Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.23045/jpd.2021.1.2.049

Crossing the "Great Fire Wall": A Study with Grounded Theory Examining How China Uses Twitter as a New Battlefield for Public Diplomacy  

Guo, Jing (The Chinese University of Hong Kong)
Publication Information
Journal of Public Diplomacy / v.1, no.2, 2021 , pp. 49-74 More about this Journal
Abstract
In this paper, I applied grounded theory in exploring how Twitter became the battlefield for China's public diplomacy campaign. China's new move to global social media platforms, such as Twitter and Facebook, has been a controversial strategy in public diplomacy. This study analyzes Chinese Foreign Spokesperson Zhao Lijian's Twitter posts and comments. It models China's recent diplomatic move to Twitter as a "war of words" model, with features including "leadership," "polarization," and "aggression," while exerting possible effects as "resistance," "hatred," and "sarcasm" to the global community. Our findings show that by failing to gage public opinion and promote the country's positive image, China's current digital diplomacy strategy reflected by Zhao Lijian's tweets has instead constructed a polarized political public sphere, contradictory to the country's promoted "shared human destiny." The "war of words" model extends our understanding of China's new digital diplomacy move as a hybrid of state propaganda and self-performance. Such a strategy could spread hate speech and accelerate political polarization in cyberspace, despite improvements to China's homogenous network building on Twitter.
Keywords
Twitter; digital diplomacy; grounded theory; China;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Collins, S. D., DeWitt, J. R., & LeFebvre, R. K. (2019). Hashtag diplomacy: Twitter as a tool for engaging in public diplomacy and promoting U.S. foreign policy. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 15(2), 78-96. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41254-019-00119-5   DOI
2 Williams Camus, J. T. (2009). Metaphors of cancer in scientific popularization articles in the British press. Discourse Studies, 11(4), 465-495. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445609105220   DOI
3 Williams, R., & Williams, R. H. (1977). Marxism and Literature (Vol. 392). Oxford Paperbacks.
4 Wittgenstein, L. (2009). Philosophical investigations. John Wiley & Sons.
5 Xinhua News Agency. (2013, August 21). Tell a Good Story of China (in Chinese). https://www.chinanews.com.cn/gn/2013/08-21/5187666.shtml?t=1488039105998
6 Zaharna, R. S. (2005, April). The network paradigm of strategic public diplomacy. Foreign Policy in Focus, 10(1), 1-4. Retrieved April 7, 2021, from https://www.american.edu/soc/faculty/upload/network-paradigm.pdf
7 Al-Dabbagh, Z. S. (2020). The role of decision-maker in crisis management: A qualitative study using grounded theory (COVID -19 pandemic crisis as a model). Journal of Public Affairs. https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.2186   DOI
8 Birks, M., & Mills, J. (2015). Grounded theory: A practical guide. Sage.
9 Vaast, E. & Urquhart, C. (2017). Building Grounded Theory with Social Media Data. In: Routledge Companion to Qualitative Research in Organization Studies. Routledge.
10 Mutz, D. C., & Mondak, J. J. (2006). The workplace as a context for cross-cutting political discourse. The Journal of Politics, 68(1), 140-155. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2508.2006.00376.x   DOI
11 Adams, A., & McCorkindale, T. (2013). Dialogue and transparency: A content analysis of how the 2012 presidential candidates used Twitter. Public Relations Review, 39(4), 357-359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2013.07.016   DOI
12 Ahmed, S. (2013). The cultural politics of emotion. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203700372   DOI
13 Karlsen, R., & Enjolras, B. (2016). Styles of social media campaigning and influence in a hybrid political communication system: Linking candidate survey data with Twitter data. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 21(3), 338-357. https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161216645335   DOI
14 Gruzd, A., & Roy, J. (2014). Investigating political polarization on Twitter: A Canadian perspective. Policy & Internet, 6(1), 28-45. https://doi.org/10.1002/1944-2866.POI354   DOI
15 Baldwin-Philippi, J. (2018). The technological performance of Populism. New Media & Society, 21(2), 376-397. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818797591   DOI
16 Bohman, J. (1996). Public deliberation: pluralism, complexity, and democracy. McGraw Hill Book Co. https://doi.org/10.1177/0191453703029001835   DOI
17 Brady, Anne-Marie. (2009). Marketing dictatorship: propaganda and thought work in contemporary China. Lanham, MD: The Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group.
