Cultural Diplomacy: The Clout of Commercialized Music, Movies and Sport

I’d like to think that Cultural Diplomacy’s reach can be split into two directions. From a global perspective, 49% of the world’s population are genuinely concerned with culture, and 51% of the population are superficially concerned about culture. Let me explain….

The reach of Culture

Cultural diplomacy has opened the door for many countries to experience the excitement of the international highlife. They have now the opportunity to outreach to the international community and gain recognition and visibility in an instant. It only takes a country’s football team to win or do well on a World Cup for them to be on the world of news. One must only think back of some of the most successful sports events to see the tremendous meaning of Sport Diplomacy. Ghana was gaining a new positive reputation through its well-played football at the last two world cups with its Football diplomacy, as soft power tool on its move.

Heroes like Sena and Pele were born to decorate the walls of millions of teenage bedrooms, and are remembered for generations around the world.

The latest rising star is Brazilians country singer Michel Telo, singing Ai Se Eu te pego (“Oh, if I catch you”) which has been viewed over 100 million times on you tube and was listed number one in at least nine European countries. Is that all really culture and dependable cultural diplomacy for its country, in that case Brazil?

The commercialization of the domains of entertainment is purely an economic act and a phenomenon resulting of the internet’s fragmented market. However, “Mass popular culture has a global reach” (Demos, 2007) and not only businesses (in food, fashion, music…) have realized the importance of culture but also governments.

When we look at the definition of cultural diplomacy it can be

“best described as the initiation or facilitation of the exchange of ideas, values, traditions and other aspects of culture or identity, whether they promote national interests, build relationships or enhance socio-cultural understanding”(http://www.culturaldiplomacy.org/index.php?en_culturaldiplomacy#Definition).

But I can not help but wonder where can we draw a line between traditional culture and commercialized culture?  Or else, if sports should actively become a tool of public diplomacy, must it be therefore a government function or must it be privatized? And does it not make it then a pure intention of propaganda?

On the other hand we have traditional and intentional cultural events taking place around the world with a reception of, 1.3 million visitors at The Treasure of the World’s Cultures organized by the British Museum, and the British Library gets 24 million visits on their website every year (Demos, 2007).

But somehow the numbers are not adding up for me. The immense differences on what the foreign audiences seem to debate and being interested in are far more commercialized aspects of cultures. Peter van Ham suggested that we are “shifting towards a post-modern world of images and influence” (2001). Yet, if I would think of cultural diplomacy as a property for the foreign audiences and their perceptions (Batora, 2006), I could certainly conclude that cultural diplomacy (for me) is sometimes an unpredictable diplomatic tool, possibly a tool to be used by all – the future of “world culture”

Bibliography:

• Batora (2006), Public Diplomacy between Home and Abroad: Norway and Canada, The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, Vol 1, pp 53-80.
• Demos (2007), Cultural Diplomacy, Available at: http://www.demos.co.uk/files/Cultural%20diplomacy%20-%20web.pdf?1240939425 (Accessed 06.04.12)
• Peter van Ham (2001), The Rise of the Brand State: The Postmodern Politics of Image and Reputation, Foreign Affairs Vol. 80, No. 5 (Sep. – Oct., 2001