roles does DD play in the overall practice of NB by states?
3. How is the notion and practice of NB affecting the DD of states apropos of image
building and reputation management?
4. What are the challenges and opportunities involved in the strategic efforts of states
to brand their national identities and reputations via DD?
5. What significance does DD play in digitally managing Ethiopia’s unique
international reputation and image?

1.5. Significance of the Study

Treated under this sub-heading explicitly are the overall significance of this study to the
academia, the government and its agencies, civil societies, and the Ethiopian Diaspora.

1.5.1. Academic Significance

This research paper may resolve certain theoretical questions and inspire academicians to
undertake other studies in the areas of international relations, PD, especially DD, public
policy, and political communications.

1.5.2. Significance to the Government

In this age of unhinged globalization, this study may influence policies related to PD,
reputation management and DD in Ethiopia’s foreign relations. It could also positively affect
the way diplomats conduct DD and engage with their foreign publics. In practical terms, it
could motivate contemporary diplomats to urgently leverage the soft power potentials of DD
for the economic, cultural, and political interest of Ethiopia.

1.5.3. Significance to Civil Societies and Diaspora Communities

Apart from elucidating the role those stakeholders play in DD it might help them develop
frameworks through which they could engage with their respective audiences – both
government and non-government i.e. both elite and non-elite audiences alike.

1.6. Scope of the Study

This study is mainly dedicated to the analysis of the impacts, challenges and opportunities
of Ethiopia’s DD supported NB efforts since February 2013. As such, the research is
delimited to the role DD plays in building Ethiopia’s positive image and reputation.

4
1.7. Description of the Study Area

The current Ethiopian MFA is a government agency established under Proclamation 4/1995
on 23 August 1995. Since then the MFA have had almost five successive Foreign Ministers:
Seyoum Mesfin (1991- 2010), Hailemariam Dessalegn (2010-2012), Berhane Gebrekristos
(acting, 2012), Tedros Adhanom (2012-2016) and Workineh Gebeyehu (November 2016 –
present).

Its principal responsibility being to supervise the overall foreign relations of Ethiopia, the
Ministry has around thirteen Directorate Generals responsible for the follow up of relevant
issues and decisions regarding Ethiopia. Starting from the formulation of the Foreign Affairs
and National Security Policy and Strategy to the promulgation of the Ethiopian Diaspora
Policy together with the forthcoming Digital Diplomacy Guideline of Ethiopia the MFA of
Ethiopia has been instrumental in managing Ethiopia reputation among its foreign publics.
With the purpose of putting Ethiopia on the global map of country brands it has formed the
PDCDG. To the same effect, a separate directorate – the DDD – has been designed under
the PDCDG that exclusively focuses on the arena of digital diplomacy, be it the provision
of news and other relevant up-to-date information or else the recent acts of fostering digital-
diplomacy empowered culinary diplomacy or else the posting of informative blog posts on
its official blog.

In fine, the PDCDG, in general and the DDD, in particular is responsible for the management
of Ethiopia’s official digital diplomacy that principally aims at the gradual attainment of
predetermined foreign policy goals on the political, socio-cultural, and economic fronts. In
its current undertakings, the DDD is said to be playing significant yet at times outmoded
role in upholding the virtual reputation of the country on the World Wide Web (WWW).

1.8. Limitations

When it comes to researching such novelties in a country where there is little or no interest
in R&D rather on the pragmatic application (exclusive focus on what works), there are
several impediments, mostly methodological ones that the researcher could possibly face.
While studying the pivotal yet debatable role DD plays in putting Ethiopia’s national image
out there on the global reputation pedestal there were several technical as well as tactical
challenges faced. Inter alia, lack of public available and reliable data, lack of prior studies
on the subject matter, particularly from a diplomatic and international relations perspective,
and the overabundance of self-reported data that is mostly rosy, especially in terms of

5
attribution of negative outcomes to external entities and exaggeration of positive
organizational achievements were the principal methodological/procedural predicaments
faced. In addition, limited access to relevant documents and certain key people posed
challenges to the researcher. Most importantly, the amount of time devoted to the study of
this topic i.e. short and pressure-laden, deprived the researcher of the longitudinal effects he
could have brought to the field through devotion and meticulous interdisciplinary curation.

1.9. Operationalization

Apropos of the implementation of the research design proposed here, its application in the
research was of prior importance. As such, this study into the complex set of relations
between DD and NB, the role of the former in the latter, depends on the blueprint set for it
for the period 1 November to 7 December 2016. During that period, the data necessary for
this study was collected from primary sources through unstructured interviews and from
secondary sources that are either published or unpublished literary and documentary
sources. Considering this arrangement, the 10 interviewees selected were interviewed from
25 to 28 November 2016. Parallel to these undertakings, research questions were framed to
ensure the pertinent problems touched upon in this study are properly addressed.

1.10. Operational Definition of Terms

For the purpose of this study the contextual definitions of key terms used were the following:

Brand – A name, term, design, symbol, or other feature that distinguishes one seller's product
from those of others.

Branding - The process involved in creating a unique name and image for a product in the
consumers' mind, mainly through advertising campaigns with a consistent theme.

Digital - describes electronic technology that generates, stores, and processes data in terms
of two states: positive (1) and non-positive (0).

Digital Data - Discrete, discontinuous representations of information or works, as contrasted

with continuous or analog signals which behave in a continuous manner, or represent
information using a continuous function.

Digital Diplomacy– Adopting the broad definition given by DigDiplo, refers to the
migration of diplomatic institutions and diplomats to the online world through the adoption
of web 2.0 applications and ICTs collectively known as social media.

6
Nation Branding – The campaigns carried out by governments to raise the profile, improve
the standing, enhance knowledge about or generate admiration for their country by foreign
audiences.

Selfie Diplomacy – The use of DD for NB purposes.

Social Media - The collection of online communications channels dedicated to community-

based input, interaction, content-sharing and collaboration like Facebook, Twitter, Google+,
Reddit, YouTube, Instagram, Blogger, Wikipedia, and WordPress.

1.11. Structure of the Study

The thesis is organized into five major chapters. Accordingly, Chapter One introduces the
skeletal structure of the study by providing a background, articulating the problem, outlining
objectives, posing relevant research questions, making certain viable assumptions, and
showing the methodological procedures adopted. Chapter Two lays down the conceptual
foundations of the study and the literature review. Chapter Three presents the research
design adopted. Chapter Four focuses on the analysis of the data from various sources and
findings. Chapter Five presents a conclusion of the findings and corresponding
recommendations.

7
Chapter Two: Literature Review

2.0. Introduction

In this chapter, under the following sections, the current knowledge including substantive
findings, as well as theoretical and methodological contributions to DD and NB have been
discussed at length. Under the theoretical literature review, a summary of the concepts of
DD and NB have been provided in relation to the problem being investigated. The theoretical
framework that guides this thesis has also been explicated. Under the empirical literature
review, the practical implications of DD, NB and selfie diplomacy has been discussed
parallel to the challenges countries face and how their influence is to be measured in the
promotion of a country’s image and reputation.

2.1. Theoretical Literature Review

Under this heading the concepts of DD and NB are explained in relation to theories.

2.1.1. The Concept of DD

Defined and called differently by different scholars and policy makers around the world, DD
is a particularly 21st century phenomenon. And the literature around DD is proliferating from
time to time. The emergence of digital tools such as Facebook and Twitter has opened new
areas of research. Researchers are conducting studies into the effects of such tools in the
daily lives of people and the foreign relations of states. It is also known by other names like
electronic diplomacy (e-diplomacy), virtual diplomacy, cyber-diplomacy and 21stcentury
statecraft. DD, according to the internet encyclopaedia of internet terms, Techopedia
(2014), is the act of attempting to achieve diplomatic goals using the Web, social media and
communications technology in general.

The US Department of State as the pioneer in the development of DD coined the term 21st
Century Statecraft to refer to the widespread use of social media tools by diplomats around
the world to deliver messages and reach out to their publics. According to a 2011 report by
the University of Virginia titled 21st Century Statecraft, the act of complementing traditional
foreign policy tools with newly discovered and adopted instruments of statecraft that fully
leverage the networks, technologies, and demographics of our interconnected world
(University of Virginia, 2011) is what constitutes 21st century diplomacy. For the Foreign
and Commonwealth Office (FCO, henceforth) of the UK, the agent of the phrase’s coinage,
DD is solving foreign policy problems using the Internet (Foreign and Commonwealth

8
Office, 2012). The Canadian Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
(DFATD), on the other hand, calls this sensational event in the conduct of diplomacy, Open
Policy.

The term virtual diplomacy (a variant of DD), in the words of Olesya M. Grech (2006), has
been coined from the fact that it refers to diplomacy carried out in a virtual fashion using
technology and the Internet, other than traditional face-to-face communications.

As of Daryl Copeland, a Senior Fellow at the Canadian Defence and Foreign Affairs
Institute (DFAI), the emergence of the very idea of DD (notwithstanding the various names
accorded to it) is attributed to the adoption, within diplomatic institutions and government
more generally, of digital-based systems of data creation, transmission and storage using the
Internet, social media platforms, computers, and a variety of wireless electronic devices.

At its broadest, the term virtual diplomacy, e-diplomacy, or DD signifies the altered
diplomacy associated with the emergence of a networked globe (Ipu, 2013). Narrowly
defined, the concept of virtual diplomacy according to Brown & Studemeister (2001), comprises
the decision-making coordination, communication and practice of foreign affairs as they are
conducted with the aid of information and communications technologies (ICTs) in the wake of
the changes brought about by the computer and telecommunications industries.

2.1.2. The Notion of Image Building and NB

The twin concepts of image building and NB, as interrelated as they are, are the foundational
ideas that theoretically and practically drive the field of PD as well as its doppelganger DD.
Principally embedded in the pioneering works of two British proponents, Simon Anholt and
Wally Olins and the theoretical narratives of marketing, NB, could be defined as “the
application of corporate marketing concepts and techniques to countries, in the interests of
enhancing their reputation in international relations” (Kerr & Wiseman, 2013). In the words
of Simon Anholt,

“Nations may have brands – in the sense that they have reputations, and those
reputations are every bit as important to their progress and prosperity in the modern
world as brand images are to corporations and their products – but the idea that it is
possible to ‘do branding’ to a country (or to a city or region) in the same way that
companies ‘do branding’ to their products, is both vain and foolish.”(2010, p. 2)
The term nation branding was first devised in 1996 by Simon Anholt. At its embryonic stage
the idea of NB was predicated on the simplistic claim “that the reputations of countries
function like the brand images of companies and that they are equally critical to the progress

9
and prosperity of those countries” (Anholt, 2008). Gradually, through various studies and
theoretical as well as practical considerations, Anholt has come up with another term to refer
to this notion and he called it competitive identity. Subtly assimilating the concept of NB as
conceived in the field of marketing into the field of diplomacy in general and PD with its
miscellaneous genres Anholt has brought about a pragmatically necessary disciplinary
domestication. While adamantly declaring his cautious yet tactical preference for his recent
competitive identity over nation branding, Anholt in his 2007 pioneering work Competitive
Identity: The New Brand Management for Nations, Cities and Regions argues that the former
“has more to do with national identity and the politics and economics of competitiveness
than with branding as it is usually understood” (Anholt, 2007). Regardless, the usage of the
concept in this study, as a study in 21st century diplomacy and statecraft would in the form
of the definition provided in the latter, which is an extrapolation of the former.

Despite the divergent opinions apropos of the way the brand of a nation or rather competitive
identity could come about – otherwise known as national reputation – whether it could be
earned or constructed the notion of NB in the context of DD as defined above has six
principal dimensions that calibrate its modus operandi. As propounded by Dennis F. Kinsey
and Myojung Chung of Syracuse University in their 2013 paper titled National Image of
South Korea: Implications for Public Diplomacy (Kinsey & Chung, 2013) the measure of a
country’s national image – international reputation and nation brand – should be tested
against a country’s emotional, physical, financial, leadership, cultural and social appeals to
its multifarious international state, sub-state and non-state audience with a particular interest
in the non-elite audience that exists outside the institutional rubric of diplomacy.

In conclusion, NB could be defined and understood as “campaigns carried out by

governments in an attempt to raise the profile, improve the standing, enhance knowledge
about or generate admiration for their country by foreign audiences” (Anholt, 2007) in the
form of comprehensive institutional initiatives like the MFA by crafting a sustainable yet
dynamic strategy of what Michael Kunczik called “image management and image
cultivation” (Kunczik, 1997) that is geared towards enhancing a country’s soft power
potentials. It could also mean a consistent and all-embracing national brand strategy which
determines the most realistic, most competitive and most compelling strategic vision for the
country, and ensures that this vision is supported, reinforced, and enriched by every act of
communication between the country and the rest of the world.

10
2.1.3. Theoretical Framework: Social Network Theory and Theory of Public Sphere

To elucidate the complex set of relations existing between the emergence of digital tools and
conventional diplomatic practices within foreign ministries, Social Network Theory (SNT)
was employed. Also, sometimes known as Social Network Analysis (SNA), SNT has
emerged as a key technique in modern Sociology, Anthropology, Social Psychology, and
organizational studies, as well as a popular topic of speculation and study (McCormack,
2007). Mainly focusing on the relations between individual actors and modelling society as
constituted of networks made up of sets of the relations or ties between the nodes as its
beginning points, SNT is a method for visualizing our people and connection power, leading
us to identify how we can best interact to share knowledge.

In their 1999 book, Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications, Wasserman and
Faust have identified four additional fundamental principles of models built using social
network theory: independence of actors; relations or ties consisting in the flow or transfer
of resources; the constraining and/or enabling of individual actors by networks; and the
generation of long-lasting ties and networks by social structures. By using these four
fundamental principles they explicated the structure of societies as having its foundation in
the relationship among individuals than the single individuals themselves.

