Showing posts with label Attitudes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Attitudes. Show all posts

Wednesday

2018 Press Freedom Index questions India's commitment to democracy

Another ranking and another dismal show! The latest is from the organization "Reporters Without Borders (RSF)" which published it's annual Press Freedom Index for 2018.
The World Press Freedom Index 2018  ranked India at a lowly 138 out of 180 countries surveyed! This was reported widely in India's mainstream media and other publications in Asia. The fact that the largest democracy in the world cannot ensure a free media comes as a shocker to all - a development that also questions the very basis of Indian democracy. It is important to recognize the fact that India ranked 136 in 2017, which was not great in itself and signifies that press freedom has never been easy in India even though the Constitution guarantees it. In 2002, when the report was first released, India ranked 80th, indicating that it has gone from bad to worse in the last decade for independent media in the world's largest democracy (?).

(Press Freedom Index in Asia. Image courtesy: RSF)
In it's report, Reporters Without Borders stated, 
"with Hindu nationalists trying to purge all manifestations of 'anti-national' thought from the national debate, self-censorship is growing in the mainstream media and journalists are increasingly the targets of online smear campaigns by the most radical nationalists, who vilify them and even threaten physical reprisals." 

The report also took into account the recent murder of journalist Gauri Lankesh and cited India's Information and Broadcasting (I&B) Ministry as the most active censoring agency of 2018.
While this was reported extensively in the Indian press we hope a larger debate takes place that looks into the reasons for the progressively deteriorating press freedom situation in India. With reports such as these out there in the public domain, how do you build a credible counter narrative? Is counter narrative a better idea than introspection on the part of the India state given it's commitment to democracy. 

These are the moments that really calls for character in a public diplomacy program where it becomes a two way process of influencing  domestic politics as well.


The Index is an annual ranking of countries compiled by Reporters Without Borders which is based upon the organization's own assessment of the countries' records when it comes to freedom of the press. Reporters Without Borders is an international non-profit that promotes and defends freedom of the press worldwide. The organization has consultant status at the United Nations and is headquartered out of Paris.
Posted by Madhurjya Kotoky 0 comments

Friday

South Korea develops comprehensive Public Diplomacy plan

South Korea never fails to impress us with it's quiet commitment to public diplomacy. While there's lot of talk around the world about projecting soft power, very rarely do we find discussions on South Korea.

 The tensions with North Korea aside, the latest that has come from South Korea is that the country has set up clear actionable and measurable public diplomacy plans for 2018 and beyond. South Korea's Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced today that it has developed the first comprehensive public diplomacy program and constituted agencies to drive and execute the plan. 
We have discussed in this blog earlier as well how relevance, 'measurability' and being 'budgeted for' will become the 3 significant challenges for foreign offices worldwide as they think of public diplomacy. 

 If we don't have answers to these, most PD programs will take the easy way out, which in India's case is narratives around Bollywood, food, culture and heritage and the occasional 'sensationalism'. 

 South Korea seems to be working to overcome these challenges:


  • The plan has a clear budget commitment of 410 billion won.
  • The plan has 49 tasks.
  • These tasks include 320 culture related projects, 200 knowledge related projects and 190 policy-oriented diplomacy projects
Among various awareness promoting initiatives, the country also has plans to constitute private committees to "correct factual errors" regarding the country. Internally for South Korea, this is the first time PD policy has been integrated with local implementation agencies and central administrative agencies of the government. This is great!

Korea Foundation will serve as the overseer of this program.

 We will definitely ask PD practitioners to keep a watch on South Korea.

Posted by Madhurjya Kotoky 0 comments

Saturday

Expat Insider Survey 2017: India among 10 worst countries


 The Expat Insider 2017 survey is out. The results for India are not flattering. Expats have ranked India among the 10 worst countries to live in. India secured the 57th position among 65 countries surveyed. Bahrain is the topmost destination for expats and ranks first. Interestingly, US ranks 43rd.
The Times of India dedicated space to this news today and for a change the publication decided to focus on the reasons behind the low ranking.

