top of page
Asian Institute of Research, Journal Publication, Journal Academics, Education Journal, Asian Institute
Asian Institute of Research, Journal Publication, Journal Academics, Education Journal, Asian Institute

Journal of Social and Political

Sciences

ISSN 2615-3718 (Online)

ISSN 2621-5675 (Print)

asia insitute of research, journal of social and political sciences, jsp, aior, journal publication, humanities journal, social journa
asia insitute of research, journal of social and political sciences, jsp, aior, journal publication, humanities journal, social journa
asia insitute of research, journal of social and political sciences, jsp, aior, journal publication, humanities journal, social journa
asia insitute of research, journal of social and political sciences, jsp, aior, journal publication, humanities journal, social journa
crossref
doi
open access

Published: 28 September 2024

Persuasive Britain: The Generation of Soft Power in the Facebook Pages of the British Embassy and British Council in Egypt

Lawrie Phillips

British University in Egypt

journal of social and political sciences
pdf download

Download Full-Text Pdf

doi

10.31014/aior.1991.07.03.518

Pages: 230-245

Keywords: Soft Power, British Embassy, British Council, Facebook Pages

Abstract

This study explores the soft power that is currently generated on and through the Facebook pages of the Embassy of the United Kingdom in Egypt and British Council in Egypt. In his classic text, ‘Soft power: The Means to Success in World Politics’, Joseph Nye argues that successful international institutions and policies should be based on both hard power (coercion, military power, and payment) and soft power (consent, attraction, and seduction). This paper claims that the social media pages of the British Embassy and British Council generate and disseminate soft power in order to pursue the interests of national institutions based in Britain such as the Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) and British universities and schools. This research is based on a nuanced critical multimodal discourse analysis of posts published on their Facebook pages between June the 1st, 2023 and May the 1st, 2024. These social media platforms highlight mutual spheres of public interaction between the UK and Egypt, synergising large-scale public and private interests in building British prosperity, ‘safeguarding’ British national security, and supporting British nationals, in that order of priorities (FCDO 2024). This nuanced analysis of soft media power concludes that these social media pages represent the doctrine of ‘Foreign Aid in the national interest’ (USAID 2002) in which large-scale private British interests prevail. Official Facebook posts tend to be static and monolithic rather than dynamic and interactive, presenting and promoting rather than personalising or debating large-scale national policies and initiatives.

References

  1. Anderson, B. (2016), Imagined communities: Reflections on the origins and spread of nationalism, Verso.

  2. Barnett, M. (2021), ‘International Progress, International Order, and the Liberal International Order’ (In) The Chinese Journal of International Politics, pp. 1–22.

  3. Bjola, C. and Jiang, L. (2015), ‘Social media and public diplomacy: A comparative analysis of the digital diplomatic strategies of the EU, UK and Japan in China’ (In) B. Corneiu and M. Holmes (Eds.), Digital Diplomacy: Theory and Practice, Routledge.

  4. British Council (2024), Our history, https://www.britishcouncil.org/about-us/history

  5. British Council annual report (2023),

  6. https://www.britishcouncil.org/sites/default/files/britishcouncil_annualreport_2022-23.pdf

  7. British Council report to the Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee in the House of Commons (2021), https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/40561/html/

  8. British Council Egypt (2024), (https://www.facebook.com/BritishCouncilEgypt).

  9. Castells, M. (2012), Networks of outrage and hope, Polity Press.

  10. Chomsky, N. and Foucault, M. (1971), The Chomsky-Foucault debate: on human nature, New Press.

  11. Cull, N. J. (2013), ‘The long road to public diplomacy 2.0: The Internet in US public diplomacy’ (In) International Studies Review, 15(1), pp. 123–159.

  12. Curtin, P. and Gaither, T. K. (2007), International public relations: Negotiating culture, identity and power, Sage.

  13. DFID (2018a), Open Aid, Open Societies: A Vision for a Transparent World. Department for International Development, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/open-aid-open-societies-a-vision-for-a-transparent-world

  14. DFID (2018b), Sahel Region. Department for International Development, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/913345/Sahel-Profile.pdf

  15. Dodd, M. and Collins, S. (2017), ‘Public relations message strategies and public diplomacy 2.0: An empirical analysis using Central-Eastern European and Western Embassy Twitter accounts’ (In) Public Relations Review, 43(2), pp. 417-425.

