Crowdfunding is about a lot more than money
Article written by Matthieu JOHN.
In a digital world where we are only just starting to discover the possibilities for new forms of mass collaboration, some defy easy categorization. We had always thought of crowdfunding as, well, a funding mechanism. If your cause can’t get government grant or a gift from a wealthy benefactor, ask the crowd to pay for it.
That’s why were we surprised to see the U.S. government turn to crowdfunding to help Syrian refugees. Why would the government with the largest budget in the world need to ask the internet for money?
Our last blogpost explored this campaign and identified some tips for successful crowdfunding campaigns. There was so much rich material that emerged from our interviews with activists about their crowdfunding activities, though, that we now offer this blog post to shed light on how the tactics helps mobilize global citizens to fight global challenges. The tool is much more powerful than a mere fundraising operation. In our research, we limited ourselves to large campaigns (with goals over $100,000), all linked to the Syrian refugee crisis. The key question we asked activists was “how did you mobilize citizens online?“ The answers we heard offer lessons for any kind of online civic participation campaign.
Overview of two organizations and their projects:
In September 2015, SOS Mediterranée, launched a campaign on Ulule in partnership with Médecins du Monde to raise funds to launch the first European civic campaign to “Rescue Lives in the Mediterranean Sea”. The purpose: to charter a rescue ship between Italian and Libyan coasts.
Shatilalive is a project led by the Lebanese organization Basmeh and Zeitooneh serving refugees and vulnerable communities. In June 2015 it launched a campaign to finance its community center in the Shatila refugee camp in Beirut.
Why do organizations turn to crowdfunding?
SOS Méditerranée members saw in crowdfunding an appropriate tool to buid its community while raising funds. By enabling a personal approach crowdfunding can create a relationship of trust with donors. Their campaign began in the inner circle of volunteers before it gradually expanded, all the while keeping it personal.
For Basmeh and Zeitooneh, resources were a real need since the funds they received from foreign NGOs had reduced considerably. But more than a sources of income, members of the Lebanese organization saw crowdfunding as an opportunity to create a network of people willing to help each others. It’s also a great way to share continuously the impact of donations on beneficiaries.
How to mobilize the public around a common goal?
To capture the attention of the public, SOS Méditerranée set a clear objective. 100,000 euros would the organization to rent a boat for 1 month. 200,000 euros would equip it with a team and equipment to make it fully operational. If it were to raise 1.2 million euros, SOS Méditerranée would be able to buy its own boat and become independent. SOS Méditerranée offered varied and original rewards: an opportunity to talk with the team, to become member of the Support Committee, and to have the donor’s name engraved on the boat.
To attract the public, the organization also shared many news pictures and videos, managed a strong presence on social networks and YouTube, and maintained a very active project profile page and website. Over a 45-day campaign, SOS Méditerranée raised an impressive $390,000, 274 % of their minimal goal.
Shatilalive project also had a clear and precise objective.. The organization offered opportunities to make a specific impact on the lives of refugees in their camp. For example, $50 would cover the cost of education of a student for a month, $500 would support an artistic workshop for youth, $1000 would cover rent for three months for vulnerable families. For donors seeking a collective impact $25,000 would cover fees of a Vocational Training Institute for one year and $50,000 would the operation of its Centre for Art and Culture the same amount of time. This link between the individual and collective impact is relevant, because it expands the options donors have to make an impact.
The organizers also managed to appeal to emotions, through texts, photos and videos that presented the living conditions of refugees, but also showing the impact Basmeh and Zeitooneh had on their lives. The point where this project particularly distinguished itself is the impressive maximization of positive media exposure. We’ve had a good example of viral strategy with the popular hashtag #Shatilalive. Basmeh and Zeitooneh focused energy on its digital exposure and took advantage of the publicity it generated. In a 41-day campaign, it met its funding target with nearly $ 101,650 in donations collected.
The relationship with the crowdfunding platform:
In both cases, the relationship between the organization and the crowdfunding platform played an important role in the campaign’s success. The platform supports project leaders, both online and in person. Besides the online help interface of the platform, it has been present from day to day, pushing the organizers to go ahead. SOS Mediterrannée had lots of interactions with Ulule, its member noted the importance of having a human and regular contact. Members of Basemeh and Zeitooneh told us how important it was for the platform’s employees to be ready to listen and answer questions from them.
Conclusion:
Through our research and interviews demonstrated that crowdfunding creates a real link between the donor and the beneficiaries. The donor participates in its way that directly contributes to youth education, charitable works, or the promotion of values that he or she shares with the organization. And for its part, the movement gains a lot more than cash. Crowdfunding can help it forge a community of activists.