 The primary reasons are:
  • Lack of work life balance
  • Lack of quality healthcare
  • Lack of quality education
  • Concerns of safety
  • Gender Insensitivity
  • Environmental Pollution
Some of the findings can be debated, especially the ones related to healthcare and education. But expats more often than not, bring their own experience as a frame of reference in evaluating standards in another country. Given that tendency we can maybe overlook that. Also the credibility of InterNations as an organization to reliably conduct such a survey needs to be examined as well, especially for research rigor.

But those are not the issues. The issue here is how surveys are now everywhere on everything under the sun. As all marketers would agree, it is one of the most popular tools to grab eyeballs, spark off a conversation and initiate a debate. Media loves it - especially online newsrooms - because the format works well with such content. What results is the shaping of perception - in this case the perception of nearly 188 countries.



What I like about the findings of the above survey is that in the context of India, it can possibly make us introspect a little bit. There's a long way to go and there are real issues that the country needs to address. Brings me back to a question I repeatedly raise in this blog:
  1. Can soft power make up for the lack of progress on fundamental issues? 
  2. Also, is soft power, in fact a by product of power and development itself? Do we give it more importance than it deserves?
There is merit in looking at the Expat Survey above in the context of an HSBC Survey published earlier this year which found that expats in India are among the highest paid in the world. Despite the high salaries and compensation, the environment in which they live made the Indian expats rate the country low in terms of experience. True - money isn't everything!



Posted by Madhurjya Kotoky 0 comments

Thursday

"Culture is there, to be Shared - Not Sold" - SIMON ANHOLT


"... international public opinion favours countries that contribute to the common good of humanity, rather than countries which are merely successful, beautiful or powerful..."

- Simon Anholt

The recent Good Country Index had a surprise. India's rank under the category of "Culture" was a lowly 119 among the 163 countries that were surveyed. For India watchers like us this was indeed interesting given the huge interest in government and policy circles to promote Indian culture overseas as a component of Indian soft power. 


The Public Diplomacy Blog spoke to Simon Anholt on this aspect trying to understand why India ranked low on "Culture". Simon brings to the fore an important distinction between promotion of 'culture' versus 'cultural contribution' and there seems to be a good opportunity for India's creative economy to be internationally 'participative'.


The following is what Simon Anholt had to say:


How is 'culture' defined in the survey?

Simon: We follow the UNESCO definition of culture that incorporates cultural production, the creative industries and expressions of national/regional culture; we also consider how each country facilitates freedom of movement and freedom of expression in order to allow the production, sharing and dissemination of culture. As explained on the website at https://goodcountry.org/index/source-datathe way we ‘sample’ a country’s cultural contribution to the world in the Good Country Index is by combining the following datasets:

  • Creative goods exports: Exports of creative goods (UNCTAD's Creative Economy Report categorization) relative to the size of the economy.
  • Creative services exports: Exports of creative services (UNCTAD's Creative Economy Report categorization) relative to the size of the economy.
  • UNESCO dues in arrears as % of contribution: UNESCO dues in arrears as percentage of contribution (negative indicator).
  • Freedom of movement, i.e. visa restrictions: Number of countries and territories that citizens can enter without a visa (according to Henley & Partners).
  • Press freedom: Freedom of the press (based on mean score for Reporters without Borders and Freedom House index as a negative indicator).

Of course these five indicators don’t give a complete or exhaustive account of a country’s cultural output – it’s just a sample – but they’re the best and indeed the only suitable datasets we were able to find. 

Cultural expression just isn’t very fully measured internationally, and obviously we need data that’s collected in a consistent way, every year, in at least the 163 countries we cover in the Index. These five datasets were the only ones we could find that fitted the bill.

2. Indian government does a lot in promoting Indian culture and there is a tacit acceptance in policy and media circles that it is India's biggest soft power - and we see a lower rank for India as a whole. What is your comment on this?


Simon: I think they’re doing the right thing (although I would argue that simply ‘promoting’ one’s national culture isn’t a very Good Country thing to do: culture is there, after all, to be shared – not sold to people as a way of enhancing the country’s image). Of course a lot of this activity is 'unmeasurable' in a comparative survey like the Good Country Index, and this is one of the reasons why we are hoping to start producing more qualitative, in-depth, country-specific surveys in the near future: this will enable us to cover a lot of the activity in all seven categories that the Good Country Index is unable to measure.


