• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

线下外交和线上外交有何不同?对联合国代表的公开声明和社交网络帖子的比较分析。

How different are offline and online diplomacy? A comparative analysis of public statements and SNS posts by delegates to the United Nations.

作者信息

Sakamoto Takuto, Araki Momoko, Ito Hiroto, Matsuoka Tomoyuki

机构信息

Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.

Institute for Digital Observatory, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.

出版信息

Front Big Data. 2024 Apr 8;7:1304806. doi: 10.3389/fdata.2024.1304806. eCollection 2024.

DOI:10.3389/fdata.2024.1304806
PMID:38680474
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11049423/
Abstract

INTRODUCTION

This article investigates the evolving landscape of diplomacy in the digital age, focusing on diplomats at the United Nations (UN) Headquarters in New York. The central inquiry revolves around how diplomatic actors use digital tools to complement or augment traditional face-to-face diplomacy.

METHODS

We systematically compare a substantial corpus of X posts (tweets) from UN diplomats with their public statements at the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), employing advanced computational social science techniques. This study applies a range of large-scale text analysis methods, including word embedding, topic modeling, and sentiment analysis, to investigate systematic differences between offline and online communication.

RESULTS

Our analysis reveals that, while the essence of diplomacy remains consistent across both domains, there is strategic selectivity in the use of online platforms by diplomats. Online communication emphasizes non-security topics, ceremonial matters, and prominent policy stances, in contrast to the operational issues common in UNSC deliberations. Additionally, online discourse adopts a less confrontational, more public diplomacy-oriented tone, with variations among countries.

DISCUSSION

This study offers one of the first systematic comparisons between offline and online diplomatic messages. It illuminates how diplomats navigate the digital realm to complement traditional roles. The findings indicate that some elements of public diplomacy and nation branding, directed toward a wider audience far beyond the council chamber, have become an integral part of multilateral diplomacy unfolding at the UNSC.

摘要

引言

本文探讨数字时代外交格局的演变,重点关注纽约联合国总部的外交官。核心问题围绕外交行为体如何利用数字工具来补充或增强传统的面对面外交。

方法

我们运用先进的计算社会科学技术,系统地比较了联合国外交官的大量X帖子(推文)与其在联合国安理会(UNSC)的公开声明。本研究应用了一系列大规模文本分析方法,包括词嵌入、主题建模和情感分析,以调查线下和线上交流之间的系统差异。

结果

我们的分析表明,虽然外交的本质在两个领域保持一致,但外交官在使用在线平台时有战略选择性。与安理会审议中常见的操作问题相比,在线交流强调非安全议题、礼仪事项和突出的政策立场。此外,在线话语采用了不那么对抗、更面向公共外交的语气,各国之间存在差异。

讨论

本研究首次对线下和线上外交信息进行了系统比较。它阐明了外交官如何在数字领域中发挥作用以补充传统角色。研究结果表明,面向安理会会议厅之外更广泛受众的公共外交和国家品牌塑造的一些要素,已成为在安理会展开多边外交的一个组成部分。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0bbd/11049423/bf9cca0cec80/fdata-07-1304806-g0003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0bbd/11049423/b153dcf6d73d/fdata-07-1304806-g0001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0bbd/11049423/cd531096212b/fdata-07-1304806-g0002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0bbd/11049423/bf9cca0cec80/fdata-07-1304806-g0003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0bbd/11049423/b153dcf6d73d/fdata-07-1304806-g0001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0bbd/11049423/cd531096212b/fdata-07-1304806-g0002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0bbd/11049423/bf9cca0cec80/fdata-07-1304806-g0003.jpg

相似文献

1
How different are offline and online diplomacy? A comparative analysis of public statements and SNS posts by delegates to the United Nations.线下外交和线上外交有何不同?对联合国代表的公开声明和社交网络帖子的比较分析。
Front Big Data. 2024 Apr 8;7:1304806. doi: 10.3389/fdata.2024.1304806. eCollection 2024.
2
Applied global health diplomacy: profile of health diplomats accredited to the UNITED STATES and foreign governments.应用全球卫生外交:向美国和外国政府派驻的卫生外交人员简介。
Global Health. 2018 Jan 11;14(1):2. doi: 10.1186/s12992-017-0316-7.
3
"Digital global health diplomacy" for climate change and human security in the Anthropocene.人类世中应对气候变化与人类安全的“数字全球卫生外交”
Health Promot Perspect. 2022 Dec 10;12(3):277-281. doi: 10.34172/hpp.2022.35. eCollection 2022.
4
Global health diplomacy in Mexico: insights from key actors in the field.墨西哥的全球卫生外交:该领域主要行为者的观点。
Global Health. 2021 Dec 2;17(1):137. doi: 10.1186/s12992-021-00789-y.
5
Closing the Gap Between Emerging Initiatives and Integrated Strategies to Strengthen Science Diplomacy in Latin America.弥合拉丁美洲加强科学外交的新举措与综合战略之间的差距。
Front Res Metr Anal. 2021 Apr 12;6:664880. doi: 10.3389/frma.2021.664880. eCollection 2021.
6
Stretching health diplomacy beyond 'Global' problem solving: Bringing the regional normative dimension in.将卫生外交拓展至超越“全球”问题解决范畴:纳入区域规范层面。
Glob Soc Policy. 2015 Dec;15(3):313-328. doi: 10.1177/1468018115599820.
7
COVID, Deglobalization and The Decline of Diplomacy: Could Tele-diplomacy Revitalize Diplomacy's Capacity to Promote Consensus?新冠疫情、去全球化与外交的衰落:远程外交能否重振外交促进共识的能力?
Glob Policy. 2021 Sep;12(4):574-576. doi: 10.1111/1758-5899.12961. Epub 2021 Sep 19.
8
Responding to the public health consequences of the Ukraine crisis: an opportunity for global health diplomacy.应对乌克兰危机对公共卫生的影响:全球卫生外交的契机。
J Int AIDS Soc. 2015 Mar 17;18(1):19410. doi: 10.7448/IAS.18.1.19410. eCollection 2015.
9
Attempts to encourage diplomacy in online interactions: Three informative failures.尝试在网络互动中鼓励外交手段:三个有启发性的失败案例。
Acta Psychol (Amst). 2022 Aug;228:103661. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2022.103661. Epub 2022 Jul 1.
10
Science diplomacy on display: mobile atomic exhibitions in the cold war: Introduction to Special Issue.科学外交的展现:冷战时期的流动原子展览:特刊引言
Ann Sci. 2023 Jan;80(1):1-9. doi: 10.1080/00033790.2023.2166114.