A New Tool For Digital Diplomacy: Crowdfunding
Article written by Matthieu JOHN, available in its original version here.
A White House initiative brought together the United Nations Refugee Agency (UNHCR) and the crowdfunding platform Kickstarter in October 2015 in order to mobilize citizens to assist Syrian refugees.
In just a week, the campaign mobilized 27,669 people around the world, which gave an impressive amount: nearly $ 1.8 million. The funds are intended for “USA for UNHCR”, which will use the money to provide assistance to Syrian refugees with food, water, clothing, and a special support to orphans. This initiative of the US government is somewhat unprecedented. This may be the first time a government has used crowdfunding in order to mobilize citizens around a global issue. It is in this context that Direct Diplomacy, which is very interested in the transformations caused by digital tools in our societies, focused on the use of crowdfunding in the field of global issues.
The crowdfunding “trend” has grown in importance these last years. The American platform Kickstarter is the best example of this. In early October, the global crowdfunding leader delivered impressive results: since its inception in 2009, the financing of its projects has passed the threshold of 2 billion through donations of 9.5 million people around the world. Other platforms, as Indiegogo, have had considerable success too. If crowdfunding manages to collect impressive amounts of money, not all the projects enjoy this success. This is particularly reflected in the success rate of projects on crowdfunding platforms. The success rate of a project on Kickstarter is for example 44% (in January 2014), whereas it is only 10% for a project on Indiegogo. However, each of the platform keeping its specificities, these results should be used carefully.
We then asked the following question: What contributes to the success of a project on a crowdfunding platform? There are several factors that enable the success of a crowdfunding campaign, but the following 4 points will most determine the impact of your campaign.
- What financial model and which platform for my project?
First of all, choose the right funding model for you: charity, reward-based, equity or lending-based. The charity or donation model is often used for social projects. People will give funds without any expectation of return but get the satisfaction of helping others or a specific cause. The reward-based model allows a company to receive funds without any ownership in exchange, but a reward as recognition of the donation. Whereas the equity model implies that investors will receive equity in return of their donations. Finally, the lending-based model will let you borrow money from the public, which will be paid back later with interest. It is a simple, quick and cheap way of receiving funds but only a small percentage of applications are approved. The charity, reward-based and lending-based models are quite popular.
Then, according to the financial model adapted to your project, you need to choose the right crowdfunding site. There are many crowdfunding sites and each of these has its peculiarities. Some platforms accept any type of project. This is the case of Babeldoor or Cookie Jar. Other platforms are general but chose not to engage itself in particular fields. Kickstarter, for example, does not host charity projects. Finally, some platforms are oriented to specific sectors. ArtMarket Canada, for example, is specialized in creative and artistic projects. Fig specializes in video games.
The platforms also have different rules, beginning with the rules surrounding the financing. In some cases, it will be obtained only once the funding goal is reached. In other cases, it will be obtained even if the funding goal is not reached. Indiegogo illustrates the latter model: on this platform for example, if a project is funded at 80%, the proponent will receive the amount thought. A project on Kickstarter must be 100% financed before funds are released.
Note also that some platforms make a pre-selection of the projects. For instance, Ulule accepts about 65% of the project proposals. These differences should be taken into account, because depending on the platform, your financial goal will not be the same, nor will be your chances of reaching your objectives.
Eventually, not all platforms benefit from the same exposure. Having your project on a platform such as Kickstarter, which is very popular and gets lots of traffic, will give your project greater exposure. The success rate on Kickstarter is 44%, it is only 11% for RocketHub which is a smaller platform.
- How to present your project?
The way you lay out your project will have a direct impact on your success. Here are six elements that any project must have:
A simple title: It should be short, catchy and easy to find through the crowdfunding website you choose and through general search engines.
A compelling description: Your project must be clearly presented, people should know who is behind the project, what problem you are addressing, where will the funds go and how it will be used, what will be the impact on beneficiaries, etc. You must find the appropriate balance between giving little information and too much information. You can refer to other similar projects that have experienced successful campaigns. Also, do not hesitate to appeal to emotions to maximize your impact.
A realistic financial goal: This must above all be reasonable and achievable. Look at a few other similar projects before setting an objective. You will see that some project holders tend to be too ambitious, some not enough!
Creative rewards: Many project offer rewards to incentivize donors. The best ones are highly innovative. For instance, for the Syrian humanitarian campaign White Helmets, donor’s names are inscribed on the ambulances that donations fund.
