The Credibility of Public Diplomacy Narratives in the Age of Fake News and Growing Mistrust Among International Political Actors

Abstract

The possibility of a widespread conflict between actors possessing nuclear weapons and ultra-sophisticated military technologies is increasingly mentioned in academic analyses and debates, causing concern among the international public. Democracy as a form of government in peaceful times can undergo fundamental changes in situations of conflict. The political leaders of the major powers can use democracy and diplomacy to reduce or prevent war, but when violence breaks out between two states, both sides use  democracy to make people sympathise with their objectives and tactics and to damage the reputation and image of the other side. Under these conditions, psychological warfare and information warfare gain more importance and applicability than public diplomacy activities. And yet, in this conflictual communicative environment, public diplomacy does not disappear from the international public agenda. The stakes are ‘whose public diplomacy narrative wins’rather than ‘whose army wins,’ because international politics and communication have entered a competition of credibility. The answer to this question is complicated because the communication environment has changed in the digital age, with wars involving multiple forms of violence. In this type of international conflict, there are several communication actors who play the role of narrators with different objectives, and the credibility of public diplomacy messages and narratives is affected by the phenomenon of fake news and post-truth.