  16. Donaldson, F. (1984), The British Council: the first fifty years. London: J. Cape.

  17. Entman, R. (2008), ‘Theorizing Mediated Public Diplomacy: The U.S. Case’ (In) The International Journal of Press/Politics, 13(2), pp. 87-102

  18. Fitzpatrick, K., Fullerton, J. and Kendrick, A. (2013), ‘Public Relations and Public Diplomacy: Conceptual and Practical Connections’ (In) Public Relations Journal, 7(4), pp. 1-21.

  19. Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (2024), https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/foreign-commonwealth-development-office

  20. Foucault, M. (1977), Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York: Vintage Books.

  21. Foucault, M. (1978), The History of Sexuality, Volume 1, New York: Random House.

  22. Foucault, M. (1980), The Foucault Reader: An Introduction to Foucault’s Thought, London: Penguin.

  23. Fuchs, C. (2012), ‘Some Reflections on Manuel Castells’ Book Networks of Outrage and Hope. Social Movements in the Internet Age’ (In) TripleC, 10(2), pp. 775-797, https://www.triple-c.at/index.php/tripleC

  24. Giddens, A. (1991), Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age, Cambridge: Polity.

  25. Graddol, N. (2006), ‘English next. Why global English may mean the end of ‘English as a Foreign Language,’ London: British Council.

  26. Gramsci, A. (2010), Selections from the Prison Notebooks, (Eds.) Q. Hoare and G. N. Smith, New York: International Publishers.

  27. Halliday, M. (1978), Language as Social Semiotic. London: Arnold.

  28. Hamilton, K. & Langhorne, R. (1995), The practice of diplomacy: Its evolution, theory and administration, Routledge.

  29. IPCC (2023), Climate change 2023 synthesis report, https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/syr/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_SYR_SPM.pdf

  30. Kress, G. & Leeuwen, T. (2001), Multimodal discourse analysis, Oxford University Press.

  31. Kress, G. & Leeuwen, T. (2006), Reading Images: A Grammar of Visual Design, London: Routledge.

  32. Lazell, M. (2023). ‘UK aid to Africa: ‘nationalisation’ and neoliberalism’ (in) Canadian Journal of Development Studies, https://doi.org/10.1080/02255189.2023.2166026

  33. Lee, N. M. & van Dyke, M. S. (2015), ‘Set it and forget it: The one-way use of social media by government agencies communicating science’ (In) Science Communication, 37(4), pp. 533–541, https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547015588600

  34. L’Etang, J. (2009), ‘Public relations and diplomacy in a globalized world: An issue of public communication’ (In) American Behavioral Scientist, 53(4), pp. 607–626. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764209347633

  35. Llobera, J. (1999), Recent Theories of Nationalism (In) Working Paper No. 164, Institut de Ciències Polítiques i Socials, Barcelona.

  36. Melissen, J. (2005), The New Public Diplomacy: Soft Power in International Relations, Palgrave MacMillan.

  37. Mercer, J. (1996), Reputation and international politics, Cornell University Press.

  38. Morton, S. (2019), ‘Colonial Violence, Law and Justice in Egypt’ (In) The Edinburgh Companion to the Postcolonial Middle East, pp. 160-182.

  39. Nye, J. S., Jr. (2004), Soft power: The means to success in world politics, Public Affairs.

  40. Park, S. J., and Y. S. Lim. 2014. ‘Information networks and social media use in public diplomacy: a comparative analysis of South Korea and Japan’ (In) Asian Journal of Communication, 24(1), pp. 79-98.

  41. Phua, J. and Ahn, S. J. (2016), ‘Explicating the like on Facebook brand pages: The effect of intensity of Facebook use, number of overall likes, and number of friends’ likes on consumers’ brand outcomes’ (In) Journal of Marketing Communications, 22(5), pp. 544–559, https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2014.941000

  42. Phillips, L. and Ghalwash, M. (2019), Brothers in arms: Visual commonalities between US and IS recruitment strategies, Journal of Media, War and Conflict, November, https://doi.org/10.1177/1750635219887775

  43. Phillipson, R. (1992). Linguistic imperialism, Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

  44. Phillipson, R. (2009), Linguistic imperialism continued, New York, NY: Routledge.

  45. Phillipson, R. (2011), ‘English: from British empire to corporate empire’ (In) Sociolinguistic Studies, 5(3): pp. 441–464, https://doi: 10.1558/sols.v5i3.441

  46. Radcliffe, D. and Abuhmaid, H. (2023), Social media in the Middle East 2022: A Year in Review, https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/handle/1794/28142

  47. Seib, P. M. (2012), Real-time diplomacy: Politics and power in the social media era, Palgrave Macmillan.

  48. Singh, J. P. (2013), ‘Information Technologies, Meta-power, and Transformations in Global Politics’ (In) International Studies Review., 15(1), pp. 5-29.