The more imaginative and personalized the rewards, the more people will donate.
A campaign video: With even a 2 or 3 minute video, you catch peoples’ attention provide information about your organization, and bring in more contributors than through any other method.
Images: Don’t stop at the video. The internet is a highly visual medium and potential donors will want to see as much as they can about a project: the beneficiaries, the members of your organization, the project in action. You can also provide graphics that illustrate the scale of the problem you’re addressing and the results you’re achieving. One successful graphic used by a campaign that Kiron University launched to provide Syrian refugees with university education presented a “progress bar” that directly indicates the amount missing to finance the education of the next student. This motivated donors by showing the impact of their individual contributions.
- Campaign length and momentum:
The concept of time will be fundamental throughout your campaign. First, you need to choose the right campaign length. On the one hand, it must be long enough to capture public attention and convince potential donors. On the other hand, a long campaign will run out of energy and discourage donors. Time should still be long enough to let you reach your goal. According to Indiegogo, the optimal campaign length would be 45 days.
It is also important to think in advance about momentum. According to Kickstarter, once your campaign raises 20% of its funding goal, it has an 80% chance of success. This “turning point” depends on your funding goal: the higher it will be, the higher the turning point will be. If your campaign has a funding goal of $10 000 or less, you need to reach only 15% of your target to have an 80% chance of success. But if your fundraising goal is $100,000 or more, you need to raise 65% of your funding goal to get the same chance of success. And the faster your campaign will gain momentum, the higher its chance of success will be: campaigns that reach 30% of their funding goal during the first week have a higher success rate.
- Promotion – the role of social media:
The success of your campaign will be closely linked to the exposure it receives. Obviously, you will want to use social networks – but how? Used correctly, both Facebook and Twitter can lead to widespread media coverage of your campaign. The luckiest campaigns benefit from the effect. This was the case of Norwegian journalist Gissur Simonarsson, who sought to raise money for Syrian refugee Abdul Haleem Al-Kader. He set up a hashtag for Twitter promotion of the campaign: #BuyPens. The phenomenal spread of this hashtag allowed Gissus Simonarsson to reap more than $175,000 in just six days. Make sure to link your project profile page to your organization’s website so that prospective donors can get more details about the project, its progress or the people behind the campaign. Keep feeding your social networks throughout the campaign. One way to do so is to periodically release videos of interviews with beneficiaries to provide provide continual feedback to donors on the impact they are having.
A final note. In running a crowdfunding campaign, you won’t be alone. Any platform you use will have an interest in your success. Leverage this mutual interest to make the most of your campaign. Contact your platform’s “Help Center” for specific advice and useful information before, during and after your crowd-funding campaign.
Goal Definition and the Use of Online Petitions
(Read in French) One of the first steps in campaign creation, and one of the most critical, is goal definition. Having a strong, clear goal allows for participants to have a unifying message to rally behind and can direct all related actions in the same direction. It can help to ensure that all protests, slogans, letters, and actions done in the name of the campaign are working towards a common goal.
To achieve both impact and longevity, a campaign can use short-term goals that work towards reaching a long-term goal. This allows for participants to have something concrete to work towards, while having a larger aim as the backdrop.
China Labor Watch (CLW), a labor rights group with offices in the US and China, uses this strategy. CLW has the overarching goal of increasing transparency of supply chains and factory labor conditions and acting as advocates for workers’ rights in supporting the Chinese labor movement. They publish reports and assessments about the state of labor conditions in Chinese factories throughout the year, however, and create short-term campaigns that are intended to work towards their overall mission.
The art of balancing impact and longevity
In the summer of 2012, China Labor Watch launched investigations into Samsung’s factories and found evidence of child workers. They subsequently published a report that outlined the abuses uncovered, and began a campaign to bring attention to this issue. CLW used numerous methods to achieve this goal which included creating and disseminating a press release, approaching the company directly, sending out a message through their email list, and setting up a page on their website to introduce the issue. Therefore, when Li Qiang, the founder of CLW, set up a petition on Change.org called “Samsung: Stop Exploiting Child Laborers,” it was just one of the many avenues by which they were trying to spread their message and gain greater awareness on this issue (also read this article on the role of emotional mobilization).
The Change.org petition garnered 159,000+ signatories and the attention of Samsung. But this success
came with a catch. The petition format of a site like change.org obliged CLW to simplify its short-term goal, in this case “calling on Samsung to stop using child laborers at its Chinese employers.” Thus, they were focusing on a specific labor issue (underage workers), and a specific company (Samsung). This allowed supporters to feel there was a focused area whereby change could take place. Samsung responded in a manner that addressed the “ask” from the petition, however, circumvented the overarching goals of CLW.