18 Aronczyk, M. (2013). Branding the Nation: The Global Business of National Identity. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199752164.001.0001   DOI
19 Brady, Anne-Marie. (2015). China's foreign propaganda machine. Journal of Democracy, 26(4), 51-59. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2015.0056   DOI
20 Bucy, E. P., Foley, J. M., Lukito, J., Doroshenko, L., Shah, D. V., Pevehouse, J. C., & Wells, C. (2020). performing populism: Trump's transgressive debate style and the dynamics of Twitter response. New Media & Society, 22(4), 634-658. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444819893984   DOI
21 Denzin, N. K. (1985). Emotion as lived experience. Symbolic Interaction, 8(2), 223-240. https://doi.org/10.1525/si.1985.8.2.223   DOI
22 Castells, M. (2010). The rise of the network society. The information age: Economy, society, and culture, Vol. 1 (2nd ed.). Malden, MA: Wiley Blackwell.
23 Charmaz, K.C. (2006a) Grounded theory. In G. Ritzer (Ed.): Encyclopaedia of sociology. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
24 Charmaz, K.C. (2006b) Constructing Grounded Theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
25 Bjola, C., & Jiang, L. (2015). Social media and public diplomacy: A comparative analysis of the digital diplomatic strategies of the E.U., the U.S., and Japan in China. In Digital Diplomacy (pp. 85-102). Routledge.
26 Chen, W., Tu, F., & Zheng, P. (2017). A transnational networked public sphere of air pollution: Analysis of a Twitter network of PM2.5 from the risk society perspective. Information, Communication & Society, 20(7), 1005-1023. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2017.1303076   DOI
27 Fisher, A., Arsenault, A., & Zaharna, R. S. (Eds.). (2013). Relational, Networked, and Collaborative Approaches to Public Diplomacy: The Connective Mindshift. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203082430   DOI
28 Foreign Ministry of the People's Republic of China. (2020, January 13). Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Geng Shuang's Regular Press Conference on January 13, 2020. https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/2511_665403/t1731707.shtml
29 Bryant, A. and Charmaz, K. (2007). Grounded theory research: methods and practices. In: A. Bryant & K. Charmaz (Eds.), The Sage handbook of grounded theory (pp. 1-28). Sage.
30 Chamberlain-Salaun, J. (2015). Consumers and the social world of health care: outsiders in the expert's world: a grounded theory study (Doctoral dissertation, James Cook University).
31 Coe, K., Kenski, K., & Rains, S. A. (2014). Online and uncivil? Patterns and determinants of incivility in website comments. Journal of Communication, 64, 658-579. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12104   DOI
32 Glaser, B. & Strauss, A. (1967) The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine.
33 Flusberg, S. J., Matlock, T., & Thibodeau, P. H. (2017). Metaphors for the war (or race) against climate change. Environmental Communication, 11(6), 769-783. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2017.1289111   DOI
34 Frenda, S. (2018). The role of sarcasm in hate speech. A multilingual perspective. In e Doctoral Symposium of the XXXIV International Conference of the Spanish Society for Natural Language Processing (SEPLN 2018) (pp. 13-17).
35 Gibbs Jr, R. W. (2013). Metaphoric cognition as a social activity: Dissolving the divide between metaphor in thought and communication. Metaphor and the Social World, 3(1), 54-76. https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.3.1.03gib   DOI
36 Hall, S. (1973). Encoding and decoding in the media discourse. stenciled paper, 7, 90-103.
37 Hardman, H. (2013). The validity of a grounded theory approach to research on democratization. Qualitative Research, 13(6), 635-649. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794112445526   DOI
38 Foucault, M. (1978). The history of sexuality. New York, NY: Pantheon Book.
39 Hayden, C. (2013). Logics of narrative and networks in US public diplomacy: Communication power and US strategic engagement. Journal of International Communication, 19(2), 196-218. https://doi.org/10.1080/13216597.2013.775070   DOI
40 Nye, J. (2011) The Future of Power, New York: Public Affairs.
41 Onuf, N. (2013). Making sense, making worlds: Constructivism in social theory and international relations. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203096710   DOI
42 Kelley, J. R. (2010). The new diplomacy: evolution of a revolution. Diplomacy & Statecraft, 21(2), 286-305. https://doi.org/10.1080/09592296.2010.482474   DOI
43 Shepherd, T., Harvey, A., Jordan, T., Srauy, S., & Miltner, K. (2015). Histories of hating. Social Media + Society, 1(2), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305115603997   DOI
44 Halaweh, M. (2012). Integration of grounded theory and case study: an exemplary application from e-commerce security perception research. Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application (JITTA), 13(1): 31-51.