Technically stated, SNT views the web of social relationships among individuals, groups,
and organizations in the form of interacts between nodes and ties (otherwise known as edges,
links, or connections). By definition, nodes are the individual actors in the network while
ties symbolize the network or correlational milieu created by the interactions among these
actors. Consequently, the perspective of SNA — which comprises both method and theory—
recommends against studying any single relationship in isolation from the network of which
it is part. This is because the dyad, or relationship between two actors, is the building block
of a network, but is itself conditioned by the network.

To depict the relations existing among those actors, in the form of networks SNT uses points
to represent nodes while lines denote ties among the nodes. To do so, it uses a scheme known
as network mapping and various network mapping softwares (like Graphviz, InfiniteGraph,
Cytoscape, etc.…) that will be used to produce graphs that illustrate the relationships among
actors. Simply defined, network mapping is the study of the physical and logical
connectivity of networks.

11
In the context of this study, the diplomats, the foreign ministries, the embassies, the ordinary
citizens, the diaspora, and the journalists (both professional and citizen) are the principal
actors that constitute the nodes. To be precise, the state, sub-state and non-state actors that
are pooled in the social network niche of DD – both elites and non-elites – alike constitute
the nodes that are represented by dots.

Secondly, Jürgen Habermas’s theory of Public Sphere was used to illustrate the exchange of
information and the forms of communications among government organizations, civil societies,
diplomats, activists, the diaspora, and the ordinary citizens. The Spanish Sociologist, Manuel
Castells in his 2008 journal article in The Annals of the American Academy of Political and
Social Sciences (AAPSS) defines public sphere as, the space of communication of ideas and
projects that emerge from society and are addressed to the decision makers in the institutions of
society (Castells, 2008). He added that, the global civil society is the organized expression of
the values and interests of society.

In his 1961 monumental book The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An
Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society, the German Sociologist and Philosopher,
Jürgen Habermas, uses the German term Öffentlichkeit to refer to events and occasions that
are open to all, in contrast to closed or exclusive affairs - as when we speak of public places
or public houses (Habermas, 1961). Öffentlichkeit is the German equivalent of the English
public sphere. In a sociological context, which he employed in this book, public sphere is
an arena of social life where individuals informally assemble and exchange ideas about
common societal issues and thereby influencing the political processes that guide their
respective political system. Hence, for Habermas, the concept of public sphere is not isolated
from the notion of public authority. Accordingly, the state being the public authority, the
public sphere was coextensive it.

For Castells (2008), it is these set of relationships between government and civil society and
their interaction via the public sphere that define the polity of society. Unlike the traditional
or old public sphere that is mainly confined to the national boundary of the state the new
public sphere is transboundary due to globalization and the resulting move towards increased
openness and collaboration. DD, being one aspect of PD as such is a feature of the new mode
of public sphere that has shifted the debate from the national domain to the global arena,
prompting the emergence of a global civil society and of ad hoc forms of global governance
(Ibid). In the same accord, Castells wrote that, PD, as the diplomacy of the public, not of the
government, intervenes in this global public sphere, laying the ground for traditional forms

12
of diplomacy to act beyond the strict negotiation of power relationships by building on shared
cultural meaning, the essence of communication.

To note contextually, notwithstanding the disagreements as to what PD means or the precise

technical definition of DD per se, it could broadly be defined as the communication with
foreign publics to establish a dialogue designed to inform and influence. First coined and
used in 1965 by Edmund Gullion, Dean of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at
Tufts University and a distinguished retired Foreign Service officer, PD chiefly deals with
the influence of public attitudes on the formation and execution of foreign policies.

Despite its formulation before the digital era, Habermas’s concept of Public Sphere could
still be of use in the understanding of a digital platform based public sphere that meshes
together diplomats, the diaspora, civil societies, marketing and promotion agencies,
outsourcing companies, PR Agencies, activists, government agencies, so and so forth. The
new social-media centred public sphere may not constitute an element of a physical public
square. But this does not mean it is not a public sphere at all. It is rather a public sphere
based on virtual platforms in lieu of the traditional public square. The new public sphere is
an interface of public opinion formation, information dissemination and decision making
founded principally upon a cloud computing dependent medium of interactions by using
social media tools like blogs, social networks, micro blogs, vlogs, podcasts and rss feeds.
And this is what makes it relevant to the explanation of the grand project of managing the
virtual reputation of Ethiopia on the digital front that would later result in a down to earth
model of NB that upholds the country’s international reputation.

2.2. Empirical Literature Review

First described in 2001, DD is the talk of the town in the corridors of international diplomacy
(Digital Diplomacy Blog, 2012). With four principal implications on the foreign policy
making processes of states, DD has ever since become a new method of PD. In his July 2008
report to the Oxford University based Oxford Internet Institute, Nicholas Westcott identified
the four main impacts of this phenomenon on the contemporary foreign policy making of
states to be in the areas of ideas, information, networks, and service delivery

Since the publication of Digital Diplomacy: U.S. Foreign Policy in the Information Age in
2001 by Wilson Dizard Jr., the literature on DD has been growing dramatically. In this book,
Dizard Jr. gives a detailed accounts and historical origins of DD vis-à-vis the revolutions in
communications technologies in the 1850s. In the same year, Sheryl J. Brown and Margarita

13
S. Studemeister published a journal article titled Virtual Diplomacy: Rethinking Foreign
Policy Practice in the Information Age, in which they explained the bearing of the Internet
on diplomacy.

In 2002 the Canadian International Relations Professor, Evan H. Potter published his book
Cyber-diplomacy: Managing Foreign Policy in the Twenty-first Century. In this book, Potter
addressed the issues of theorizing, the myths and realities related to cyber-diplomacy and
most importantly the real-time implications of DD on the foreign policy of a state, taking
the Canadian case.

Another milestone in the review of literature related to DD is a research project funded and
published in 2002 by the RAND Corporation, a non-profit US think-tank. The title of the
research being Tools for 21st Century Diplomacy: An Approach to Improved Information
and Communication Technology for Romania's Foreign Affairs Ministry, it tried to shed
light on the appropriate tactics that could be used to fit the emerging digital tools into the
conventional diplomacy of a country, taking Romania’s Foreign Ministry as a case. In its
introduction, the report underscored the need to treat information gathering, analysis,
interpretation, decision making and dissemination — as well as the documentation of these
actions (Anderson, Bikson, & Hunter, 2002) as critical business of government agencies in their
21st century diplomacy.

The publication of David Bollier’s report for the Aspen Institute, The Rise of Netpolitik:
How the Internet Is Changing International Politics and Diplomacy in 2003 marks another
episode of the emphasis paid to DD as an emerging genre of PD. Paying due attention to the
impacts of the Internet on the normal operation of diplomacy, Bollier outlined the effects of
digital networks on the existing architecture of power and culture. He also pointed out the
possible bearings such tools have on the rise of soft power of states (Bollier, 2003). By using
conventional military strategy, he demonstrated the impact of the internet-driven politics
and diplomacy on the future of wars.

Perhaps, Richard Grant’s 2005 paper The Democratization of Diplomacy: Negotiating with
the Internet is a vital contribution to the stock of the literature on DD. In this paper, Grant
explained the manners in which the advent of the internet has affected the practice of
diplomacy, be it negotiation, governance, or the role of the key players in the arena of
diplomacy. Focusing mainly on five major categories of relations, he tried to explicate the
impressions left behind by DD on various spheres of governance and administration.

14
Since 2005 hundreds of books and journals were published, researches conducted,
documentaries made and conferences held regarding the theories, the applications, the
challenges, and opportunities as well as the practical implications of DD. Drawing on a
variety of case studies from different countries around the world, researchers and scholars
have invested their efforts at enhancing the public understanding of DD. They have strived
to advise governments on how to develop guidelines and strategies in the application of DD.
Think-tanks, government agencies and forums were set up to address problems related to
adoption of cyber-diplomacy for a plethora of purposes.

2.2.1. The Impacts of NB on DD

Parallel to the burgeoning of the DD as the contemporary lingua franca of the PD as in the
management of a country’s reputation abroad, the phenomenon of NB has also been gaining
momentum and undergoing several profound transitions and transformations. Primarily
embedded in the works of its founding fathers, Simon Anholt, Wally Olins and Keith Dinnie
the concept and practice of NB via digital means have come a long way. Despite NB hitherto
lacking in unified theoretical framework, today hundreds of countries around the world are
practicing it. Notwithstanding the leading countries like the US, the UK, Canada, France,
Germany, China, Singapore, Malaysia and the like currently NB is an almost ubiquitous
global phenomenon that continues to affect the normal conduct a nation’s conventional
diplomacy under the rubric of PD. In this surge, countries like Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania,
Rwanda, Uganda are also leveraging its potentials regardless of their levels of development.

Invigorated by the ground-breaking works of Simon Anholt – dubbed ‘the father of NB” and
an independent policy advisor who has worked to help develop and implement strategies for
enhanced economic, political and cultural engagement with other countries – that, inter alia,
constitutes Brand New Justice: The Upside of Global Branding, Competitive Identity: The
New Brand Management for Nations, Cities and Regions and the recent, Places: Identity,
Image and Reputation, NB can now be treated as a multidisciplinary field within the rubric
of social sciences, political sciences, humanities, communication, marketing and
International Relations. As part of his contributions to the development and effective utility
of the concept of NB within business firms and government agencies, Anholt is also the
founder of the idea of the Good Country and the Good Country Index (GCI) that measures
a country’s unique contributions to the betterment of humanity in its relative capacity.

15
Another influential ‘guru’ of this novel diplomatic practice as well as academic thrill is
Wallace “Wally” Olins, a British proponent and practitioner of corporate identity and NB
and the cofounder of Wolff Olins and Saffron Brand Consultants, both independent global
conglomerates that specialize in consulting firms and governments on strategies of NB.
Since the publication of his first treatise on the subject matter in 1978, The Corporate
Personality: An Inquiry into The Nature of Corporate Identity, Olins has produced other
masterworks such as his 1999 Trading Identities, his 2003 On Brand and his 2014 The Shape
of Brands to Come.

Keith Dinnie is another senior lecturer in branding in the Department of Marketing,

Branding and Tourism within the Business School of Middlesex University. With the
publication of his 2008 book, Nation Branding: Concepts, Issue, Practices, Dinnie has tried
to shed light on the evolution of the concept of NB and its practice within various countries.
By doing so, he has provided experts in field as well as researchers in the academia a unique
window of opportunity through which they could make sense of the theoretical and practical
implications of NB.

What is most needed in the efforts to debunk the myth of NB and the utility of DD, the latter
facilitating the realization of the former – in practical as well as conceptual terms – in the
field of PD is the urgency to look for propositions that tend to explain the nexus of the two.
To this end the publication of several articles within the journal of Place Branding and
Public Diplomacy (PBPD) has played a tremendous role. With the presentation of relevant
contributions to the proper understanding of NB within the academia and the whole
community of practitioners from researchers like Henrik Merkelsen’s Nation Branding as
An Emerging Field – An Institutionalist Perspective and Candace L. White’s Brands and
National Image: An Exploration of Inverse Country-Of-Origin Effect, the PBPD has tried
hard to clarify the air of confusion that surrounds NB.

2.2.2. The Phenomena of Online Nation Branding

With the emergence of the Internet, recognized by some as a great equalizer (Dinnie, 2008)
and the WWW, together with the sporadic multiplicity of social media outlets, as a new
public sphere that facilitate a non-hierarchical, dialogic interface that connects state and non-
state actors like, brands of any kind have globalized in a way never imagined before. In a
situation where “Every nation is competing with every other nation over everything” (Olins,
2013) online branding of states has become an integral element of their PD. By way of

16
providing a platform for dialogue, collaboration and relationship building, DD has been
playing a pivotal role in the efforts of states to put their unique country brand on the
frontlines. According to Olins, this is an encouraging observation for smaller, emerging or
less-developed nations that cannot realistically hope to compete with the global economic
superpowers in terms of financial firepower to fund their nation branding (Ibid).In this
respect, as of Ilan Manor and Elad Segev (2015), investigating the manner in which foreign
ministries employ social media in their nation-branding activities is warranted as it may
represent a shift in the conceptualization, practice and assessment of selfie diplomacy.

2.2.2.1. Perspectives on How to Brand the State

Despite the multiplicity of studies into the area of NB over the years within different
disciplines that run the gamut from marketing to PD, especially DD there has been a
recurrent disagreement among scholars, policy makers and the practitioners in the field on
the manner of branding the state i.e. whether nations can, or should, be branded like
commercial products or financial corporations (Ibid). Owing to this schismatic division on
the issue, Hlynur Gudjonsson, Icelandic Trade Commissioner to North America and the
Consul General for New York, New Jersey, Connecticut and Rhode Island, have identified
three different groups or positions on the notion as well practice of NB. For Gudjonsson
(2005), the three categories of positions include absolutists, moderates and royalists.

Absolutists treat the nation or the state “as a product and as a product that can be branded”
(Ibid.). For them, the very fact that a state is an evolutionary by-product of changes in a
society makes the nation acquire “the same timely and timeless attributes as a product, and
its subjects or governments try to position, brand and reinvent themselves as a nation among
nations from time to time” (Ibid.). The absolutists’ argument of conflating the state with
products was best exemplified by the creation of the Utopian ideals, “liberté, egalité,
fraternité “by the French revolutionists and “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” by
the founding fathers of the USA as a way of differentiating their newly founded nation from
the old, the nouveau from the ancien régime.

Contrary to the absolutists, the royalists believe that to symbolize the state as product is
wrong since the “changes or reforms which nations go through are based on higher
philosophical grounds and means than the changes corporations or products go through”
(Ibid.). The royalists adamantly argue that the futile attempts at commodifying the nation are
preposterous. As entities “beyond and above regular human interventions” (Ibid.) treating

17
nations as though they are products, both in the commercial as well as consumeristic sense,
should carefully be avoided. But they have a conviction that an array of branding strategies
could realize those superior human interventions.