As public pressure mounted against Samsung, they responded with a “zero tolerance” policy on child labor. “What that means is that if child labor is confirmed they could pull out all business from a factory,” noted Kevin Slaten the Program Coordinator at CLW in an interview, “and if that happens, as it did in the case of this factory, it would be suicide. It would absolutely devastate [the workers].” By pulling out of the factories, although child labor would be addressed, the jobs and livelihoods of numerous adult employees would end.
Having a simplified “ask” on the petition allowed for Samsung to respond to the demands of the petition while still not acting in accordance with CLW’s ultimate objectives. This was one case where short-term goals hindered the longer-term goals of a movement.
Goal definition, therefore, needs to be considered carefully in the early stages of a campaign and can be critical in reaching the envisioned outcomes. The use of digital tools can be largely helpful in growing the audience for a cause, and can allow for a goal to get more attention. However, one must be exceedingly careful in considering how to state a short-term goal to ensure that it works within the bigger picture in creating long-term change. Although CLW got more “ears to their cause” through the use of Change.org, a carefully defined goal could have harnessed the power of their petition to create more meaningful change.
Protecting Social Campaigns from Digital Risks
![▇▇▇▇ [1113]](https://directdiplomacy.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/content-blocked.jpg)
▇▇▇▇ [1113], picture of Brian J. Matis, January 2012 (Flickr)
(Read in French) As outlined in both our Campaign Playbook and Full Report, the Direct Diplomacy team advocates a series of important recommendations for campaign organizers for safe participation in the digitally enabled era of direct action.
As the impact and influence of online citizen movements have increased, so too have efforts to weaken and undermine them by repressive governments. These governments have long used physical intimidation tactics to disrupt political organization. Now that organization is moving online, they are increasingly turning to digital tactics.
This is why it is essential that movements are aware of the digital environments in which they operate. While the Internet is truly a global phenomenon, it has become increasingly divided along national jurisdictions. Content regulations, domain blocking technology, and comprehensive surveillance systems are all part of state government’s growing digital presence, and form the relative digital environment that campaign organizers operate in. For example, countries that have pervasive government surveillance systems, robust content blocking technology, and repressive freedom of expression laws would be considered to have a risky digital environment. Campaign organizers need to educate themselves and their participants of how they are vulnerable to digital risks. More than that, organizers need to learn about and equip themselves with the proper tools to protect themselves in risky digital environments.
Rapidly advancing and ever prevalent, we categorize these digital risks under three broad classifications: surveillance and censorship, phishing attacks, and Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks.
Content censorship and Internet surveillance has now become commonplace in both authoritarian and democratic societies. The degree to how much content is filtered and blocked in a country will vary, but projects like the OpenNet Initiative do extensive testing to map out blocking activity worldwide. Organizers will have to be aware of the local laws that dictate what content is illegal, to ensure that potential participants can access important information, campaign material or digital tools. Fortunately, for organizers or citizens in such countries, censorship circumvention tools like Psiphon allow users to access the open Internet.
Surveillance systems offer potentially more pervasive and insiduous risks to campaigns. Armed with these systems, governments are complicit in infiltrating mobile devices and computers, recording the activity of campaign participants, with damaging repercussions. The Occupy Central campaign in Hong Kong (see Samuel Wollenberg’s post on OCLP and distributed leadership) showed just that, as Chinese state authorities were suspected of multiple accounts of monitoring and registering activists. Some participants were even refused entry into Mainland China after being connected with the protests. For such campaigns, digital anonymizers like Tor can help ensure participants and organizers isolate themselves from retroactive punishment via state surveillance systems.
The Occupy Central campaign also witnessed instances of malicious pshishing activity, where campaign participants were sent suspicious messages with links to malware and other nefarious software. These threats are easily avoidable with simply refusing end-user acceptance (i.e. just don’t open strange links), but educating participants on how to identify phishing messages is encouraged.
DDoS attacks, while less prevalent than the other risks we have categorized, are difficult to defend against. The attacks are attempts to make a machine, website, or network resource temporarily or indefinitely unavailable to intended users. With multiple methods of attack, DDoS require significant technical resources to properly mitigate threats. However, as the attacks require sophisticated coordination and resources to execute, campaigns should focus most of their defensive efforts to mitigate against the more prevalent digital risks.