3. Does the ranking reflect a perception by people of "culture" in the country or the state of culture in the country ?

Simon: Neither: the Good Country Index isn’t an opinion poll, it’s a measurement of reality; however it doesn’t directly reflect the state of culture in the country, it attempts to measure how much of that culture is shared internationally.
4. How do you think the ranking would impact India's perception?

Simon: My research over the last 15 years has consistently demonstrated that international public opinion favours countries that contribute to the common good of humanity, rather than countries which are merely successful, beautiful or powerful. So whilst a high ranking in the Good Country Index on its own is unlikely to affect public perceptions of the country, the good behavior that gives rise to that ranking certainly will. 

Simon Anholt


Suggestions/Critiques welcome.
- Madhur





Posted by Madhurjya Kotoky 0 comments

Tuesday

The politics of perception in Charlie Hebdo

As world media discusses and debates the impact of Charlie Hebdo massacre on freedom of expression, Noam Chomsky, offers, as always, a point of view that is unique. 

Chomky brings to our attention a serious concern with regards to the dominant media narrative on the Charlie Hebdo incident. Speaking on the commentary that followed, Chomsky writes,
“The crimes also elicited a flood of commentary, inquiring into the roots of these shocking assaults in Islamic culture and exploring ways to counter the murderous wave of Islamic terrorism without sacrificing our values. The New York Times described the assault as a "clash of civilizations," …
Chomsky juxtaposes this against media commentary that followed recent act of violence across the world such as:

All the above incidents were marked by violence against civilians, public institutions, journalists but never quite qualified to feature in narratives of attacks against freedom of expression, freedom itself, or even narratives of outrage and concern on a scale similar to reactions received by the Charlie Hebdo incident. 

It's only sensible to wonder why.

In the politics of narrative and perception, Chomsky’s position is significant. The “media power structure” of our world is no different and is the same as the political power structure in international politics. We don’t often realize this, but as stories compete, some voices tend to get lost or are never expressed.

Chomsky states,
“These few examples illustrate a very general principle that is observed with impressive dedication and consistency: The more we can blame some crimes on enemies, the greater the outrage; the greater our responsibility for crimes -- and hence the more we can do to end them -- the less the concern, tending to oblivion or even denial.”
This awareness surprisingly resulted in some Middle Eastern states like Qatar to take the initiative and establish their own international media outlets (Eg. Al Jazeera). 

However Middle East’s media landscape, as I experienced in the last couple of years, is completely dominated by experienced professionals from the West or from Asia, who come with great knowledge, but not necessarily always with a “contextual perspective” that is required to tell a story of the “other”. 

Coupled with controls over free media in the entire region, difficult questions remain unasked; indigenous experiences remain hidden and the introspection that is required to understand “why is it happening to us” never happens. 

Instead, people are told what is wrong with them, often by groups who have no context. The tradition of the story is alien.

As Chomsky states,
Contrary to the eloquent pronouncements, it is not the case that "Terrorism is terrorism. There's no two ways about it." There definitely are two ways about it: theirs versus ours. And not just terrorism. 
Posted by Madhurjya Kotoky 0 comments

Wednesday

Assassination, symbolism and implications for Public Diplomacy


5389! Yes, that’s the number of articles a simple Google search shows as I surf the web now to read about the assassination of Ambassador Christopher Stevens in Libya. It is reflective of the immense symbolism of the incident across the world, especially in the Arab world currently undergoing significant political transformations. The world awaits the American reaction, and, maybe a lot of us are expecting spectacular retributive justice from the Americans.  It makes for a good show!

This unfortunate incident was powerful for its immense symbolism. Real close to the anniversary of 9/11, in a country recently ‘liberated’ from a dictator, in the lands of the Arab Spring with aspirations of becoming free and open societies. It is indeed great media fodder, especially the imagery of protests, the burning of the American flag and civilian assaults on the American embassies. An American response has to take into account this context and maybe a measured response will be beneficial if the United States wants a long term strategic involvement in the region.