The moderates claim that the very nature of the state, as composed by a collection of
individuals whose identity is defined by their belongingness to this or that state, in
nationalistic terms, “their specific interests can only be voiced by them and they cannot be
branded as a unit” (Ibid.). As such, “neither the government nor the nation is an entity by
itself, and they cannot be branded per se”. In the overall fabric of NB, Michael Porter (Porter,
1998) asserted that, the prime role of the government as an agent of the state is to set the
tone, influence and make rules, laws, and landscapes for the competition to take place within
and to strengthen the nation’s products and brands.

2.2.2.2. Opportunities and Challenges in Online Nation Branding

Regardless of the differences of opinions among the researchers in the area of NB, recently
there is a general consensus that, online branding offers emerging or less-developed nations
the opportunity to establish themselves as niche brands in a way that would not be possible
through using more conventional branding techniques such as print advertising (Dinnie,
2008) that are less economical. In extension, it can be argued that the emergence of online
branding – specifically, reputation management through digital PD – has provided states in
the Global South, that are underdeveloped and with smaller budget packages a cheaper,
affordable, faster, global platform via which they could brand or re-brand their respective
unique country identities.

In his 7 April 2016 interview with the “Germany – Land of Ideas” website, Vito Cecere,
Chief Information Officer at the German Foreign Office, referring to the indispensability of
social media to the advancement of the PD of states has declared that we are moving into an
age of “a foreign policy of societies” (Germany – Land of Ideas, 2016). According to Cecere,

Any nation that seeks to be heard by its own citizens and by people abroad, that
wants to lead and participate in social discourse, has to communicate systematically
using the media adopted by the public at home and abroad.(Ibid).
In their efforts to reach out to their publics and engage in a dialogic conversation with them
several countries around the world, irrespective of their level development or political
system, are taking part in this brave new world of DD. But, here it should not be forgotten
that all states do not necessarily engage in a dialogic conversation with their respective
global audience. Despite the engagement of different countries in the underdeveloped world

18
in DD out of necessity, the extent to which they decentralized their unidirectional,
monologue-laden mode of communications still dominates their day-to-day PD
engagements.

At the forefront of NB through DD and the general digitalization of their diplomatic

activities are countries like the US, Great Britain, France, the Scandinavians, and Germany.
Those countries lead the race towards leveraging the soft power potentials of DD, especially
when it comes to managing their respective online reputations. In this respect, a good
example could be Germany’s online NB initiative. The “Germany – Land of Ideas” branding
initiative is a collaborative branding scheme that involves stakeholders from the German
government, media corporations and various other business corporations. Based on two
pillars, the “Germany - Land of Ideas” association, and Land der Ideen Management GmbH
and founded by the federal government and the Federation of German Industries (BDI) in
2005 the “Germany – Land of Ideas” initiative has “the aim of making Germany visible and
identifiable domestically and internationally as a powerful innovator and creative force”
(Germany – Land of Ideas, 2016). To carry out its mission the initiative has its own bilingual
(German and English) website that bears the name of the initiative, unique logo, Facebook
Page, Twitter handle and YouTube Channel. For the runners of the initiative, “Germany –
Land of Ideas” acts as a neutral platform to link networks and create synergies, which in
turn lead to more ideas, innovations, and joint projects (Ibid.). As the executive board is
composed of representatives of the government, civil societies, NGOs and think tanks, the
initiative’s claim that it has “diverse and representational” and “innovative and
international” NB strategy could be exemplary for other countries. By focusing on four core
factors (Economy, Society, Culture, and Science) within the German Nation, the proverbial,
Vaterland and collaborating with the Place Branding Institute at Steinbeis University in
Berlin, the “Germany – Land of Ideas” initiative tries to promote the German Brand through
its official website and various social media outlets. While doing so, the initiative promotes
the paramountcy of dialogue and collaboration, as “ideas arise through dialogue”.

Speaking of NB, especially as a phenomenon with a long history and as a practice that has
undergone various transformations, it is imperative that attention be paid to Gudjonsson’s
proposition. In his effort to define NB, Gudjonsson has stated that NB is a phenomenon that
“occurs when a government or a private company uses its power to persuade whoever has
the ability to change a nation’s image” (Gudjonsson, 2005). The kind of power that the
nation uses to “win the hearts and minds” of its publics, to ‘proselytize’ its audience in

19
favour of projecting its unique national identity is what Joseph Nye conveniently termed soft
power. To promote its unique national identity on the world stage, especially among, non-
state actors that range from ordinary citizens on social media to influential personalities to
the diaspora, civil societies and NGOs, the nation relies on a blend of attraction and
influence. This in a way necessitates states to seek a reliable permanent friend. Contrary to
the former British Prime Minister, Lord Palmerston’s conservative stance – There are no
permanent friends, but permanent interests – the contemporary art and science of NB
demands that the right tools be used and those tools should be utilized in a such a way that
they win the permanent goodwill of the public. It is generally known that states compete in
every possible way against each other in the areas of manufacturing, outsourcing, tourism,
trade, investment, R&D, scarce raw materials, banking and finance, culture and education,
the sports, cuisine (hence, the birth of culinary diplomacy/gastronomy diplomacy), and the
creative industries (music, cinema, literature, theatre, painting, sculpture…). In this age of
multinational corporations (MNCs), the competition among nations is tough and multi-
layered. This cut-throat competition among states to get what they want through persuasion
is undertaken principally through NB. Hence, NB is a supporting programme to increase a
nation’s prosperity by adding to the value of its brands (Ibid) that are manifested through
services and goods and international acceptance.

Mutatis mutandis, in the field of PD, NB is all about projecting a nation’s pride and prestige
by “combining its values, characteristics and culture” (Greenland Tourism Office, 2016)in
terms that are comprehensible and appealing at home and abroad. To this end, NB utilizes
the “tools of branding to alter, confirm or change the behaviour, attitudes, identity or image
of a nation in a positive way” (Gudjonsson, 2005). In this respect, DD has emerged as a
powerful tool of framing a nation’s identity i.e. the way issues, events, and actors (the nation,
in this case) are portrayed in a communicative text (Manor, 2015). By employing DD as an
instrument of NB and image building, states are engaging with their respective publics
(individuals, the diaspora, civil societies…) that are non-state and non-hierarchical in real-
and near real-time. Even though there are differences in the communicative model of
countries, many countries are trying to build relational networks of dialogue and
collaboration. The social media-driven NB efforts of states are geared towards branding an
already existing positive unique country brand or re-branding a historically tarnished
reputation. In the case of re-branding, recent attempts in NB in the post-communist Central
and Eastern European countries like Croatia, Macedonia and Serbia, in Ethiopia (a country

20
with a long history of recurrent famine and civil war) and the post-genocide Rwanda are
evident. Most of the countries that are preoccupied with re-branding are countries that have
previously suffered what Melissen calls “negative branding”. The other reason, those
countries with a ‘spoiled reputation’ engage in rebranding is a matter of necessity. Their
underdevelopment has forced them to embrace the phenomenon of NB and the brave new
world of DD to ameliorate their condition through the attraction of tourism, foreign direct
investment and foreign aid and technical assistance.

Melissa Aronczyk, an Associate Professor at the School of Communication and Information

in Rutgers University, expediting further on the justifications behind countries’ ever-
increasing engagement in NB activities states that, it is a mechanism adopted by states and
corporations “as a necessary corrective [measure] to the waning importance of the nation-
state in the context of” (Aronczyk, 2008) the hyper-globalization of economics, politics and
culture. Prior to or in this age of globalization of almost everything, states strive to create
their unique national identity, as imagined by their citizenry at times with Utopian overtones,
through a certain nation-state’s “historical background and myths, political, cultural and
economic events, traditions, historical and tourist sites, geographical location and its
citizens, including their cultural characteristics and behaviours” (Smith, 1991). A blend of
endogenous and exogenous factors could however compromise this nationally imagined
identity. Inter alia, the spectre of cultural homogeneity or, conversely, hyper-hybridity (a
phenomenon some refer to as cultural imperialism); stronger allegiances at the subnational,
supranational or transnational levels (Castells, 1997, Ch. 5; Slaughter, 1997 as cited in
Aronczyk, 2008) and widening networks of mobility, media and migration (Appadurai,
1996; Morley, 2000 as cited in Ibid) are the factors that endanger the very existence or
survival there of a country’s unique ideal identity. Hence, the use of NB – offline or online
(DD) – as bulwark against the chipping away of the state’s power by non-state actors.

By comparing the overall efforts of states to brand themselves through DD by painting and
presenting their self-portrait, Manor and Segev (2015), refer to the contemporaneous NB
activities of states as selfie diplomacy. In such a way, states are assumed to be attempting to
sketch out their own portraits. Selfie diplomacy, the diplomatic variant of online NB, is
expected to inspire, Dinnie (2008) argues, positive word-of-mouth through techniques such
as seeding trials, viral advertising, brand advocacy programmes and influencer outreach
initiatives.

21
2.2.2.3. The Differences between NB and PD: Further Clarification

Here, it is a matter of necessity that the difference between the notion of NB and PD be
elucidated. The common sense understanding and practice of conflating PD and NB has over
the years been a predicament in their proper understanding and application in a synergetic
manner. Referring to this, Jan Melissen has explicated the conceptual divergences between
the two. In terms of practice, Melissen ( 2005) argues that, branding a nation involves a
much greater and coordinated effort than PD. According to Melissen, whereas branding is
about the mobilization of all of a nation’s forces that can contribute to the promotion of its
image abroad (Ibid), the origins of PD lie in the purview of its daily practitioners, the public
diplomats. In the case of their practice, the immediate point of divergence lies in their scope
and extent of inclusiveness of other actors outside the domain of state-to-state diplomacy.

As to the conceptual difference between the two interrelated yet unique in their own ways
notions, there are two. First, branding’s level of ambition easily outflanks that of the limited
aims and modesty of most PD campaigns (Ibid.). In plain terms, while branding experts
imagine the world as a giant and complex marketplace, the practitioners of PD are constantly
reminded of the fact that diplomatic communication is only a flimsy part of the dense and
multi-layered transnational communication processes (Ibid).Second, nation-branding
accentuates a country’s identity and reflects its aspirations, but it cannot move much beyond
existing social realities (Ibid).Per se, the principal mission of NB is all about what Melissen
put as “articulation and projection of identity” of a nation in a way that preserves that
particular country’s uniqueness in a positive way.

Despite their differences, the recent revolutions in both fields and the contemporary attempts
to combines the two for better outcomes have made them complementary endeavours.
Where PD fails to reach, or bring about a favourable influence, NB could compensate. On
the other hand, NB is also affecting the very formulation of image building and reputation
management strategies of many countries around the world. These days, countries frame
their soft power seeking imperatives in a participatory, agile and collaborative manner and
most importantly, in a way they could build permanent and reliable relationships/networks
and with the intent of engaging in a dialogue with their partners.

2.2.2.4. Case Studies in Online Nation Branding

Over the last few years, especially after 2011, the year the Arab Spring swept across the
Middle Eastern and North African (MENA), a burgeoning use of social media for NB

22
activities has been witnessed. The subversive potentials of digital technologies in
empowering non-state actors to the extent of organizing revolutions and overthrowing
regimes has alerted governments to follow these trends very closely. By providing
individuals with a new public sphere outside the purviews of state control where they could
create, share and consume contents via a culture of creative collaboration social network
sites (SNS) have promised them a disruptive power that challenges the old notions of state
power. Rather than just tuning into the monologue-laden communication style of the state,
individuals have come to develop their non-elitist, dialogic channels of communication. This
in part has played a significant role in bringing states to the citizen-controlled fora of SNS
in an arm-twisting feat.

Apart from the disruptive potentials of those social media platforms, the affordability – the
relatively low cost of operating – in those new public spheres, Sevin (2013) argues, has been
particularly attractive for governments that do not necessarily have the means to promote
themselves in traditional media platforms. Finally, the relevance of SNS in the context of
the contemporary new public diplomacy has been their provision of what Bortree & Seltzer
(2009) described in their journal article Dialogic Strategies and Outcomes: An Analysis of
Environmental Advocacy Groups’ Facebook Profiles as, ideal conditions for two-way
engagement as organizations may communicate with individuals on topics of shared interest.

In recent years, hundreds of foreign ministries have flocked SNS including but not limited
to Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, SnapChat and Instagram. In such unexpected turn of events,
Matthias Lüfkens (2016) declares that, social media has become diplomacy’s significant
other. Per a 2015 study conducted on Twitter engagement of MFAs by the New York-based
global public relations and communications firm, Burson-Marsteller, currently there are
more than 200 MFAs and foreign ministers active on Twitter in addition to some 400 heads
of states and more than 200 missions to UN institutions (Twiplomacy, 2015). The Burson-
Marsteller’s 2016 Twiplomacy study by focusing on not just Twitter but also Facebook,
Instagram and YouTube plus more niche DD platforms such as Snapchat, LinkedIn,
Google+, Periscope and Vine singled out 793 Twitter accounts of leaders, foreign ministers
and their respective organisations in 173 nations.

In a more comprehensive survey conducted by the Turkey-based Digital Research

Association (2016) titled Digital Diplomacy Review 2016 (#DDR16), a hitherto most
sophisticated and inclusive DD ranking and rating that included 210 foreign ministries, 1098
digital assets in 33-plus SNS the online presence of these ministries has been identified.