Fortunately, many citizen campaigns are already educating and protecting themselves. The Internet Ungovernance Forum (IUF) was a 2014 campaign part of the wider Internet freedom movement in Turkey. Operating in the riskier Turkish digital environment, the campaign organized sessions identifying digital risks facing citizen journalists and activists, and even held workshops on how participants can utilize protective tools like Psiphon or Tor.
The IUF has set an important and positive example for citizen campaigns operating in the digital era. As campaigns begin utilizing digital tools for organizational capacity and direct action, they must be mindful of the digital environments where they operate. And as repressive technology continues to advance, so too does the positive technology empowering citizens worldwide.
See also this The Economist’s multimedia content on how prostestors evade digital censorship :
The Maven of Digital Diplomacy
(Read it in French) In his 2000 book The Tipping Point, Malcolm Gladwell identifies one key actor in social transformations, whether they be in the realm of ideas, politics, or fashion. ”Mavens” are early trend-setters: the people who recognize the potential of a new way of thinking, a new way to bring people together, a new look. They play an essential role because they are among the first to act on a new concept, showing others how it’s done. Later “connectors” and “salespeople” pick up their example and tell thousands or millions about it, and the new trend becomes commonplace.
The growing use of digital tools in diplomacy already has its maven. In studying how the British Ambassador to Lebanon, Tom Fletcher, plies his trade online, we saw how perfectly the term fits. Not only is he an active presence on social media, he has also pioneered the use of these tools to advance his diplomatic objectives.
Amb. Fletcher’s approach has been called Diplomacy 2.0 by the Lebanese media. He embraces social media as a central part of his mission to manage the bilateral relationship between Great Britain and Lebanon, arguing that “increasingly, it matters less what a Minister or diplomat says is ‘our policy’ on an issue – it matters what the users of Google, Facebook or Twitter decide it is… networks are replacing hierarchies.’ The task for diplomats is to intervene in these new spaces to advance their government’s views and win other users over through “authenticity, engagement and purpose.”
He’s active on a variety of platforms to accomplish this. His embassy operates corporate accounts on Facebook, YouTube and Flickr as well as a website, but since social media is primarily a tool for the individual, he maintains his own Twitter account and blog. The strategy seems simple enough – use Facebook as the principal engagement platform between the UK and the Lebanese people, keep the website as an authoritative repository of information, then reinforce with “stickier” content through video (Youtube), still photos (Flickr) and live videoconferences (Google Hangouts). The ambassador adds his own personal flavour through his blog and tweets to draw more and more people into the conversation. With 23,300 at latest count, clearly he’s having some success.
Of course, it is no longer rare to see diplomats active on so many social media fronts. What is rare is to have a diplomat that uses them in a such a strategic, coherent and explicit manner. Indeed, he has staked out brave new ground for transparency by not only engaging in the conversation online, but by explaining openly why he is doing so and what his objectives are. His blog the Naked Diplomat is in effect a meta-discussion about his online presence. It is quickly becoming a reference point for all those interested in digital diplomacy, and we recommend it highly.
The new approach to diplomacy that Amb. Fletcher embodies is no mere hobby of his. In the use of social media he accurately perceives an opportunity for make diplomacy relevant for the digital age. True to his role as a maven, he sets out lessons that all diplomats should follow in making this a reality. To wit:
- It is important to know your audience. In his case, 25% of his followers are simply curious about the work of an ambassador, 25% are UK policy junkies, 25% are Lebanon political junkies and 25% are a mix of people that are either curious, quirky, or hostile.
- Do not be defined by your audience; this is not a popularity contest. Having a lot of followers is a sign that your message is getting through, but it is not an end in itself.
- Be authentic: people need to see the real person behind the Twitter handle. Social media is more raw and real and human than normal diplomatic relations, and people are more likely to read the press release if they feel they know what you are like as a person.
- Try to be consistent and coherent. Avoid duplication and contradictions between the people in the country where you are serving and the people back home.
- The best diplomacy is based on action not on contemplation. Statements on social networks should be about changing the world and not just describing it.
- Understand the risks, particularly where the personal and the professional mix. Think before you tweet, and think about how it will look through the lens of a hostile audience.
- Quality matters. Build a brand and know the impression that you want to leave.
- The rest of your day job still matters. Just like diplomats that fall into the trap of thinking their report matters more than the action described in it, a similar trap exists with our tweets.
- Social media is a jungle, and you will definitely be criticized. Try to listen, to engage, to convince but don’t fall into endless debating
- Don’t lose sight of the bottom line. Always remember the national interest by asking yourself: what makes my country richer and more secure?