45 Huang, Z. A., & Arifon, O. (2018). La diplomatie publique chinoise sur Twitter: la fabrique d'unepolyphonie harmonieuse [Chinese public diplomacy on Twitter: Creating a harmonious polyphony]. Hermes, La Revue, 81, 45-53. http://doi.org/10.3917/herm.081.0045   DOI
46 Huang, Z., & Wang, R. (2019). Building a Network to "Tell China Stories Well": Chinese Diplomatic Communication Strategies on Twitter. International Journal of Communication, 13, 24. Retrieved from https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/11221
47 Jia, R., & Li, W. (2020). Public diplomacy networks: China's public diplomacy communication practices in Twitter during Two Sessions. Public Relations Review, 46(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2019.101818   DOI
48 Khatib, L., William, D., & Michael, T. (2011, January 4). Public Diplomacy 2.0: An Exploratory Case Study of the US Digital Outreach Team. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1734850
49 Lee, S. T. (2021). Vaccine diplomacy: nation branding and China's COVID-19 soft power play. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41254-021-00224-4   DOI
50 Hopf, T. (2002). The social construction of international politics: identities & foreign policies, Moscow, 1955 and 1999. Cornell University Press.
51 Boyd, D., & Crawford, K. (2011, September). Six provocations for big data. In A decade in internet time: Symposium on the dynamics of the internet and society.
52 Stroud, N. J. (2010). Polarization and partisan selective exposure. Journal of Communication, 60(3), 556-576. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01497.x   DOI
53 Pousti, H., Urquhart, C., Burstein, F., & Linger, H. (2013). Methodological implications of social media as a research setting for IS healthcare studies: reflections from a grounded theory study. In ACIS 2013: Information systems: Transforming the Future: Proceedings of the 24th Australasian Conference on Information Systems (pp. 1-12). RMIT University.
54 Zhong, X., & Lu, J. (2013). Public diplomacy meets social media: A study of the US Embassy's blogs and micro-blogs. Public Relations Review, 39(5), 542-548. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2013.07.002   DOI
55 Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1990) Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
56 Taylor, A. (2014). The people's platform: Taking back power and culture in the digital age. Metropolitan Books.
57 Tie, Y. C., Birks, M., & Francis, K. (2019). Grounded theory research: A design framework for novice researchers. Sage Open Medicine, 7. https://doi.org/10.1177/2050312118822927   DOI
58 Urquhart, C. & Vaast, E. (2012). Building social media theory from case studies: a new frontier for IS research. 33rd international conference on information systems. Orlando, USA (pp. 2705-2723). Retrieved April 7, 2021, from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.659.1885&rep=rep1&type=pdf
59 Vaast, E. & Walsham, G. (2013). Grounded theorizing for electronically-mediated social contexts. European Journal of Information Systems, 22(1), 9-25. https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2011.26   DOI
60 Edwards, S., Birks, M., Chapman, Y., & Yates, K. (2018). Bringing together the 'threads of care' in possible miscarriage for women, their partners, and nurses in non-metropolitan EDs. Collegian, 25(3), 293-301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colegn.2017.09.004   DOI
61 Huang, Z., & Wang, R. (2021). Exploring China's Digitalization of Public Diplomacy on Weibo and Twitter: A Case Study of the U.S.-China Trade War. International Journal of Communication, 15, 28. Retrieved from https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/15105
62 Leeker, M., Schipper, I., & Beyes, T. (2017). Performativity, performance studies, and digital cultures. In Performing the Digital (pp. 9-18). Transcript-Verlag. Retrieved from https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.12657/31479/627661.pdf?sequence=1#page=22
63 Marinho, J. (2020, August 7). China in Africa (2019): Facebook & Twitter as Part of Public Diplomacy. Retrieved December 7, 2021, from https://repositorio-aberto.up.pt/bitstream/10216/129013/2/415437.pdf