23
Accordingly, currently 175 Twitter, 129 Facebook, 92 YouTube and 82 Google+ accounts
owned by various foreign ministries were identified. However, according to the Twiplomacy
Study 2016 findings, there is a growing digital divide between governments that are active
on social media with dedicated teams and those that see digital engagement as an
afterthought and so devote few resources to it. Moreover, referring to the inertia against
embracing the digitalization of diplomacy, the survey has asserted that, there is still a small
number of government leaders who refuse to embrace the new digital world and, for these
few, their community managers struggle to bring their organizations into the digital century
(Ibid). To rate and rank the foreign ministries, the Digital Research Association employed
four key parameters – digital assets they used, the extent of their presence, their level of
influence and engagement and their creative use of tactical disruption. And it is against
these key parameters that the general practice of selfie diplomacy by states could be
evaluated, especially the foreign ministries’ engagement and influence coupled with their
potential to disrupt, create and spontaneously attract and win the partnership of their
respective followers. On the other hand, it is also important to pay attention to Ilan Manor’s
(2016) caveat in his seminal comparative study, Are We There Yet: Have MFAs Realized the
Potential of Digital Diplomacy? that, while the DD research corpus tends to be America-
centric, the adoption of social media by [foreign ministries] is a global phenomenon. It is
also worth noting that, according to Manor, for some foreign ministries, the very use of web
2.0 applications is a goal in itself, as it projects a certain national image.

In the same accord, Stein (2011) argues, it is now common practice as foreign ministries and
embassies market their nations in connected, yet increasingly competitive environments. For
instance, the vast majority of the 193 national country accounts are still owned by private
individuals, who had the bright idea to register [the English names of their] in the early days
of Twitter (Twiplomacy, 2016). That notwithstanding, many foreign ministries still compete
to own the country promotion and image building agenda.

2.2.2.4.1. North America: the US

As the home of most of the DD platforms that have revolutionized the conduct of diplomacy
in this century, the US is a leading nation in terms of technology and digital innovation.
Actually, the most ubiquitous digital platforms and many of the most valuable tech brands
in the world are of American provenance (McClory, 2016), and the Silicon Valley of
thousands of tech companies in California including Facebook, Twitter, Instagram,
YouTube and Google have made it an epitome of digital innovation. According to a 2016

24
global ranking of soft power of 30 countries report by the New York-based integrated
communications consultancy firm Portland, the US leads all the rest 29 countries in terms
of its soft power potentials in three crucial areas: higher education, cultural production, and
technological innovation. Despite fluctuations in the US’ international reputation over the
years, especially with respect to its military involvement in the Middle East and the
September 11 attacks as well as the recent WikiLeaks Cablegate scandal and Edward
Snowden’s NSA revelations, the US State Department still takes the lead when it comes to
projecting America’s brand to the international community. Alluding to the pioneering
works of the US State Department in the field of selfie diplomacy, Sabrina Sotiriu contends
that, the core of American DD efforts have relied on the belief that the Web 2.0 revolution
has permeated our everyday lives in ways unthinkable previously, and that it is a permanent
technological feature that should be utilized and not avoided (Sotiriu, 2015). In its DD
engagement, the US State Department promotes Brand America through its official social
media channels on Facebook (@usdos), Twitter (@StateDept), YouTube and its networked
blog, Diplopedia in English, Arabic, Chinese, Farsi, French, Hindi, Portuguese, Russian,
Spanish, and Urdu. While engaging with its publics the US State Department invests its
utmost efforts in listening to and conversing with them. This is done with the expectation
that it could project America’s positive image and re-brand its tarnished reputation that
brought about a calamitous effect gradually resulting in a negative branding of sorts. The
negative branding of America as expressed through ‘Anti-American’ sentiments, especially
in the Muslim world that perceives America both as an “imperialist invader” and “corruptor
of societal values” to reckon with has negatively impacted America’s external perception.
Despite recent improvements in the American brand, especially during the Presidency of
Barack Obama, the US State Department’s selfie diplomacy due to America’s long history
of crises-laden diplomacy, Ilan Manor argues, cannot be regarded as a magical wand, able
to alter the US’s image with one stroke (Manor & Segev, 2015). Per se, despite the
pioneering and innovative contributions of the US State Department in the field of
diplomacy, in general and PD, in particular, the current state selfie diplomacy at the US State
Department is more inclined towards rehabilitating and ameliorating the crises and the
negative image of Brand America. Brand America as expressed through American cinema,
technological innovation (the global dominance of Silicon Valley products), diversified
immigrant community, the Sports, cuisine and other consumer and luxury products together
with the classical notion of the American Dream, as “a land of hope and opportunities” and
America’s post-Cold War era global hegemonic dominance, it has suffered frequent and
25
massive blows. America’s actively engaged, massive selfie diplomacy in the hope of
restoring America’s influence and “glory” to its right place, is continually reforming and
trying harder to “fine tune” its NB approaches so far. To this effect, the US State Department
is expected to, as Manor and Segev (2015) explained in their study America’s Selfie: How
the US Portrays Itself on Its Social Media Accounts, tailor nation-branding campaigns to the
characteristics of local audiences and the way such audiences perceive the US.

2.2.2.4.2. Europe: Finland, Sweden and the UK

Among the outstanding foreign ministries that undertake the mission of promoting their
unique country brand we find the Finnish MFA. Despite the absence of a dedicated DD unit
(DDU) within its bureaucracy, the Finnish DD model focuses mainly on NB activities that
are coordinated by the MFA (Manor, 2016). According to a comparative study conducted
by Ilan Manor, despite the Finnish MFA most often refraining from the utility of social
media for PD activities and online dialogue, when it does use for such purposes, it focuses
on informing and influencing elites, the Finnish population and the Finnish diaspora rather
than foreign populations (Ibid). According to Manor, Finnish Embassies are provided with
branding materials, which they then disseminate online. In its attempts to brand and promote
Finland, the Finnish MFA has reformulated the “This is Finland” campaign that was
originally launched in 1995. With its own dedicated official social media accounts
(Facebook, Twitter and YouTube) and a website the “This Is Finland” campaign promotes
Finnish art and culture, society, business and innovation opportunities in eight foreign
languages (English, Chinese, German, Spanish, French, Portuguese, Russian and Arabic)
and the two official languages of Finland, Finnish (Suomi) and Swedish. According to
Twiplomacy’s Country Promotion 2016 study, @ThisIsFinland (On Twitter) is the highly
successful country promotion of the Finnish government.

Another Scandinavian nation with an illustrious record of selfie diplomacy is Sweden. As

part of its country branding strategies in 2007 the Swedish Department for Foreign Affairs
(DFA) in collaboration with the Swedish Institute inaugurated an online embassy in the
virtual world of Second Life, an online virtual world developed by the San Francisco-based
Linden Lab. The virtual embassy named Second House of Sweden spanned the years 2007-
2012. The main rationale behind this initiative was the need to, Manor (2016) states,
facilitate direct engagement with Second Life users, thus reaching a global audience while
showcasing Swedish art and culture. He added, the embassy hosted lectures on Swedish
culture, organized concerts, and celebrated Sweden’s national day. Later, this has brought

26
about the uniquely influential Brand Sweden. NB is seen as a part of Sweden's PD, especially
with Brand Sweden. The study and promotion of Brand Sweden online is undertaken through
the joint collaboration of the DFA and the Swedish Institute. Sweden being the first country
to delegate the management of its official Twitter handles to its citizens, the articulation and
projection of Brand Sweden on Twitter is through a collaborative project known as Curators
of Sweden, an initiative of the Swedish Institute and Visit Sweden and is administered by
the Swedish Institute in lieu of the DFA. The idea behind Curators of Sweden is that the
curators will share both their own and relevant third party’s thoughts, stories, information
and other content that is somehow linked to Sweden (Curators of Sweden, 2015). For
Lüfkens (2016), the initiative is one of the best examples of ‘citizen diplomacy,’ giving a
global voice to ordinary citizens. It has allowed thousands of other tweeps to learn about
everyday life in Sweden from the citizens themselves.

The UK’s FCO is another influential thought-leader in new PD theory and practice
(Pamment, 2016). Like its US counterpart, the FCO uses Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and
its collaborative FCO blog of overseas UK diplomats to promote the current GREAT Britain
Campaign in collaboration with the British Council, UK Trade and Investment (UKTI), the
Cabinet Office, the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS). The campaign
aims to promote the UK internationally as a GREAT place to visit, study and do business
(British Council, 2016). Unlike the US model of PD however, especially in DD (global
outreach and NB), Iosifidis & Wheeler (2016) contend that, Britain has‘punched above its
weight’ by taking a more pragmatic approach to PD 2.0 than that of the USA. According to
the former UK Ambassador to Lebanon and the author of Naked Diplomacy: Power and
Statecraft in the Digital Age, social media enabled Britain to carry out its core diplomatic
goals, including information harvesting,analysis, the promotion of English as the language
to unlock cyberspace, crisis management and the extension of commercial interests
(Fletcher, 2012). The UK government has thus developed a well-structured, flexible and
efficient approach to social media (Iosifidis & Wheeler, 2016). Predicating its selfie
diplomacy on the principles of trust and cooperation, the FCO has so far been keen on
focusing its NB activities through its official social media outlets (especially,
Facebook(@ForeignOffice), Twitter (@ForeignOffice), YouTube and FCO blog) on four
key issues: listening, publishing, engaging and evaluating its goals. While trying to maintain
the pedigree of the GREAT Britain brand, as of the FCO, has been focused on listening to
the angles and tones involved in the discussions of issues, actively publishing and pushing

27
the UK’s message across the FCO’s global web involvement, engaging
relevantorganizations and online groups to encourage debate and foster partnerships, and
evaluating goals, targets and ways of improvement (Foreign and Commonwealth Office,
2012 as cited in Sotiriu, 2015). In fine, via its official social media handles on Twitter,
Facebook, YouTube, and others as well as its FCO Blog, the FCO has been “showcasing a
friendly face [of the UK] to the rest of the world” (Dua, 2015) that includes the English
language, British Premier League, the 2012 London Olypmics, overseas British
humanitarian services, British luxury products such as the automobile industry Aston
Martin, British cinema, music, literature and art, the Monarchy and history in 40 languages
that English and 6 foreign languages the FCO has designated as “core languages”(Arabic,
Russian, French , Spanish, German, and Mandarin) and other relevant languages such as
Italian, Hungarian, Bosanski (Bosnian), Kiswahili and Hebrew. According to the GREAT
Britain Campaign’s (2012) website, the goal of promoting Britain through the potentials
offered by DD is to encourage people around the world to think and feel differently about
modern Britain. In return, expansion and enhancement in Great Britain’s soft power and
tourist inflow and foreign direct investment are expected.

2.2.2.4.3. Asia: India, China and Israel

India’s Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) is one of the leading global DD power, only
preceded by 3 European states (UK, France, Russia) , the US and the EU. Despite a relatively
modest budget for its PD (Chaudhury, 2016), the MEA is the leading Asian foreign ministry
in terms of its outreach and selfie diplomacy which actually was accentuated by the personal
leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the Spokeperson of the MEA, Vikas
Swarup. Via its official social media outlets on Facebook (@MEAINDIA), Twitter
(@MEAIndia and especially, @IndianDiplomacy), YouTube as well the MEAIndia app that
have garnered massive social media followership, the MEA conducts India’s selfie
diplomacy in more than 14 languages that include Hindi, English, Spanish, French and
Arabic. India’s online NB attempts through a combination of engagement and conversation
is aimed at fostering India’s soft power. Among others, the MEA’s DD engagement with
regards to branding India focuses on the promotion of India’s historical place, for being “the
largest democracy”, Indian Yoga sport, Indian literary figures such as Rabindranath Tagore,
the founder of modern India Mahatma Gandhi, Indian music and cinema from one of largest
cinema Industries, Bollywood, India’s unique culinary taste, exotic tourism hotspots and the
cultural and religious diversity of the country. Apart from shedding light on the country’s

28
soft power potentials in terms of engaging, attracting and influencing millions of people
around the world, the selfie diplomacy at the MEA most importantly focuses on the guiding
tenets of Brand India, an initiative of the Ministry of Commerce and Industry (MCI),
Government of India under the aegis of the India Brand Equity Foundation (IBEF) with the
intent of attracting businesses into India in the areas of manufacturing, infrastructural
development, the service sector, ICT development and ICT-enabled services.

Though an anomaly, the MFA of the People's Republic of China, is among those foreign
ministries that quickly adapted to and embraced DD to interact with their publics both at
home and abroad. Unlike other countries’ foreign ministries however, MFA China is active
only on China- and Chinese language-based SNS called Sina Weibo and WeChat. The MFA
China with the utility of those interactive public spheres engages in a dialogue with its local
and international, Chinese and non-Chinese audiences in at least six languages: Mandarin
(Chinese), English, French, Spanish, Arabic and Russian. Per se, the recipes for China’s
selfie diplomacy through those outlets come from Chinese culture (martial arts, cuisine, film,
art and literature), Chinese philosophy as epitomized through the Confucius cultural
institute, Chinese historical artefacts such as the Great Wall and the Forbidden Kingdom,
Chinese history as well as the Mandarin language, a language with largest native speakers
in the world and in the business sphere, affordable Chinese products. Overall, China’s selfie
diplomacy though most of the time, inward looking, has the essential elements of a
multifaceted DD, typically a dialogic loop that engages the MFA’s publics at a personal
level and the special emphasis accorded to boosting the soft power in tandem with “the rise
of an image conscious-China”(Rabinovitch, 2008).

