| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
170933
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article analyses changes in diplomatic practices brought by twenty-first century communications technologies. There exists a close relationship between communications technologies and diplomatic practices. Since the invention of the telegraph at the end of the nineteenth century, diplomacy has been conducted at a progressively faster pace. The most recent technological developments associated with Internet have increased the speed and reach of communications, with consequences in international politics that International Relations scholars have yet to understand. Building on existing scholarship in diplomatic studies, the analysis adopts a historical perspective on the use of technology in diplomacy, examines the impact of digitalisation on diplomatic practices, and suggests new research questions that scholars need to answer. All this shows that International Relations scholars would be well-served by looking at the transformative impact of new communications technologies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
129680
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
International sporting competition has played a rôle in diplomacy since at least the ancient Olympiad. Competitors in international sporting events have always possessed the capacity to represent their governments and peoples-and, more latterly, sponsoring firms-not only to foreign governments but also to foreign populations and the global public more broadly. The rapid increase in the number and variety of international sporting competitions over the past 50 years has seen "the increase in people-to-people exchanges, both virtual and personal, across national borders." The communicative power of international sport has increased dramatically by the information and communications technologies revolution over the past several decades, enabling the audience for major sporting events to expand to hundreds of million people. Yet, little study on how international sport relates to public diplomacy has occurred and remains not well understood. This analysis fills in this lacuna.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|