  49. Smith, A. D. (1991), National identity, Penguin.

  50. Strauß, N., Kruikemeier, S., van der Meulen, H. & van Noort, G. (2015), ‘Digital diplomacy in GCC countries: Strategic communication of Western embassies on Twitter’ (in) Government Information Quarterly, 32(4), pp. 369–370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2015.08.001

  51. Streeter, J. (2024), 80 Years British Council in Egypt, https://www.britishcouncil.org.eg/en/80Years

  52. Tombleson, B. & Wolf, K. ‘Rethinking the Circuit of Culture: how participatory culture has transformed cross-cultural communication’ (In) Public Relations Review43(1), pp. 14-25.

  53. Tuch, H. N. (1990), Communicating with the world: UK public diplomacy overseas, St. Martin Press.

  54. UK Development Partnership Summary (2024), https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uk-egypt-development-partnership-summary/uk-egypt-development-partnership-summary-march-2024

  55. UK in Egypt (2024), https://www.facebook.com/ukinegypt

  56. USC Centre on Public Diplomacy (2019), Soft power, https://softpower30.com/what-is-soft-power

  57. USAID (2002), Foreign Aid in the National Interest: Promoting Freedom, Security and Opportunity, Washington, DC: USAID, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GOVPUB-S18-PURL-LPS46120/pdf/GOVPUB-S18-PURL-LPS46120.pdf

  58. Uysal, N., Schroeder, J. & Taylor, M. (2012), ‘Social Media and Soft Power: Positioning Turkey’s Image on Twitter’ (In) Middle East Journal of Culture and Communication, 5 (3), pp. 338-359.

  59. Van Dijk, T. (2015), Critical discourse analysis (In) D. Tannen, H. Hamilton, and D. Schiffrin, The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, John Wiley & Sons.

  60. Van Dyke, M. A. & Vercic, D. (2009), ‘Public relations, public diplomacy, and strategic communication: An international model of conceptual convergence’ (In) K. Sriramesh and D. Vercic (Eds.), The global public relations handbook: Theory, research, and Practice, Routledge, pp. 822-842.

  61. Wang, J. (2006), ‘Managing national reputation and international relations in the global era: Public diplomacy revisited’ (in) Public Relations Review, 32(2), pp. 91–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2005.12.001

  62. Weber, M. (1968), Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology, New York: Bedminster Press.

  63. White, C. and Radic, D. (2014), ‘Comparative public diplomacy: Message strategies of countries in transition’ (In) Public Relations Review, 40(3), pp. 459–465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2014.01.012

  64. White Paper on International Development (2024), https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/international-development-in-a-contested-world-ending-extreme-poverty-and-tackling-climate-change

  65. Xiong, Y., Cho, M., and Boatwright, B. (2018), ‘Hashtag activism and message frames among social movement organizations: Semantic network analysis and thematic analysis of Twitter during the #MeToo movement’ (In) Public Relations Review, 45(1), pp. 10-23, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2018.10.014

  66. Zeng, J., Ponce, A. and Li, Y. (2023), ‘English linguistic neo-imperialism in the era of globalization: A conceptual viewpoint’ (In) Frontiers in Psychology, 14, pp. 1-9, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1149471

  67. Zerfass, A., Verčič, D., Nothhaft, H., and Werder, K. P. (2018), ‘Strategic communication: Defining the field and its contribution to research and practice’ (in) International Journal of Strategic Communication, 12(4), pp. 487–505, https://doi. org/10.1080/1553118X.2018.1493485

  68. Zhong, X. and Lu, J. (2013), ‘Public diplomacy meets social media: A study of the British Embassy’s blogs and micro-blogs’ (in) Public Relations Review, 39(5), pp. 542–548. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2013.07.002

  69. Žižek, S. (2008), The Sublime Object of Ideology, London: Verso.

  70. Zwick, D. (2018), ‘No longer violent enough? Creative destruction, innovation and the ossification of neoliberal capitalism’ (In) Journal of Marketing Management, 34(11/12): 913–931.

bottom of page