In the Middle East, Israel’s MFA takes the lead in terms of selfie diplomacy though it is
fraught with certain complications. Similar to the US State Department’s challenges in
branding America, MFA Israel also faces several challenges in its attempt to brand the state
of Israel. To tackle such issues in Israel’s image problem and to improve its currently
intricate state of ‘negative branding’ due to Israel’s frequent association with human rights
violations and ongoing military engagement in the occupied territories, MFA Israel actively
uses social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube in order to improve the
country’s mixed international image and reputation. As such, the NB efforts of MFA Israel
via its official social media outlets focuses on three key themes: Israel’s status as a “high-
tech nation”, Israel as the “only democracy” in the Middle East and Tel Aviv as a young,
liberal, vibrant and LGBTQ-friendly city that is quite different from the divided and

29
politicized Jerusalem. In addition to MFA Israel’s adamant insistence on projecting Israel
“as the only democracy in the Middle East”, the ongoing counter-disruption activities of the
MFA in labelling recent sporadic Palestinian attacks on Israeli’s as an “act of terror” by
creating, Manor (2015) wrote, an associative link between Palestinian terrorism and IS
terrorism have swept Israel’s positive image under the rug. In a situation where the forces
that deny the official brand of the State of Israel as a bastion of democracy in the Middle
East are overshadowing the official selfie diplomacy of the MFA (known for its innovation,
interactivity and multilinguality (Hebrew, English, Arabic, Persian, French, Spanish and
Russian)) the MFA has mostly been unsuccessful in branding Israel the way it initially
intended. Thus, the very branding of Israel as a democracy may fall on deaf ears (Manor,
2015). To the contrary, the MFA has also succeeded in branding Israel as a “high-tech”
nation through its incessant DD engagements characterized by dialogue, flexibility and
multilinguality, though with a persistent history of paying lesser attention to what the
authorities of the State of Israel call “the enemies of Israel, the terrorists” – Arab Speaking
neighbours and Iran.

2.2.2.4.4. Africa: South Africa, Rwanda and Ethiopia

In the African context, South Africa, Egypt and Ethiopia take the lead in their DD
engagements. South Africa, known for its pioneering initiatives in the field of NB is a
country at the front of DD in Africa. Prior to the emergence of the notion and practice of
selfie diplomacy, the Republic of South Africa (RSA) established the International
Marketing Council of South Africa (IMCSA) in 2000, Yvonne Johnston, the CEO of the
IMCSA stated, upon the realization that it was absolutely imperative to create a positive and
compelling brand image for South Africa (Johnston, 2008).The Department of International
Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO) of the RSA in its daily conduct of DD aims to promote
the 2000 IMCSA inaugurated comprehensive national image of South Africa, Brand South
Africa with its catchy slogan Inspiring New Ways. As a foreign ministry that is aggressively
following the trends on social media, the DIRCO promotes Brand South Africa via its
official social network channels in the fields of culture, people, investment and migration,
tourism and governance. In addition to these, the DIRCO also promotes South Africa as a
responsible producer, possessor, and trader of advanced technologies in the nuclear,
biological, chemical, and conventional arms fields which originates, as of Muller (1998), in
South Africa’s foreign policy of non-proliferation, disarmament and arms control.
Technically speaking, the DIRCO’s selfie diplomacy efforts in building the “Rainbow

30
Nation’s” image and international reputation prioritizes engagement in a dialogue with
foreign publics and the South African diaspora community through Brand South Africa’s
“Play Your Part” initiative that encourages, especially the latter in bringing about a positive
change by investing in and remitting to the RSA as well as providing their expertise to the
betterment of its image. Under its people and culture promotion agenda, the DIRCO together
with the Brand South Africa initiative of the IMCSA advertises South Africa’s literature,
cinema, music and art as well as South Africa’s culinary delicacies such as the South African
Wine and the Batho Pele (Sotho for "People First"), a political initiative introduced in 1997
during Nelson Mandela’s Presidency for the improvement of goods and services delivery to
the South African public. Internationally influential South African personalities like Nelson
Mandela, Bishop Desmond Tutu, Tech innovator and owner of Tesla Motors, Elon Musk
and Hollywood actress Charlize Theron are also used as means of boosting the Republic’s
soft power. In fact, the offical Twitter handle of the DIRCO @DIRCO_ZA has the motto:
“promoting South Africa's national interests and values, the African Renaissance and the
creation of a better world for all”. Finally, the branding efforts of the DIRCO in concert with
other branding partners of the RSA like the IMCSA also focus on ridding Brand South Africa
of South Africa’s notorious Apartheid legacy, which alignes itself to the indigenous African
philosophy of Ubuntu.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation (MINAFFET) of Rwanda with its policy
imperative of presenting the world with “a positive image of Rwanda in such a way as to
correct the outside world’s wrong perception of the unity and history of the Rwandan
people” is among those vibrant MFAs in Africa by embracing SNS to branding Rwanda.
Brand Rwanda, re-branded after the genocide (Kinyarwanda, Interahamwe) in 1994, which
symbolizes Rwanda as the “Fortune of Africa” and “the “Heart of Africa” is promoted by
the MINAFFET to persuade and encourage its followers to travel to, invest and work in
Rwanda. With respect to the ill-reputed legacy of the genocide, the MINAFFET strives to
re-brand Rwanda by upholding the triadic traditional philosophy of Kwibuka, Kinyarwanda
for “remember”, that is geared towards remembering, uniting and renewing in the fight
against an imminent threat of genocide ideology. Apart from its active and dialogic social
media engagement, the MINAFFET has developed Rwandapedia, a Wikipedia of
documents, quick info, videos and images about Rwanda. Throughout its selfie diplomacy
efforts, the MINAFFET uses French, English and Kinyarwanda, through because of its anti-
colonial policy towards France, it inclines more towards English.

31
The Ethiopian MFA ranks 3rd in Africa and 76th in the world per a digital diplomacy survey
conducted by Digital Diplomacy Review from the beginning of 2015 to mid-March 2016.
As the observations made by the survey and the researcher indicated, the Ethiopian MFA
has active engagements on social media such as Facebook and Twitter, WordPress. Through
its official outlets on these platforms it strives to provide relevant information to its global
audience in English. Contrary to its ranking however it lags most in terms of selfie
diplomacy. This could be attributed to several factors. First, the absence of a holistic country
brand hitherto has made its nation branding efforts to be limited to the recently inaugurated
tourism brand, Ethiopia: The Land of Origins. Second, the lack of a clearly stipulated online
nation branding strategy per Ethiopia’s foreign policy imperatives of articulating and
promoting the “national pride and prestige” of the country on all fronts presents a recurring
challenge. Third, the current model of digital diplomacy it practices is sternly monologic.
This coupled with the novelty of DD and selfie diplomacy has complicated the situation. If
the promotion of Ethiopia’s image via selfie diplomacy is to bear fruit it is supposed to adapt
to the contemporary status quo of dialogue and participatory collaboration with its tech-
savvy netizens. This, of course, includes both its domestic and foreign audiences that speak
a variety of languages, have diversified voices and multifarious demands. Fourth, contrary
to its catchy mission statement, Inspiring Africa’s future through active diplomacy founded
on sound research and institutional reform, it has not been proactive in undertaking R&D
on the contemporaneous practice of selfie diplomacy. Were the Ethiopian MFA’s DD to
accelerate the projection of Ethiopia’s soft power, it is imperative that it traverses fresh
outlooks, other countries’ lessons and listens to its audiences.

By way of a conclusion, the overall picture of selfie diplomacy around the world is a
diversified one. The varieties of country specific DD-fuelled NB cases show variations due
to several endogenous and exogenous factors. Different countries have different approaches
to this phenomenon depending on their experience, proactive stance, foreign policy
principles, financial and technical preconditions as well as the level of understanding of the
pros and cons of selfie diplomacy.

2.3. Challenges in Selfie Diplomacy in A Nutshell

In the efforts of many foreign ministries around the world to leverage the potentials of DD
for building, managing and preserving their respective country’s image and reputation there
are several challenges they face. In other words, the efforts in these institutions to create a
dialogic loop that is multilingual, simplistic, innovative, and responsive is fraught with

32
several predicaments. Inter alia, factors such as digital divide (gap in access to and literacy
in ICT infrastructure), novelty of the field, finance, scarcity of skilled manpower,
bureaucratic bottlenecks, the lack or presence thereof guidelines, a culture of R&D and
scarcities in training facilities have seriously been impinging on the progress of selfie
diplomacy in them.

Few practitioners in the field of DD claim that, social media presence alone no matter how
monologic and unidirectional that may be is considered soft power. Contrary to this
reductionist argument however, the creation and management of a vibrant and dynamic
selfie diplomacy should be an all-embracing project in which dialogue, interactivity and
relationship building should be the norm. The very effectiveness of such a massive and
complex undertaking highly depends on the lack or presence thereof these elements.

For one, as Manor and Segev illustrated, as the practice of DD is still evolving, the use of
SNS to manage the national image and reputation is a novel practice (Manor & Segev, 2015).
In this respect, the shortage of scholarly works into the way MFAs utilize DD for NB
presents an impending challenge. This could be a result of the fact that until recently, NB
activities focused primarily on traditional media, such as advertising campaigns in
television, radio and print (Ibid).

On the financial side, the meagre budget that is allocated to such initiatives in particular and
PD in general, except in few countries like the US, France and the UK is a serious constraint
to reckon with. Given this, developing a unique national image through the opportunities
provided by DD will be a daunting one. At this juncture, it is also crucial to remember that
in most cases the perception that NB is an innately economic imperative that better be
managed through tourism boards has shifted the necessary financial resources to those
entities in lieu of PD sections within the foreign ministries. This has tied their hands.

As indicated by György Szondy in his study, Public Diplomacy and Nation Branding:
Conceptual Similarities and Differences, there has been a general tendency of conflating NB
with PD. This confusion in the usage of the terms despite their “ambiguous and anecdotal”
(Szondy, 2008) relationship, if not clarified through periodic studies remains to be a
recurrent challenge.

Another obstacle that is hampering the adoption and gradual utility of such ‘brave new
world’ tools as SNS for NB lie at the heart of the bureaucratic red tape of those countries.
The unsuitability of their bureaucratic structure as well as its unwillingness to embrace those

33
zeitgeists is an obstacle that is negatively affecting the process of adopting and effectively
utilizing the platform provided by those tools. At times, the abnormal level of scepticism
about DD among top level bureaucrats has severely crippled the adaptation process.

In the developing and under-developed countries of the Global South rife digital divide has
been a common challenge of foreign ministries struggling to acclimatize to the “leaps of
faith” in the conduct of diplomacy. The existence of a wide rift between those who could
know (literacy) and have access to the Internet as a conduit of those innovative tools is an
impasse to the digitalization and rejuvenation process. And the vast majority of African
states are characterized by this condition of low Internet penetration.

The insistence of some foreign ministries to stick to the old model of diplomatic
communications (unidirectional and monologic) despite migrating to those interfaces of
networked, collaborative, and dialogic netizens (Internet citizens) by itself is a perennial
problem in the field. Their failure, rather adamant unwillingness, to create an ambience of
trust and cooperation, interaction and conversation and relationship (bridge) building is
considered antithetical to the effectiveness of selfie diplomacy.

Finally, the absence of a comprehensively developed nation brand strategy together with
supporting mechanisms of measuring and evaluating the level of effectiveness of DD’s role
in NB remains to be a challenge. The very nature of selfie diplomacy as well as DD
engagements in this situation is more inclined towards quick fixes and pragmatic
oversimplifications. Instead of conducting a periodic review of the state of their selfie
diplomacy, they resort to already available yet worn out kluges that could help little or no in
addressing the plethora of challenges faced by the practitioners. Parallel to this, lack of well-
organized training facilities and experience sharing among the practitioners from different
countries apropos of the notion and practice of NB and digital PD in the global as well as
national context has been an inhibiting factor in the understanding and application of nascent
and delicate concepts such as soft power, the power of persuasion and attraction, the art of
creating a compelling national narrative with the intent of winning not just ‘the hearts and
minds’ of the people, but their permanent friendship too.

In conclusion, the absence of a diplomatic environment characterized by agility, innovation

and a culture of creative collaboration coupled with the sluggish process of adapting to those
novel trends such as DD and strategized NB continues to worsen the condition. Apart from
tapping into the “Uberization of everything” effect, it is a matter of existential necessity that

34
foreign ministries today migrate from the classical international to the contemporary
Internetional sphere. That is to mean, if foreign ministries and their diplomats are trapped in
the silo of territorial globalization while the rest of the world has moved to the Internetional
system of an “Internet-ridden system and even beyond” the stakes are high not just in
financial terms but to the very essence of the fabric of the diplomatic profession. The refusal
of some foreign ministries to tactically embrace the “viral, non-hierarchical, real-time, 7/24,
personalized, customized and optimized” (Digital Research Association, 2016) new public
sphere of non-state actors’ domination in their own terms, the current impetus towards selfie
diplomacy (though protracted and half-hearted) would remain to be the proverbial Sisyphean
toil. While traversing the course of such intricacies as the uncharted waters of branding the
nation through DD, R&D should be at the core of the agenda. Internationally acclaimed and
tested measurement tools should also be considered while introducing novel ideas and
practices, if their utility is to be palpable and effective.

2.4. Measuring National Brands

To fully understand, build, manage, and evaluate the performance of a certain country’s
unique country brand it is imperative to either develop new or employ already available
indices. In this regard, the two most commonly known and highly developed yardstick of
assessing the worth of a country’s brand, as indicated by, Marc Fetscherin (2010) in his
journal article, The Determinants and Measurement of A Country Brand: The Country Brand
Strength Index, both [of which] come from private sources rather than the academic
literature. They are the Country Brand Index (CBI) and the NBISM, developed by the UK-
based branding consultancy firm, FutureBrand and the British NB guru, Simon Anholt
together with the German-headquartered marketing research firm, Gesellschaft für
Konsumforschung (GfK), respectively. Here it is a matter of theoretical and practical
necessity to explain their differences.

The CBI measures a country brand’s international standing from the marketing side of
things. Using the CBI, a country’s national brand is measured in terms of its level of
consumer products branding, corporate and business services branding, the retail and
hospitality experience and brand innovation and how far a country’s unique brand is digitally
well connected. In doing so, it measures the competitive advantage among country brands
as expressed through consumer and luxury goods and services produced in those nations. In
fine, it basically employs a series of qualitative and quantitative researches to evaluate the

35
extent to which goods and services produced in a country influence and dominate in the
competitive international market.