Now that Amb. Fletcher has led the way it’s time for all of us connectors to get out there and popularize this way of diplomacy.
How Digital Tools Are Transforming Diplomacy
(Read in French, in Spanish) The first research question we need to address is about the changes that the advent of digital tools is bringing to diplomacy.
Traditionally, diplomats have focused primarily on interaction between national governments, in other words on state to state communications. Digital tools present three challenges to this practice.
First, as they accelerate the diffusion of power to a broader set of social actors, they have expanded the number of players involved in international relations. No longer can diplomats focus on the top 10 or 20 most influential people in each country, now they must engage with thousands and potentially millions as it becomes easier for people to collaborate together to exercise power.
Second, by connecting actors directly they undermine the role of some institutions and other intermediaries. This opens the door for individuals to play a role as never before in world politics. Before, a citizen had to vote for a political party, join a NGO or get a job as a diplomat, foreign correspondent, or business executive to engage in international affairs. Now one can start a movement online, become a citizen journalist or become an international entrepreneur by doing little more than running a successful website.
Third, because individuals as citizens play a greater role they demand more transparency. Gone are the days when governments could try to exert influence in other countries without explaining what they are trying to do and why they consider it legitimate. It’s simply too easy for individual citizens to question, expose and criticize. Any policy that doesn’t anticipate the need to address those concerns is likely to fail.
The growing role of individuals in international relations obliges us diplomats to adapt our approaches. We offer the following three rules.
- We need to be clear about what we’re trying to achieve. The environment in which we are practicing diplomacy has expanded to include thousands and potentially millions of participants. We need to be able to explain our objectives in terms that all can potentially understand.
- We need to be as transparent as we possibly can. When dealing with a much wider set of interlocutors there will always be those that are suspicions of governments and those that fundamentally distrust anyone in a position of authority. The best response is to be open with what we are trying to do and why we consider our work to be fully legitimate.
- We need to be as interactive where we can. In a highly communicative environment, the worst strategy is to speak without listening, or to broadcast views without giving an opportunity for others to share theirs.
Social Media in International Relations: Meaningless or Menace?
(Read in French) On the one hand, countries supporting Ukraine’s territorial integrity launch a campaign of solidarity under the Twitter hashtag #unitedforukraine are derided for being ineffectual in the face of Russian hard power.
On the other hand, the Turkish Prime Minister denounces Twitter as “the worst menace to society” responsible for links between the 2013 protests that shook his country and “foreign powers.”
Opinions on the use of social media in international relations are all over the map. To some it seems a waste of time, to others a mortal threat to the most powerful institutions in the world: national governments.
Time for a deep breath. To those who reacts with derision, we would reply that social media is a tool which is increasingly used in all sectors of political and economic life, and so deserves to be used in diplomacy as well.
To those who react with fear about dark plots of foreign subversion, I would remind them that social media has no special power beyond the power of citizens talking and cooperating with one another. If a government does not fear its own citizens, it should have nothing to fear from Twitter or Facebook.
But the wild divergence in opinions about digital diplomacy also underlines how important it is for us to come to terms with these tools. As they reshape how we conduct global affairs, we need to learn how they can be used effectively, and how they can be used legitimately.
This blog aims to be a discussion by practitioners for practitioners about the role of digital tools in diplomacy.
In launching the blog, our hope is that in having actual diplomats talk about what we actually do with social media will help inject rationality and objectivity into the discussion. For nothing so demystifies a profession as being a part of it. And nothing demystifies digital tools as actually using them.
The discussions on this site will aim to accelerate the learning process as diplomats race to get up to speed with tools the rest of the world has adopted with astonishing speed. With luck, it will also help others interested in international relations understand how diplomacy is adapting to the digital world, and what opportunities are opening for them, as individuals, to play a role.
Our research team will monitor the online activity of prominent digital diplomats and the relatively few analyses that have been written about their work. Along the way we will draw on this research to address the following questions:
- How is the increasing use of digital tools transforming the traditional practices of diplomacy?
- Who are the most successful diplomats using social media and what should we learn from them?
- How should governments engage with new actors in digital diplomacy?
- If governments must act through individual diplomats in a social media world that only really responds to individuals, how should diplomats balance their institutional and individual identities?
- In a world that demands more and more transparency, how should foreign ministries balance openness with the occasional need for secrecy when negotiating or advancing national interests?
directdiplomacy.wordpress.com 
Recent Comments