IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/glopol/v11y2020i2p233-244.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social Media Mobility: Leveraging Twitter Networks in Online Diplomacy

Author

Listed:
  • Ilan Manor
  • Elad Segev

Abstract

Recent years have seen mass adoption of social media by ministries of foreign affairs (MFAs). However, diplomats are still searching for ways to evaluate their online activity and assess the impact of online activities on offline diplomacy. This article argues that the centrality of a diplomatic institution to a Twitter network of its peer can be used to evaluate both online and offline diplomacy. Central actors on Twitter can set diplomats’ offline agenda, influence how diplomats view issues being debated in diplomatic forums, gather information relevant to the policy formulation process and become information brokers between nations. Moreover, through a two‐year analysis of the Twitter networks of MFA and UN missions we demonstrate that diplomatic institutions can perform an act of upward social media mobility by which they become more central to Twitter networks. We also show that hard power resources such as the relative wealth of nations and their population size does not guarantee online centrality. Thus, diplomatic institutions may suffer from downward social media mobility in which they become less influential online. Finally, we identify a set of digital tactics and strategies that enable MFAs and embassies to become more central to Twitter networks of their peers.

Suggested Citation

  • Ilan Manor & Elad Segev, 2020. "Social Media Mobility: Leveraging Twitter Networks in Online Diplomacy," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 11(2), pages 233-244, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:glopol:v:11:y:2020:i:2:p:233-244
    DOI: 10.1111/1758-5899.12799
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12799
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1758-5899.12799?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hafner-Burton, Emilie M. & Kahler, Miles & Montgomery, Alexander H., 2009. "Network Analysis for International Relations," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 63(3), pages 559-592, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Alfredo Guzmán Rincón & Sandra Barragán Moreno & Belén Rodríguez-Canovas & Ruby Lorena Carrillo Barbosa & David Ricardo Africano Franco, 2023. "Social networks, disinformation and diplomacy: a dynamic model for a current problem," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-14, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jacob Wood & Gohar Feroz Khan, 2015. "International trade negotiation analysis: network and semantic knowledge infrastructure," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(1), pages 537-556, October.
    2. Tobias Böhmelt & Jürg Vollenweider, 2015. "Information flows and social capital through linkages: the effectiveness of the CLRTAP network," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 105-123, May.
    3. Cynthia Couette, 2024. "Epistemic competition in global governance: The case of pharmaceutical patents," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 15(3), pages 516-527, June.
    4. Michael Kenney & Stephen Coulthart & Dominick Wright, 2017. "Structure and Performance in a Violent Extremist Network," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 61(10), pages 2208-2234, November.
    5. Carattini, Stefano & Fankhauser, Sam & Gao, Jianjian & Gennaioli, Caterina & Panzarasa, Pietro, 2023. "What does network analysis teach us about international environmental cooperation?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    6. Stefan Niederhafner, 2014. "The Korean Energy and GHG Target Management System: An Alternative to Kyoto-Protocol Emissions Trading Systems?," TEMEP Discussion Papers 2014118, Seoul National University; Technology Management, Economics, and Policy Program (TEMEP), revised Sep 2014.
    7. Parizek, Michal & Stephen, Matthew D., 2021. "The long march through the institutions: Emerging powers and the staffing of international organizations," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 56(2), pages 204-223.
    8. Srigiri, Srinivasa Reddy & Breuer, Anita & Scheumann, Waltina, 2021. "Mechanisms for governing the water-land-food nexus in the lower Awash River Basin, Ethiopia: Ensuring policy coherence in the implementation of the 2030 Agenda," IDOS Discussion Papers 26/2021, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).
    9. Stanzel, Volker (Ed.), 2018. "Die neue Wirklichkeit der Außenpolitik: Diplomatie im 21.Jahrhundert," SWP-Studien 23/2018, Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik (SWP), German Institute for International and Security Affairs.
    10. Emilie M. Hafner-Burton & Alexander H. Montgomery, 2012. "War, Trade, and Distrust: Why Trade Agreements Don’t Always Keep the Peace," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 29(3), pages 257-278, July.
    11. Stacie E. Goddard, 2020. "Revolution from the Inside: Institutions, Legitimation Strategies, and Rhetorical Pathways of Institutional Change," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 11(S3), pages 83-92, October.
    12. Julia Gray & Jonathan Slapin, 2012. "How effective are preferential trade agreements? Ask the experts," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 7(3), pages 309-333, September.
    13. Maria J. Debre & Hylke Dijkstra, 2023. "Are international organisations in decline? An absolute and relative perspective on institutional change," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 14(1), pages 16-30, February.
    14. Zeev Maoz, 2012. "How Network Analysis Can Inform the Study of International Relations," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 29(3), pages 247-256, July.
    15. Yoshiki Yamagata & Jue Yang & Joseph Galaskiewicz, 2017. "State power and diffusion processes in the ratification of global environmental treaties, 1981–2008," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 501-529, August.
    16. Michele Acuto & Benjamin Leffel, 2021. "Understanding the global ecosystem of city networks," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 58(9), pages 1758-1774, July.
    17. Alexander H. Montgomery & Scott D. Sagan, 2009. "The Perils of Predicting Proliferation," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 53(2), pages 302-328, April.
    18. Takagi, Daisuke & Yokouchi, Nobutada & Hashimoto, Hideki, 2020. "Smoking behavior prevalence in one's personal social network and peer's popularity: A population-based study of middle-aged adults in Japan," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 260(C).
    19. Phil Baxter & Jenna Jordan & Lawrence Rubin, 2018. "How small states acquire status: A social network analysis," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 21(3), pages 191-213, September.
    20. Renato Corbetta, 2015. "Between indifference and coercion: Third-party intervention techniques in ongoing disputes," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 32(1), pages 3-27, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:glopol:v:11:y:2020:i:2:p:233-244. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.