The NBISM, on the other hand, is the most holistic nation brand index, which according to
the GfK (2016), helps governments, organizations and businesses understand, measure and
ultimately build a strong national image and reputation. In this regard, it is much broader
than the CBI for it focuses not just on corporations and businesses, but also governments.
By combining six principal components (Governance, People, Culture and Heritage,
Tourism, Investment and Immigration, and Exports), the NBISM also known as the Nation
Brand Hexagon, measures the influence and excellence of each country’s national brand, or
rather the image of this brand.

36
Chapter Three: Research Design
3.0. Introduction

Prior to the problematization of the topic at hand, Digital Diplomacy for Nation Branding
and Image Building: The Ethiopian Context, an interdisciplinary review of literature was
undertaken. In doing so, several gaps have been identified which have been stated in
previous sections. As such, it is imperative that a proper research design be developed to lay
down the foundational coordinates of the whole research process. To this effect, this chapter
outlines the several research methods and techniques used while undertaking this study. It
states the principal research methodology and the related research design as well as the
sampling framework that was used. It also enlists the methods of data collection and their
subsequent analysis vis-à-vis the ethical considerations observed during data collection.

3.2. Research Method

Speaking of the research method adopted by this study, the principal research paradigms,
approaches, methods and techniques employed are discussed under the following sub-
headings.

3.2.1. Research Paradigm and Approach

Apropos of the research paradigm employed in this study an anti-positivist (naturalistic

inquiry) was used. As a study that focuses on interviews and case studies it is the most
appropriate model. While discussing matters such as social networks and brands this
paradigm comes in handy for its meticulous focus on the quotidian human interaction with
phenomena.

The chief research approach that is adopted in the conduct of this study is a qualitative one.
Owing to the novelty of this phenomenon, a qualitative approach is an appropriate tool since
it is exploratory in nature i.e. it is interested in debunking the myths behind new phenomena,
especially those accorded little or no research attention. It is also a useful approach when it
comes to studying topics of interest that are highly opinionated like this, that is constantly
under the aegis of subjective viewpoints and is highly susceptible to contextual flux and a
complicated process of interdisciplinary conceptualization.

3.2.2. Research Method

The research design that has been adopted in this study is chiefly founded on a case study
of an exploratory nature. The careful selection of a case study approach in the context of this

37
study is an effective tool in the efforts to unravel the multifaceted roles DD plays in the
creation, promotion, and evaluation of Ethiopia national identity. And this is mainly based
on the comparative analysis of the scenario in different countries from North America,
Europe, Asia, and Africa. Without traversing the contours of selfie diplomacy in different
settings, critically appraising the Ethiopian case would not give us the overall picture.

During the review of literature undertaken to thematise and concretize the foundations of this
research, it was frequently observed that most of the literature on case studies (UK, USA,
Macedonia, Post-Communist Balkan States, South Africa, Rwanda…etc.) are a comparative
analysis of the subject matter. From this, it has been deduced that this technique could safely be
replicated to the study of the problem stated here, how is DD influencing Ethiopia’s NB
strategies on the online niche of several non-state actors and a new form of dialogue-laden
public sphere?

3.2.3. Research Techniques

In the process of conducting this research the researcher employed unstructured interviews.
The unstructured in-depth interviews helped traverse the perspectives (which mostly are
highly opinionated) of the diplomats within the MFA of Ethiopia on the problem under
discussion.

3.3. Sampling

This section elaborates the approach, the method and the techniques of sampling used in this
study. These three key issues are presented separately under the following subheadings.

3.3.1. Sampling Approach

As per the research design of this study a grounded theory sampling approach was used. As
a research approach known for its suitability in the collection and analysis of qualitative data
from interviews and case studies it helped much in the formulation of an explanatory
context. It in turn facilitated the proper explanation of the phenomena of selfie diplomacy
within the Ethiopian diplomatic milieu.

3.3.2. Sampling Method

The samples selected for this study were adopted using a non-probability sampling method.
This method was selected carefully as it was advantageous in terms of minimizing cost and
convenience. While conducting this study into a novelty in the Ethiopian context, it was
paramount that the right kind of people are to be included in the sample at the right time

38
depending on their availability. As a qualitative study with explanatory overtones, it was
necessary to ensure that the relevant data was collected from the people who have either a
first-hand practical experience in the field or a research interest in implications of the
phenomena. As such a convenience sampling technique was adopted to sample employees
with the knowledge of DD and NB at the MFA of Ethiopia.

3.3.3. Sampling Techniques

As this study is predicated on the data collected from people who are easy to reach a
convenience sampling technique was applied. For all intents and purposes addressed in
previous sections, the population taken for sampling is limited to the Ministry’s employees.
In such a way, 10 diplomats out of 28 employees within the PDCDG were selected as
respondents. During the selection, the minimum age limit for the respondents was set at 25,
for the respondents are expected to have some years of prior exposure to or field experience
in the DD. Whenever necessary, preference was given to diplomats with educational
backgrounds in PD, brand management and exclusive exposure to the practice of promoting
Ethiopia’s image via DD.

3.4. Data Collection Instruments

The research used interviews and several relevant documents (Reports, Case Studies, Social
Media Guides…etc.) as instruments of data collection which are found to be appropriate to
the case study approach.

3.4.1. Validity & Reliability

The validity and reliability of this exploratory qualitative research was established by
triangulation. Triangulation helps the maintain the validity and reliability of the research by
correlating the data collected from miscellaneous sources and through various mechanisms
and shedding light on the common themes extracted by analysing the data gathered. In
addition, the reliability of this research is further enhanced by using an identical unstructured
interview guideline for all selected respondents and asking similar set of open-ended
questions to all the interviewees.

3.5. Discussion of Instruments Applied

The main instrument applied in the collection of relevant data for this study was an
unstructured interview. The interview, which comprised 11 questions that are related to the
research objectives and questions, formulated in this research targeted diplomats within the

39
PDCDG of MFA of Ethiopia with a working experience in PD, especially DD. The main
purpose of the questions asked to the selected respondents is to find out the general
understanding the interrelated notions of DD and NB, the significant roles they could play
in building Ethiopia’s image, the current state of selfie diplomacy within the MFA, the
presence or lack thereof a culture of R&D based NB, to assess the availability of the
necessary resources to practice selfie diplomacy and the need to evaluate the dialogic nature
of the MFA of Ethiopia’s DD. In addition, respondents were asked whether there is such a
thing called Brand Ethiopia, whether Ethiopia’s national image is properly being portrayed
via DD and what challenges they faced.

3.6. Data Analysis Techniques

As a qualitative research with the explicit goal of eliciting data from primary (interview) and
secondary sources and comparing their findings with other similar case studies a constant
comparative analysis strategy was implemented. The data analysis technique devised for this
study involved organizing the details about the case, categorizing the data into meaningful
themes, looking for and identifying patterns. This came about by making analogical analysis of
the data and finally arriving at conclusions by evaluating the implications of the data which
answered the research questions posed in Chapter 1.

3.7. Ethical Considerations

To uphold the ethical considerations while conducting this research, the principle of
voluntary participation was applied. All the respondents were not coerced in any way to
respond to the interview questions posed to them. Hence, their informed consent was from
the outset prioritized. The selected interviewees were informed of the purpose and the utility
of the data elicited from their responses and are given the utmost liberty of accessing the
reports, if they would like to do so. In lieu of their real names, codes are employed to
maintain their right to anonymity as well as privacy, for some of their responses might have
implicit or rather explicit political overtones.

40
Chapter Four: Data Analysis and Findings
4.0. Introduction

This chapter deliberates the data analysis and findings from the interviews conducted with
10 respondents at the Ethiopian MFA’s PDCDG who are engaged in DD during the period
25 to 28 November 2016. The rationale behind this study was to identify the roles DD plays
in NB in terms of pronouncing and projecting Ethiopia’s image and reputation.

Based on the research questions framed this study was aimed at addressing the pertinent
issues related to

1. The complex set of relations between DD and NB and the role the former could play
in the latter
2. The challenges and opportunities involved in selfie diplomacy
3. The significant roles DD could play in portraying Ethiopia’s positive image parallel
to the challenges it poses.

Accordingly, the findings of the analysis of data from the interviews and literature review
are organized around these 3 major thematic areas followed by a revealing and reflexive
conclusion.

During the interview sessions, the questions were posed to the respondents in a spirit of
establishing rapport with them, encouraging them to be more open. Priority was also given
to the natural ideal flow of the respondents rather than strictly adhere to the sequential flow
of the research questions drawn. And this has encouraged the respondents to respond to
questions that are politically sensitive, which under normal circumstances they are not at
liberty to discuss.

4.1. Discussion of Findings

In an era of disruptive innovation, rapid technological change, ubiquitous connectivity, big

data, machine learning, algorithmic governance and digital literacy, diplomats, leaders, and
ministries started adopting what the digital zeitgeist necessitates: transformation (Digital
Research Association, 2016).With this process of transformation came the phenomena of
DD. One of the arenas where DD has come to make a tremendous impact is NB. The
marriage of DD to the classical yet dynamic concept of NB resulted in selfie diplomacy
thereby envisaging what Andrew Graan (2016) called “a new aesthetic paradigm”. In this

41
regard, DD has played a significant role in the efforts of nations to attract and influence
selected international publics.

4.1.1. The Relations between DD and NB

Despite their conceptual and practical differences as discussed in Chapter 2, DD and NB

have the goal of enunciating and radiating a country’s image. While DD treats the society
as a community of citizens from a political theory perspective, NB prefers to expand on the
marketing argument that society is nothing other than a collection of consumers.

Apropos of image building, DD as a trade within PD underscores the content of the message
that includes cultural, scientific, educational, and informational transactions to encourage
and promote mutual understanding and dialogue, the maintenance of consensus. NB, on the
other hand, is keen on stressing the image rather than what is in the message. Because of
this NB relies on the marketing advertising techniques of promoting a certain brand through
symbols and audio-visual aids that are transmitted through the media, traditional or modern
such as SNS. Through the course of time, however, NB has come to influence the very
conduct of DD with regards to image building and reputation management. While DD strives
to establish commonalities of principles among states, NB gravitates towards the creation of
a country’s unique identity.

Another difference between the two that systematically brings them together on the common
subject of image building is the origin of their direction. As has been inferred from the
interview findings, the vast literature on DD its chief goal is the promotion of a nation’s
political interests as formulated in its foreign policy. This could be best exemplified by
Ethiopia’s DD of promoting Ethiopia’s foreign policy imperatives of democratization and
development, peaceful settlement of disputes and the projection of its pride and prestige. In
such a way, Ethiopia’s DD endeavours to identify and foster values of common importance
that could potentially attract, persuade, and unify its public. With its penchant for business
and economic affairs such as trade, investment and tourism NB is focused on the creation of
a unique country brand in a way that favours the country’s relative competitiveness in the
international marketplace. This could be understood in the context of Anholt’s concept of
competitive identity that was discussed in Chapter 2.

4.1.2. The Role of DD in NB: The Ethiopian Account

Today there is a consensus among scholars, policy makers and practitioners of selfie
diplomacy that DD could play a pivotal role in propagating a country’s positive

42
distinctiveness in the echo chambers of the SNS-driven new public sphere of not just state
actors but powerful non-state actors. The viral, non-hierarchical, real-time, 24/7,
personalized, customized, and optimized (Digital Research Association, 2016) nature of DD
has allowed states to connect to their respective public emotionally, physically, and most
importantly, strategically, in a way that they could inculcate their ideas and aspirations in
the minds of millions in ways never imagined before. Indeed, digital diplomacy is key in
nation branding by strategically marketing the intent, character, mission, and identity as well
as the aspirations of a state in the frame of a highly competitive milieu. It serves as a window
through which a country’s unique of set of narratives, products and heritages could be
presented to the public.

The findings drawn from the interviews and the literature review of case studies generally
point to the fact that despite its novelty DD plays a significant role in the creation,
management, and preservation of a typically Ethiopian soft power. The unprecedented
opportunities presented by DD such as instantaneous communication, networking, and
dialogue though replete with certain inherent challenges, are the factors that could help the
country understand its proper place in the simulacra of the public imagination.

DD as a new media landscape where the makers and consumers of information network
without the strictures of the obsolete mode of communications, could help Ethiopian
diplomats and the MFA of Ethiopia to generate ideas, gather intelligence, produce
knowledge, interpret globalization in the Ethiopian context. Apart from that as the case
studies cited in this study and the findings of the interviews revealed, DD could help them
grasp the essence of selfie diplomacy to properly depict Ethiopia’s positive image. This
could, of course, come about either through the promotion of already existing positive
attributes of the Ethiopia national identity and the re-branding of historically tarnished
reputation. Illustrative of this is, the nation branding project of France over the centuries
beginning from the French Revolution’s notion of the nouveau (new) vs. ancién (old).

The participatory and dialogic nature of the new public sphere provided by DD could help
the MFA of Ethiopia to entice and persuade its audiences in a way that instils a sense of
belongingness and trust in them. As the literature on this subject illustrates, the journey
towards persuasively selling a country’s image by capitalising its soft power needs the
massive participation the people as they are the ultimate sources and destination of a nation’s
aspirations. As Melissen (2005) argued, the rather simplistic practice of selling images and

43
peddling messages to foreign audiences has little chance of paying off when it comes to the
semiotic articulation and the artistic projection of a country’s positive perception.

Finally, DD provides the infrastructure in which countries understand, build, manage, and
evaluate the performance of their unique country brands in real-time or otherwise using
international indices such as the NBISM. This being the case, the findings of the data analysis
from the interviews and the case studies emphasized the unprecedented opportunities DD
continues to offer poor countries such as Ethiopia in rehabilitating their tarnished reputation
and fostering the positive image they have.

