485 / 658
483
Friday, November 11
0 9 : 0 0 – 1 0 : 3 0
OSC05
Critical Perspectives onNation Branding: Theories, Concepts, Cases
A. Duarte Melo
1
1
University of Minho, Braga, Portugal
Since the late 1990s, nation branding has attracted growing interest from academics, professional consultants, and government actors. The ideas and
practices associated with nation branding are frequently presented by branding advocates as necessary and even inevitable in light of changing dynamics
of political power and influence in a globalized and media-saturated world. In this context, some have argued that nation branding is a way to reduce
international conflict and supplant ethno-nationalism with a new form of market-based, national reputation management. However, a growing body
of critical studies has documented that branding campaigns tend to produce ahistorical and exclusionary representations of the nation and advance a form
of “commercial nationalism”that is no less problematic. This panel seeks to expand the critical explorations of nation branding as a signifying practice and
draws on social theories to do so. Nation branding, by definition, is an international phenomenon predicated on the use of various forms of cross-bor‑
der communication, circulation, and persuasion. At the same time, these cross-border exchanges are intimately tied to national(ist) agendas and politics
which should not be ignored. The presenters in this panel deploy varying conceptual and empirical lenses to explore the ways in which globalizing and
nationalizing discourses and practices intersect in nation branding. Two of the papers offer in-depth case studies that examine the nation branding efforts
of individual countries. Specifically, Pawel Surowiec and Philip Long look at the case of the UK and its GREAT campaign, while Galina Miazhevich focuses
on Russia’s efforts at image-making via its transnational broadcasting network RT. Two of the other papers draw on multi-country examples to tease out
nuanced theoretical arguments: Cecilia Cassinger and James Pamment analyze nation branding in the Nordic countries, whereas Katja Valaskivi compares
nation branding ideas and strategies in Japan, Finland, and Sweden. Finally, Nadia Kaneva draws on examples from post-socialist countries to present
a predominantly theoretical discussion, which outlines the emergence of a transnational political economy of image, within which nation-brand com‑
modity-signs circulate. Taken together, the five papers in this panel bring to bear insights from a number of critical social theories that examine relations
of power in society. Some of these theoretical perspectives include: Joseph Nye’s conception of soft power, Michel Foucault’s theory of governmentality,
Jean Baudrillard’s theory of simulation, Pierre Bourdieu’s field theory, and CharlesTaylor’s analysis of the social imaginary.While the presenters engage with
different theoretical perspectives, they all seek to problematize the social, political, and theoretical consequences of nation branding.
PN 163
Continuities and Discontinuities in Britain’s Strategic Soft Power Narratives: The GREAT Campaign
P. Surowiec
1
, P. Long
2
1
Bournemouth University, Faculty of Media and Communication, Bournemouth, United Kingdom
2
Bournemouth University, Faculty of Management, Bournemouth, United Kingdom
Nation branding is a product of British promotional culture, which has been exported by nation branding consultants to governments worldwide. This pow‑
erful governance idea, associated with the New Labour Government’s (1997–2010)‘Cool Britannia’representation of the UK has re-shaped conceptualizing
soft power. In theory, the governance of Britain’s soft power matches complexities of international relations. In practice, capitalising on culture and heritage
are Britain’s most recognizable features in exercising soft power: the UK’s public diplomacy has been subjected to corporate-styled influence by branding
(Leonard, 1997); appropriation of new technologies (and the ‘creative industries’) (Vickers, 2004); and development of multilateral relations with overseas
and domestic publics such as the Foreign Policy Centre (Melissen, 2005). Vickers (2004: 192) points out that New Labour initiated “re-packaging of diplo‑
macy for public consumption, rather than a rethink of the paradigm of diplomacy.”With the elections of the Coalition and subsequent Conservative Govern‑
ment, Britain developed a new set of reputational risks and opportunities. The Government’s foreign policy and prosperity agenda pushed for changes to
Britain’s soft power approach. Our analysis of soft power communicative resources is contextualised in the settings of“Britain as competitive state”(Leibfried
et al., 2015). This paper explores the GREAT campaign – a flagship soft power exercise of Britain’s Coalition Government, which has survived the election
of the Conservative Government in 2015 in spite of large-scale cuts in funding to participating actors such as Visit Britain. The GREAT campaign, launched to
accompany the 2012 London Olympics and Paralympics, continues to globally articulate Britain’s strengths and collective identities. We set out to explore
the significance of the GREAT campaign to Britain’s soft power governance, the strategic promises it makes as well as its key messages. By drawing on a set
of interviews with British policy makers, public policy, and media outputs of the campaign, we set out to map actors and analyse relationships between
the Coalition Government’s foreign policy goals and the GREAT campaign goals.We explore approaches to engagement with multiple publics accompanying
this campaign and its significance for collective identities. We interrogate input of non-state actors to the campaign, and we analyse key messages and
channels of their distribution at home and abroad. We argue that adaptability in the governance of soft power strategic narrative enables Britain to“punch
above its weight” (Hurd, 1990) in global political economy. In principle, this research makes an empirical contribution to the studies on the governance
of soft power. The study is also relevant to tourism studies in the contexts of representations aimed at tourist audiences.
PN 164
Dilemmas of Nation Branding in the Post-Broadcast Era: The Case of RT
G. Miazhevich
1
1
University of Leicester, Leicester, United Kingdom
The paper uses the case of Russia’s soft power tool—the international multi-national broadcaster RT (formerly Russia Today) launched in 2005—to ex‑
plicate the changes in nation branding brought about by media convergence (Jenkins, 2006). Despite a surge in studies on nation branding (for a compre‑
hensive summary see Kaneva, 2011), there has been little research linked to a new-media enabled environment and its impact on nation-branding. This
paper strives to address this gap. Using the case of RT, which proved to enjoy a more prominent presence on the English language Twitter than even the BBC
(Gillespie 2014), the paper explores the transformation of nation-branding in a post-broadcast era (Turney and Tay, 2009). As the shift of RT’s policy from
‘informing others about events and life in Russia’ to those ‘who question more’ (according to its director M. Simonyan) indicates, the converging media