Palestinians burn the US flag during a demonstration against an anti-Islam on September 12, 2012 in front of the UN headquarters in Gaza City. Source: www.presstv.com
In my previous posts I had written about the possibility of a counter reaction to the Arab Spring in the next few years. Viewed in context of the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood, and rising tide of millenarian aspirations post the fall of the older political order, incidents such as these can play on popular imagination and provide the reactionary forces with just the ammunition to seize power. Enhanced strategic communications is now more important for United States than ever to counter such a possibility. This will call for more action from State Department to build ‘networks of influencers’ and deepen engagement rather than going out all guns blazing. Can these story tellers be crisis managers? Can PD/ Public Affairs be expected to manage such conflicts?

Policymakers must not lose sight of the fact that this battle will be fought over ‘24 hour media’ all across the world. This will be as much a battle of ideas and attitudes. Every action by both the parties will create different narratives that would shape perceptions, form opinions in societies currently undergoing tremendous change. The implications will be significant and it might help if policymakers indulge in some ‘scenario gaming’ from this perspective.

Can there be an internal foreign policy dialogue in the United States? While freedom of expression is sacrosanct, does it give the right to pull down other faiths, beliefs and way of life? Especially in a country that is committed to protect every community, every faith, and every belief in its land? If the action of a minority in the name of freedom of expression can bring mayhem, war and destruction to their own people what good is the right? Is the principle of “reasonable restrictions”, as it exists in Indian legal system, the answer to these issues that arise out of such incidents in the western world?

In an age of pervasive media and ‘continuous conversations’ these are important questions. I don’t know the answers, but what I would like to stress is that this is not a job for the marines alone, but communicators of the State Department have a battle in their hands too! A protracted struggle!

Suggestions/Critiques welcome.

-- Madhur
Posted by Madhurjya Kotoky 0 comments

Tuesday

'Emotional connect' in the elections in Egypt

So we all know the results of the elections in Egypt. Muslim Brotherhood leads with radical Salafists coming a close second. In fact Islamist parties cornered two-thirds of the votes in the elections. On March 21, 2011, I had clearly written in my blog that it is too early to write off Islam as a political force as a result of the Arab Spring. In a bit of kamikaze thinking, I also applied the Gartner Hype Cycle to explain why religion might become central to Arab political discourse after the Arab Spring. You can read the post here - Revolutions and emotions in Middle East.   By this time we also know that Tunisia has turned 'green' and Libya intends to do so as well. 

History has showed us time and again that revolutions often lead to 'millenarian' expectations that often results in it becoming reactionary or throwing up results that maybe unanticipated. This is not to suggest that the victory of Islamists is a reactionary development; it might be good for those countries and the world in general. They were elected by a democratic process. Just that we don't know yet.

Religion is emotional and appeals to the heart and so has wider appeal than political concepts. It can be felt and doesn't need to be learnt unlike a political concept. Besides, religion promises final salvation, the education and training for which begins at home. It is also not alien and is instead steeped in the local customs, culture and folklore. It is familiar, pure and can be trusted. It is what in communications we call the 'emotional connect.' In societies where religion has always been central it is no surprise that people have expressed their faith in Islamists. Congratulations to the people of Egypt for successfully electing a government of their choice!

Suggestions/Critiques welcome.

-- Madhur



Posted by Madhurjya Kotoky 0 comments

Sunday

Survey of attitudes by India's PD division

The Public Diplomacy division of Government of India in collaboration with the Center for Advanced Study of India, University of Pennsylvania, is conducting a survey of attitudes with regard to India's foreign policy. It is a survey of 'elite attitudes' - given that fact that it is a survey of international relations faculty in Indian academic institutions - and is a first of its kind exercise undertaken by the PD division.

It is currently also being conducted at the first National Conference on International Relations - Shifting Sands: India in the Changing Global Order, in New Delhi, India. The introduction to the survey states, 
"... there is relatively little understanding about what Indians take to be the nature of international politics, and correspondingly, how their power and influence should be used. This survey seeks to help better understand Indian attitudes on the role of power, order, force and justice in international politics. How will the interplay of long-held beliefs, India's vision of itself, the rise of new actors and institutions and India's changing relationship with the West influence India's worldview and role in global affairs?"
It will be interesting to see the results of this survey, which has good news potential as well. The conference in itself is a first time initiative by the PD division to create a forum for Indian academics, policymakers and practitioners of international relations to meet, network and exchange ideas.

Suggestions/Critiques welcome.

-- Madhur

Posted by Madhurjya Kotoky 0 comments
Older Posts Home
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)