4.1.3. Critique of Ethiopia’s NB Efforts via DD

Given its short history of involvement in DD, the Ethiopian MFA’s has exhibited certain
key accomplishments that deserve appreciation. The MFA of Ethiopia’s current 3rd leading
position in DD in Africa next to the ideationally powerful states of South Africa and Egypt
demonstrates well this very reality. When it comes to selfie diplomacy, however, the MFA
of Ethiopia’s current modus operandi as the findings of the data from the interviews,
personal observations and case studies consulted indicated suffers from 3 key predicaments.
These 3 predicaments that pose an ever-present challenge to the efficiency and efficacy of
the Ministry’s DD with the aim of promoting Ethiopia’s positive image include: an outdated
approach to DD that favours monologue in lieu of dialogue, the absence of a
comprehensively constructed Brand Ethiopia and the negative impacts of Ethiopia’s record
of tarnished reputation (negative branding).

Contrary to the case studies reviewed in this study the overriding DD approach within the
MFA of Ethiopia is not well-suited to the proper articulation and projection of Ethiopia’s
self-portrait in the Internetional System, where the contagious idea of, the Digital Research
Association’s 2016 Digital Diplomacy Review argues, viralpolitik slowly supplements
realpolitik. The interview findings indicated that, despite the Ministry’s third leading
position among the few influential foreign ministries in Africa the non-participatory,
monologue-laden public relations-style nature of its DD has severely debilitated its image
building attempts. The MFA of Ethiopia instead of listening to its publics, publishing
relevant information, engaging the people in an affective manner and evaluating its
performance, as the experience of the case studies showed, solely focuses on the incessant
provision of its official statements which more often are unattractive and uninteresting to
the public. In the process, this repetitive act of neglecting the interests and concerns of its

44
public has inadvertently plummeted the chances of boosting the country’s power of
attraction, persuasion and influence. As Daryl Copeland once said, “you can’t have a
dialogue if you’re reading from a script.” Which brings the research to a conclusion that, a
DD that is not cognizant of the presence of the voices of the people as manifested through a
two-way flow of ideas is incovenient to ensuring the proper and positive portrayal of
Ethiopia’s image. Put simply, dialogue is the essence of DD and NB taken separately or in
tandem.

The absence within the MFA of a culture of dialogue with the people is apt to make its DD,
not the least fail. The very attractiveness and influence of the MFA’s DD could only be
properly realized when the people are empowered through a culture of openness and trust.
As the literature on this subject proved, the journey towards persuasively selling a country’s
image by capitalising its soft power needs the massive participation the people as they are
the ultimate sources and destination of a nation’s aspirations. The literature on the
conceptual and practical implications of DD on NB also indicates that, per se the former is
an act of communicating foreign publics in the form of a dialogue to inform and influence
public opinion in favour of the latter. In conclusion, DD is a new public sphere where both
diplomats and the ordinary people create and share ideas and information through a culture
of conversation, relationship building and discourse coalition that could not normally be
regimented by the old diplomatic culture of secrecy and elitism. In such a way, DD is more
suited to enhancing as well as projecting Ethiopia’s soft power as opposed to the old PD of
suffocating and disregarding the people’s voice and making the diplomats engage in a
soliloquy of sorts, as it were. Nowadays, the people are not interested in talking to entities
that do not listen to what they have to say.

Apropos of the presence or lack thereof what could be called Brand Ethiopia, the findings
of the analyses of the interviews and the case studies indicated that at the moment Ethiopia
lacks a multifaceted branding initiative that comprises culture, history, religions, tourism,
investment, goods and services that the country produces and its governace model.
Ethiopia’s recently inaugurated “Ethiopia: The Land of Origins” tourism brand alone could
not result in Brand Ethiopia. As indicated in the literature reviews on NB, especially as
conceptualized by Simon Anholt (2000) in his Nation Brands Hexagon, the perception and
measurement of a country’s brand – Ethiopia, in this case - is not just about tourism but also
about the public opinion on the government’s competency and fairness and perceived
commitment to global issues; the people’s reputation of that country’s competence,

45
openness, and friendliness to other countries and peoples; global perception of its heritage
and culture; its potential to attract people to live, work, study and invest in it vis-à-vis a
favourable business atmosphere and the country’s quality of life; and, the publics image of
goods and services produced in that country. As Kinsey & Chung (2013) argued, the
measure of a country’s national image – international reputation and nation brand – should
be tested against a country’s emotional, physical, financial, leadership, cultural and social
appeals to the global community of people not just governments.

Even though most of the findings of the interview analyses point to the fact that the current
image and reputation of Ethiopia is based on age-old negatives stereotypes as constructed
by the Western media agencies such the BBC’s Jonathan Dimbleby’s portrayal of Ethiopia’s
1985 widespread famine, some of the findings cast light on another factor. That other
aggravating factor is the Ministry’s inability and unwillingness to proactively participate in
the creation, moderation, dissemination, and evaluation of Ethiopia’s soft power potentials.
The MFA of Ethiopia’s conventional model of diplomacy characterized by bureaucratic
rigidity, resistance to change, its failure to foster a culture of innovation among its diplomatic
corps and its negligence of the power of the people’s participation in its efforts to promote
Ethiopia’s image through DD is severely debilitating the already deteriorating global
perception of the country. The forewarning here is, if Ministry insists on clinging to this out-
dated modus operandi, the international reputation of the country hangs by a thread.

4.1.4. Challenges in Ethiopia’s Selfie Diplomacy

Like all other MFAs around the world, the Ethiopian MFA faces a plethora of challenges
that test the efficacy of its selfie diplomacy.

Firstly, the emergence of DD as a novel mode of communications characterized by dialogue

and relationship-building is among the chief challenges. For many MFAs the very newness
of the notion presents a challenge. Especially in poor countries such as Ethiopia that lack
the necessary resources such as R&D, finance, and a receptive bureaucracy the adaptation
process is sluggish. The results of the data analyses from the interviews and the case studies
proved the fact that the sceptical, half-hearted reception of new ideas and practices
inconsequentially has more harms to it than benefits.

Secondly, the prevalence of a wide digital divide i.e. gap in access to and literacy in ICT
facilities between the digitally have and have nots is a perennial challenge for most of the
countries in the Global South that includes Ethiopia. While the MFA of Ethiopia is busy

46
trying to convince its foreign audience to embrace Ethiopia’s positive image, the domestic
audience characterized by little or no access to the Internet is left out of the picture. This
tendency, as most of the arguments of most literature indicated, could severely damage a
country’s reputation for it neglects the main voices of that reputation, the people. In this
regard, Ethiopia is no exception.

Thirdly, the absence of a newly constructed holistic country brand as in Brand Ethiopia
coupled with Ethiopia’s long history of tarnished reputation has minimized the positive
impact recent initiatives such as “Ethiopia: The Land of Origins” could have made. Tested
against international standards, Ethiopia hitherto doesn’t have a well-integrated, all-rounded
unique national identity that it could present to the world. The current image the country has
is explicitly focused on the tourism sector. The recently inaugurated by the Ethiopian
Tourism Organization (ETO), “Ethiopia: The Land of Origins”, is not reflective of the
country’s rich pool of diverse people, cultures, religions, foods, languages, the place of
Ethiopia in the African collective conscious and the world, the country’s unique
contributions to the world, plus the goods and services that are ‘Made in Ethiopia’ and the
plethora of investment opportunities. In addition, the very creation of the country’s globally
influential brands though piecemeal is the sole domain of the ETO, a government agency
that solely specializes in the tourism sector. The MFA of Ethiopia hitherto didn’t play any
role in their creation except for announcing them when they come out. The minimal role the
Ministry has in organizing and spearheading national brand creation and promotion, in
concert with the ETO and other stakeholders both from the government and private
companies has further contributed to the non-existence of an appealing Brand Ethiopia. As
such, the creation of a successful and influential Brand Ethiopia demands that other aspects
such as people, governance, investment, and contributions to humanity be included.

Finally, the absence of a clear policy guideline that could serve as a roadmap for the MFA
of Ethiopia DD engagements has presented an obstacle. Unlike other cases the lack of a
clearly articulated strategy of engagement hampers the effectiveness of Ethiopia’s selfie
diplomacy. In a situation where financial and skilled manpower are scant, the MFA of
Ethiopia’s ongoing struggle to assert Ethiopia’s positive image on the world stage is
fruitless. A combination of policy and resource conundrums together with the absence of
R&D facilities with the Ethiopian MFA have inhibited the extent to which the Ministry could
build and preserve its own and Ethiopia’s international reputation in the arenas of diplomacy,
tourism, history, science and technology, and investment.

47
5. Conclusions and Recommendations
5.0. Introduction

Even though few studies to date have evaluated the way nations use DD to proactively
manage their image (Manor & Segev, 2015), recent studies undertaken in this area indicated
that the phenomenon of DD has proven to be an essential tool to alter the myriad of a
country’s image are perceived and accepted. By introducing the concept of dialogue, DD as
emissary of the new PD has further enhanced the power of states to create and manage their
identities. On the other hand, the emergence of DD inspired several studies that aim at
reconceptualising and contextualising of the concept of NB into the domain of PD. One
instance in this regard is Ying Fan’s conceptualization of NB in the context of PD. Fan
defined NB as, a process by which a nation’s images can be created, monitored, evaluated,
and proactively managed to improve or enhance the country’s reputation among a target
international audience (Fan, 2010). In line with the collective efforts to domesticate the
concept of NB first into PD and later DD, the concept of selfie diplomacy started to take
shape. The birth of selfie diplomacy united NB with DD in the sense that the latter could
facilitate the former. Gradually, the hitherto separate and disorganized practices of NB and
DD joined forces to jointly alter a country’s image and reputation in a positive way thereby
boosting that country’s attractiveness and influence i.e. soft power.

5.1. Conclusions

Based on the findings in Chapter 4, the following conclusions have been drawn and
presented here thematically with reference to the research questions formulated.

5.1.1. The Roles DD Plays in NB with an Emphasis on the Ethiopian Case

The adoption of social media tools by foreign ministries to advance the extent of their
influence among their selected domestic and foreign audiences have brought several key
opportunities to the field of NB. In their case study, America’s Selfie: How the Us Portrays
Itself on Its Social Media Account, Manor & Segev (2015) identified five beneficial roles
DD could play in NB:

1. [By engaging at the foreign ministry and the missions,] nations can tailor foreign
policy and nation branding messages to the unique characteristics of local audiences
with regard to history, culture, values and traditions, thereby facilitating the
acceptance of their foreign policy and the image they aim to promote;

48
 2. [DD] can also overcome many of the obstacles of [NB];
3. [It] could ensure that the image a nation promotes is linked with reality as content
shared on social media accounts deals both with foreign policy goals as well as the
concrete actions taken by a nation in the global arena;
4. [It] could facilitate two-way interaction and engagement between foreign ministries
and their followers, thus facilitating the creation of long-lasting relationships and
brand loyalty; and
5. [DD] is an important tool for image management as people who visit a nation’s social
media accounts often seek interaction and are therefore willing to open channels of
dialogue.

It is evident that DD could play a pivotal role in the creation, management, and promotion
of Ethiopia unique national identity. Especially, as a country that has experienced a recurrent
crisis in its image and reputation, the MFA of Ethiopia’s DD if ameliorated could prove to
be a bulwark against negative branding and a harbinger of a positive image of the country.
Nevertheless, an effective selfie diplomacy that could save Ethiopia’s face could only be
born when the NB is tactically tailored to be part of the Ministry’s DD which should also be
reformed to be more engaging, open, dialogic, and R&D based.

5.1.2. Implications of NB for DD

NB plays a key role in the construction of a country’s unique national identity. As such, the
creation and promotion of Brand Ethiopia via DD mostly comes from NB.

5.1.3. Challenges in Selfie Diplomacy

To avoid repetition, the Ethiopian MFA faces more or less universal mix of internal and
external limitations that are financial, bureaucratic, infrastructural, conceptual and political
in nature.

5.2. Recommendations

As per the research findings the following recommendations have been proposed.

5.2.1. On the Novelty of Selfie Diplomacy

Further longitudinal studies by scholars in the fields of diplomacy, international relations,

marketing, and communications, based on this research, could help elucidate these concepts
and document trends thereby shedding more light on the general picture of its practice at the
MFA of Ethiopia in a global and regional context.

49
5.1.2. On the Need for Brand Ethiopia

It would be immensely advantageous for the MFA of Ethiopia and its partners to undertake
a massive study and help create Ethiopia’s unique country brand.

5.1.3. On Policy Considerations

Considering the absence of clear policy guidelines on how to conduct selfie diplomacy,
preparing holistic engagement strategies with clearly stipulated goals and expectations
through the active participation of the people, the Ethiopian government, think-tank, and
consultancy firms would be advantageous in providing a sense of direction to the
practitioners and the policy makers that intend to project Ethiopia’s soft power potentials.

5.1.4. On the Need to Improve the Ministry’s Institutional Setup

It is advisable if the MFA of Ethiopia works harder to traverse and improve its unsuitable
bureaucratic atmosphere since this could boost the morale and creativity of its diplomats
thereby resulting in better outcomes.

Here it is also in the MFA of Ethiopia’s advantage to build the capacity of its diplomats
through trainings in DD, NB, and foreign languages other than English to acclimatize them
to such novelties and diversified audience.

