Amb. Ogbole Amedu-Ode
By Mark Longyen
Former Nigerian ambassador and ex-spokesman, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Amb. Ogbole Amedu-Ode, says media diplomacy is crucial to influencing the formulation and implementation of a robust foreign policy in multifaceted ways.
Amedu-Ode, who described media diplomacy as the use of media by government representatives to interact with both state and non-state actors, stated this while speaking with diplomatic correspondents in Abuja.
According to him, diplomatic correspondents engage in diplomatic diplomacy, and are participants in diplomatic activities, procedures, and influence foreign policy because media diplomacy is a significant tool in foreign policy.
Amedu-Ode said that, in the public space, diplomacy and journalism are regarded as two different types of human endeavors but noted that they have a common denominator between them, which is reporting.
“While diplomats report to their headquarters and between each other through formal channels, announcements, and attitudes, the media’s reporting is for the public space.
“There is, therefore, the point of divergence, which is the targeted audience.
“The world of diplomacy and journalism, like every field of human endeavor, is a dynamic world even as both sides continue to maintain some strict rules of engagement,” he emphasized.
The former Chargé d’Affaires, Nigerian Embassy, Mexico, said that media diplomacy helps in advancing the goals of foreign policy by sending messages and information to the officials of other states, and influencing audiences at the international level.
“Social media can be a crucial tool in diplomatic practice for expressing the negotiating parties’ positions.
“For instance, the frequent tweets from key negotiators and other parties have influenced the dynamics of the Brexit negotiations.
“Additionally, social media permits quick shifts in public opinion,” Amedu-Ode said.
Amedu-Ode said that the media had played a significant role in diplomacy by putting politicians under more pressure than ever before to respond quickly to news reports, which are frequently inaccurate, fragmentary, and devoid of context.
“While quick diplomatic communication can lead to policy blunders, it can also help decision-makers handle a crisis.
“Global television coverage may serve as a real-time information source on situations that call for swift action, which could significantly impact the result,” the retired diplomat said.
He described the managing of foreign policy engagements, whereby diplomats use digital and online platforms, like the internet and social media, to manage information between countries, as digital diplomacy.
“Diplomats, foreign ministries, and I political figures can control information directly through digital media,” he said.
According to the ambassador, there is a nexus between media diplomacy and public diplomacy, adding that emerging realities have revealed that the duo have often been lumped together as one and the same.
He said that public diplomacy is strategic communication, which is implemented through the media, as the media is used as a channel to communicate and convey positive information to the public.
“It aims to achieve acceptability or legitimacy and therefore, cooperation within a target audience for a foreign policy objective through media and improve the image of a country internationally,” he said.
Amedu-Ode said that on the other hand, media diplomacy aims to achieve conflict resolutions via the platform of the media, which is the involvement of journalists in international conflict resolution.
The difference between media diplomacy and public diplomacy, he said, is that in media diplomacy, journalists use media to send messages and information to the general public and state officials.
While in public diplomacy, he said, political actors, including state and perhaps non-state actors, use the media to influence the public opinion of foreign and domestic audiences.
“This shows that the difference lies with the communication channels and communication actors,” Amb. Amedu-Ode added.(NAN)