64 Melissen, J. (Ed.). (2005). The new public diplomacy (pp. 292-31). Palgrave Macmillan.
65 Hartig, F. (2016). How China understands public diplomacy: The importance of national image for national interests. International Studies Review, 18, 655-680. https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viw007   DOI
66 Christensen, C. (2013). @ Sweden: Curating a nation on Twitter. Popular Communication, 11(1), 30-46. https://doi.org/10.1080/15405702.2013.751855   DOI
67 Creamer, E. G. (2018). Enlarging the conceptualization of mixed-method approaches to grounded theory with intervention research. American Behavioral Scientist, 62(7), 919-934. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764218772642   DOI
68 Gary, D. R. (2015). To Know Us is to Love Us: Public Diplomacy and International Broadcasting in Contemporary Russia and China. Politics, 35(3-4), 273-286. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9256.12104   DOI
69 Golbeck, J., Grimes, J. M., & Rogers, A. (2010). Twitter use by the U.S. Congress. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 61, 1612-1621. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21344   DOI
70 Halaweh, M. (2018). Integrating social media and grounded theory in a research methodology: a possible road map. Business Information Review, 35(4), 157-164. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266382118809168   DOI
71 Hua, C. Y. (2019). Reach the moral heights and enhance international discourse power. Study Times. https://www.ccps.gov.cn/xylt/201907/t20190712_133103.shtml
72 Huang, Z. A., & Wang, R. (2019b). The new "cat" of the Internet: China's panda diplomacy on Twitter. In F. Frandsen, W. Johansen, R. Tench, & S. Romenti (Eds.), Big ideas in public relations research and practice (pp. 69-85). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2398-391420190000004006   DOI
73 Lai, L. S., & To, W. M. (2015). Content analysis of social media: A grounded theory approach. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 16(2), 138.
74 Lindsley, D. B. (1951). Emotion. In S. S. Stevens (Ed.), Handbook of experimental psychology (pp. 473-516). Wiley.
75 Martin, V. B., Scott, C., Brennen, B., & Durham, M. G. (2018). What Is Grounded Theory Good For?. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 95(1), 11-22. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699018759676   DOI
76 Mills, J., Birks, M. & Hoare, K. J. (2014). Grounded theory. In: J. Mills & M. Birks (Eds.), Qualitative methodology: a practical guide (pp. 107-121). Sage.
77 Pamment, J. (2013). New Public Diplomacy in the 21st Century. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203096734   DOI
78 Livingstone, S. (2016, January 7). Assessing China's plan to build internet power. China File. https://www.chinafile.com/reporting-opinion/media/assessing-chinas-plan-build-internet-power
79 Enli, G. S., & Skogerbo, E. (2013). Personalized campaigns in party-centered politics: Twitter and Facebook as arenas for political communication. Information, Communication & Society, 16, 757-774. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2013.782330   DOI
80 Pain, P., & Masullo Chen, G. (2019). The president is in: Public opinion and the presidential use of Twitter. Social Media+ Society, 5(2), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305119855143   DOI
81 Peterson, P. G., Sieg, J., Bloomgarden, K., Grunwald, H., Morey, D. E., & Telhami, S. (2002). Public Diplomacy: A Strategy for Reform: A Report of an Independent Task Force on Public Diplomacy Sponsored by the Council on Foreign Relations. Washington, DC: Council on Foreign Relations.
82 Poole, E., Giraud, E. H., & de Quincey, E. (2021). Tactical interventions in online hate speech: The case of# stopIslam. New Media & Society, 23(6), 1415-1442. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820903319   DOI
83 Shahin, S., & Huang, Q. (2019). Friend, Ally, or Rival? Twitter Diplomacy as "Technosocial" Performance of National Identity. International Journal of Communication, 13, 19. Retrieved from https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/10921
84 Sharp, P. (2005). Revolutionary states, outlaw regimes, and the techniques of public diplomacy. In The new public diplomacy (pp. 106-123). Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230554931_6   DOI
85 Settle, J. E. (2018). Frenemies: How social media polarizes America. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108560573   DOI
86 Shumba, E. (2021). An investigation into 'Wolf Warrior' diplomacy in Africa via Twitter and Facebook at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. South African Journal of International Affairs, 28(3), 471-483. https://doi.org/10.1080/10220461.2021.1976267   DOI
87 Slaughter, A. M. (2009). America's edge: Power in the networked century. Foreign affairs, 94-113. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20699436
88 Schliebs, M., Bailey, H., Bright, J., & Howard, P. N. (2021). China's public diplomacy operations: understanding engagement and inauthentic amplifications of PRC diplomats on Facebook and Twitter [working paper]. Programme on Democracy and Technology, Oxford University. https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:427320a1-c677-40d4-b4a5-1759e563e7ed