50
References
Anholt, S. (2000). The Nation Brand Hexagon. The Nation Brand Hexagon. GfK. Retrieved September 15,
2016, from GfK: http://nation-brands.gfk.com/
Anholt, S. (2007). Competitive Identity: The New Brand Management for Nations, Cities and Regions .
London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Anholt, S. (2008). From Nation Branding to Competitive Identity – The Role of Brand Management as a
Component of National Policy. In K. Dinnie, Nation Branding: Concepts, Issues, Practice (pp. 22-
23). Oxford: Elsevier.
Anholt, S. (2010). Places: Identity, Image and Reputation. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Aronczyk, M. (2008). “Living the Brand”: Nationality, Globality and the Identity Strategies of Nation
Branding Consultants. International Journal of Communication, 2, 41-65. Retrieved from
http://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/download/218/118
Bortree, D. S., & Seltzer, T. (2009). Dialogic Strategies and Outcomes: An Analysis of Environmental
Advocacy Groups’ Facebook Profiles. Public Relations Review, 35(3), 317–319.
doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2009.05.002
British Council. (2016). GREAT Britain campaign. Retrieved November 2016, from British Council:
https://www.britishcouncil.org/organisation/facts/programmes-and-initiatives/great-campaign
Brown, S. J., & Studemeister, M. S. (2001). Virtual Diplomacy: Rethinking Foreign Policy Practice in the
Information Age. Information & Security, 7, 28-44. Retrieved September 2016, from
http://mercury.ethz.ch/serviceengine/Files/ISN/699/ichaptersection_singledocument/1d88fdd2-
d277-48d0-b9c1-6428b9274566/en/doc_701_259_en.pdf
Castells, M. (2010). The Rise of the Network Society (2nd ed., Vol. 1). Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Chaudhury, D. R. (2016, April 6). India on top 10 ranking of global digital diplomacy: Diplomacy Live.
Retrieved September 2016, from India Times: http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-
and-nation/india-on-top-10-ranking-of-global-digital-diplomacy-diplomacy-
live/articleshow/51715372.cms
Copeland, D. (2011, October 18). Are Diplomats Needed In The Digital Age? (Open Canada) Retrieved May
15, 2016, from Open Canada: http://opencanada.org/rapid-response/are-diplomats-needed-in-the-
digital-age/
Curators of Sweden. (2015). ABOUT. Retrieved from Curators of Sweden: http://curatorsofsweden.com/about/
Digital Research Association. (2016, August). Digital Diplomacy Review 2016 (#DDR16). Retrieved from
Digital Diplomacy Review 2016: http://digital.diplomacy.live/
Dinnie, K. (2008). Nation Branding: Concepts, Issues, Practice. Oxford: Elsevier Ltd.
Dua, T. (2015, February 3). 5 countries to follow on social media. Retrieved November 2, 2016, from
DIGIDAY UK: http://digiday.com/brands/five-countries-follow-social-media/
Durrance, J. C., & Williams, K. (2008, August 4). Social Networks and Social Capital: Rethinking Theory in
Community Informatics. The Journal of Community Informatics, 4(3). Retrieved June 2016, from
http://ci-journal.net/index.php/ciej/article/view/465/430
Fan, Y. (2010). Branding the Nation: Towards A Better Understanding. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy,
6(2), 97–103.
Fetscherin, M. (2010, January 1). The Determinants and Measurement of a Country Brand: The Country Brand
Strength Index. International Marketing Review, 27(4), 466 - 479. Retrieved September 20, 2016,
from http://scholarship.rollins.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1043&context=as_facpub
Fletcher, T. (2012, October 2). The Naked Diplomat. (Foreign & Commonwealth Office) Retrieved November
2, 2016, from Foreign and Commonwealth Office:
http://blogs.fco.gov.uk/tomfletcher/2012/10/02/the-naked-diplomat/
Foreign and Commonwealth Office. (2012). The Foreign and Commonwealth Office Digital Strategy. Foreign
and Commonwealth Office. London: Foreign and Commonwealth Office. Retrieved September 2016,
from Foreign and Commonwealth Office:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/39629/AB_12-11-
14_Digital_strategy.pdf

51
Foreign and Commonwealth Office. (2012). What is Digital Diplomacy? Retrieved August 4, 2016, from
Digital Diplomacy – the FCO's digital work: http://digitaldiplomacy.fco.gov.uk/en/about/digital-
diplomacy/
Germany – Land of Ideas. (2016, April 7). Nation Branding in the Digital Age: From the Traditional to the
Digital Diplomat. Retrieved October 6, 2016, from Germany – Land of Ideas: https://www.land-der-
ideen.de/en/news/nation-branding-digital-age-traditional-digital-diplomat
Gesellschaft für Konsumforschung. (2016). About NBI. Retrieved from GfK: http://nation-brands.gfk.com/
Graan, A. (2016). The Nation Brand Regime: Nation Branding and the Semiotic Regimentation of Public
Communication in Contemporary Macedonia. Signs and Society, 4(1), 70-105. doi:2326-
4489/2016/04S1-0004
GREAT Britain Campaign. (2012). About. Retrieved September 2016, from GREAT Britain Campaign:
http://www.greatbritaincampaign.com/#!/about
Grech, O. M. (2006). Virtual Diplomacy: Diplomacy of the Digital Age. University of Malta, The Faculty of
Arts . Valetta: University of Malta. Retrieved September 9, 2016, from
https://www.diplomacy.edu/sites/default/files/23082010104529%20Grech%20(Library).pdf
Greenland Tourism Office. (2016). Branding Toolkit Vol 1. Retrieved from Official Greenland Tourism Site :
http://corporate.greenland.com/media/4243/branding-toolkit-vol-1_uk.pdf
Gudjonsson, H. (2005, February 8). Nation Branding. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 1(3), 283–298.
doi:10.1057/palgrave.pb.5990029
Iosifidis, P., & Wheeler, M. (2016). Public Spheres and Mediated Social Networks in the Western Context and
Beyond . (P. Iosifidis, & M. Wheeler, Eds.) London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Ipu, C. J. (2013). E-Diplomacy in East Africa: Case Study of Kenya. Institute of Diplomacy and International
Studies, Diplomacy. Nairobi: University of Nairobi. Retrieved August 2016, from
http://erepository.uonbi.ac.ke/bitstream/handle/11295/60009/Ipu_E-
diplomacy%20in%20East%20Africa%3a%20case%20study%20of%20Kenya.pdf?sequence=3&isA
llowed=y
Johnston, Y. (2008). Developing Brand South Africa. In K. Dinnie, Nation Branding: Concepts, Issues,
Practice (pp. 5-13). Oxford, UK: Elsevier Ltd.
Kerr, P., & Wiseman, G. (2013). Diplomacy in a Globalizing World: Theories and Practice. New York :
Oxford University Press.
Kinsey, D. F., & Chung, M. (2013). SURFACE, 4(1). Retrieved September 2016, from
http://surface.syr.edu/exchange/vol4/iss1/2
Kunczik, M. (1997). Images of Nations and International Public Relations. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Lüfkens, M. (2016, May 31). Twiplomacy Study 2016. Retrieved October 2016, from Twiplomacy:
http://twiplomacy.com/blog/twiplomacy-study-2016/
Manor, I. (2015, January 9). Framing, Tweeting, and Branding: A Study in the Practice of Digital Diplomacy.
Retrieved October 2016, from USC Center on Public Diplomacy:
http://uscpublicdiplomacy.org/blog/framing-tweeting-and-branding-study-practice-digital-
diplomacy
Manor, I. (2015, May 2). On Israel’s Selfie Diplomacy. Retrieved August 18, 2016, from The Jerusalem Post:
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/On-Israels-selfie-diplomacy-436483
Manor, I. (2016). Are We There Yet: Have MFAs Realized the Potential of Digital Diplomacy? Leiden, The
Netherlands: Koninklijke Brill.
Manor, I., & Segev, E. (2015). America’s Selfie: How the US Portrays Itself on Its Social Media Accounts. In
C. Bjola, M. Holmes, C. Bjola, & M. Holmes (Eds.), Digital diplomacy : theory and practice (pp. 89-
108). New York, New York, USA: Routledge.
McClory, J. (2016). The Soft Power 30: A Global Ranking of Soft Power. PORTLAND.
McCormack, K. (2007). Social Network Theory: Applications to Supply Networks. Lecture Note.
Melissen, J. (2005). The New Public Diplomacy: Soft Power in International Relations. (J. Melissen, Ed.)
Hampshire, England: Palgrave McMillan Publishers.
Muller, M. (1998). Current Developments in South African Diplomacy. In Academic Training Institute, & J.
Kurbalija (Ed.), Modern Diplomacy (pp. 65-79). Pretoria, South Africa: DiploPublishing.

52
Olins, W. (2013, November 4). On Nation Branding. (O. N. Branding, Producer, & Saffron Consultants)
Retrieved September 14, 2016, from YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bc-N1Upvgr8
Pamment, J. (2016). GREAT: A Campaign Approach to Projecting Soft Power. In J. McClory, The Soft Power
30: A Global Ranking of Soft Power (pp. 64-67). Portland.
Porter, M. (1998). The Competitive Advantage of Nations. Free Press.
Rabinovitch, S. (2008). The Rise of an Image-Conscious China. China Security, 4(3), 33–47. Retrieved from
http://mercury.ethz.ch/serviceengine/Files/ISN/91335/ichaptersection_singledocument/12e9d58d-
7a76-4f25-8cc6-bf7641539312/en/03_Chapter+2.pdf
Sevin, E. (2013). Places Going Viral: Twitter Usage Patterns in Destination Marketing. Journal of Place
Management and Development, 6 (3), 227-239. doi:10.1108/JPMD-10-2012-0037
Smith, A. D. (1991). National Identity. University of Nevada Press.
Sotiriu, S. (2015). Digital Diplomacy: Between Promises and Reality. In C. Bjola, A. Clarke, K. L. Corrie, M.
Holmes, L. Jiang, I. Manor, S. Murray, C. Bjola, & M. Holmes (Eds.), Digital Diplomacy: Theory
and practice (pp. 33-51). New York: Routledge.
Stein, J. G. (2011). Diplomacy in the Digital Age: Essays in Honour of Ambassador Allan Gotlieb. (J. G. Stein,
Ed.)
Szondy, G. (2008). Public Diplomacy and Nation Branding: Conceptual Similarities and Differences.
Netherlands institute of International Relations 'Clingendael'. The Hague: Netherlands institute of
International Relations 'Clingendael'.
Techopedia. (2014, February 4). E-Diplomacy. Retrieved June 2016, from Techopedia:
http://www.techopedia.com/definition/29050/ediplomacy
The Oxford Department of International Development. (2014, October 23). Researching Public Diplomacy.
Retrieved September 2016, from YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EUHcd_EkTE
Twiplomacy. (2015, April April). Twiplomacy Study 2015. Retrieved October 2016, from Twiplomacy:
http://twiplomacy.com/blog/twiplomacy-study-2015/
Twiplomacy. (2016, July 27). Country Promotion 2016. (M. Lüfkens, Editor, & Burson-Marsteller) Retrieved
September 2016, from Twiplomacy: http://twiplomacy.com/blog/country-promotion-2016/
University of Virginia. (2011, July 8). 21st Century Statecraft. Retrieved April 2016, from Digitizing America:
http://digitizingamerica.shanti.virginia.edu/sites/shanti.virginia.edu.digitizingamerica/files/21st%20
Century%20Statecraft.pdf

53
 Appendices
Appendix 1: Interview Guide
Interviewees Full Name: Sex: Age:
Level of Education: Department:
Contact Details – Phone: E-mail:
Date of Interview:
Dear Interviewee, my name is Hibamo Ayalew Basha. Currently I am an MA student in Diplomacy and
International Relations at the Ethiopian Civil Service University. As part of the partial fulfillment of
Master of Arts in Diplomacy and International Relations I am writing my thesis on the topic Digital
Diplomacy for Nation Branding and Image Building: The Ethiopian Context. Kindly thanking you for
your cooperation, I would like to request you to respond to the following questions as they are relevant
for the study. I would also like to remind you that your responses are to be used for the sole purpose of
the research and remain confidential. Last but not least, the opinions you might express during the
interview will by no means, intentionally or unwittingly, be taken as the formal stand of your organization
and are personally attributed to you. Rest assured, you’re explicitly entitled to your own private views.
1. What do you think are the relationships between digital diplomacy and nation branding? What
significant roles could digital diplomacy play in branding Ethiopia on the cyber front?
2. In your organization, are there initiatives at building Ethiopia’s reputation through your digital
diplomacy engagements?
3. Do you think that there is such a thing as Brand Ethiopia?
4. Are there standard measurement tools and guidelines that you employ in your efforts to leverage
the potentials of digital diplomacy in branding Ethiopia?
5. Do you have research and development programs that could help you better understand, measure
and manage Ethiopia’s reputation via your social media outlets? What significant roles do other
non-state entities, private corporations that are engaged in the corporate branding business play in
enhancing your endeavors?
6. If the collective efforts in your organization driven towards branding Ethiopia via the public that
has been offered by digital diplomacy are to be fruitful, it is imperative that the necessary resources
(skilled manpower, finance and gadgets and gizmos) are present. That being the case, do you
believe that your organization has the necessary resources that could help it effectively manage
Ethiopia’s reputation?
7. In your opinion, how is the notion and practice of nation branding affecting the digital diplomacy
that you conduct on a daily basis? How is the dialogic element digital diplomacy introduced
affecting your nation branding activities?
8. What is the current state of Ethiopia’s reputation on the digital diplomacy front? Do you believe
that Ethiopia’s national identity is being properly and fairly represented in the arena of digital
diplomacy? What counter-disruption strategies are you employing to ensure that Ethiopia is
appropriately portrayed?
9. As a practitioner of diplomacy and a citizen of Ethiopia, do you believe that the utility of those
‘brave new world’ communications tools could help improve Ethiopia’s global image?
10. What are the challenges you and your organization face in your efforts to build a better,
comprehensive brand of the country?
11. Is the nation branding approach you have in your organization being implemented in concert with
the aim of boasting the country’s soft power?

54
View publication stats