Next week on our series, first lady, betty ford. Shortly after moving into the white house, she had a mastectomy. She released a statement detailing her illness. During her husbands Reelection Campaign in 1976, she feels so popular, the Campaign Slogan was vote for bettys husband. When the president lost, she delivered the concession speech. And after the white house, she publicly shared her experience with alcohol and Prescription Drug addiction leading to the creation of the betty ford center. Next monday, the life and career of first lady betty ford, live at 9 00 p. M. Eastern on cspan and cspan 3 as well as cspan radio. Offering the special edition of the book, first ladies of the United States of america. It has a biography and portrait of each first lady and comments from noted historians on the role of first ladies throughout history. Its available for the discounted price of 12. 95 plus shipping. Plus a special section welcome to the white house. Its the White House Historical association and chronicles life in the executive mansion in the tenure of each of the first ladies, you can find out more at cspan. Org first ladies. Cspan, we bring Public Affairs events from washington directly to you, putting you in the room at congressional hearings, white house events, conchses, and offering complete gaveltogavel coverage to the u. S. House all as a Public Service of private industry. Were cspan created by the cable tv industry 34 years ago and funded by your local satellite provider. Now you can watch us in hd. Now a discussion on u. S. Diplomatic efforts in mutz limb countries. Well hear from Foreign Service officer Walter Douglas who spoke at the center for strategic and International Event for 50 minutes. John was hinting at the origin of this report. It went up on the website last week. I am not going to go through it because i think you can read it, but i want to point out how the things came about and where it takes us. As john said, what was fascinating, as we looked at 26 reports since 9 11 dealing with the middle east, how amazing it was that how few of them had been spoken to the officers in the field. In the sense of we have a lot of advice coming, that the best they can come up with is give Public Diplomacy more money. Money does not solve all the problems. And so that was one of the incentives for doing this. What goes on over there . How does it work . Ive been associated with Public Diplomacy and spent the past 10 years working in that region. The arab middle east, pakistan, afghanistan, and if you look at the officers in that region to come up with suggestions, challenges, what faces us out there, i stayed away from policy because that is the white houses prerogative, to what do we do overseas when we get there . I have taken in a lot from what i have seen, but everything i put in this report is mine, not the state departments report. I can do some independent thinking. That was important through that clearance process to make sure that i speak in my voice and nobody elses. Something else that was interesting coming out of this is defining what Public Diplomacy is. There has been talk about this since 9 11, but basically and there has been a lot of reporting but to define what it is, and one thing that was striking, one thing that came out in the report is we hear about messaging. Washington, are you messaging . Are you getting this message right . Public diplomacy is larger than that. Messaging is something we do in the press, the Public Diplomacy is a panoply of programs and platforms that we use to engage the audience is out there, to make them more accepted to American Foreign policy. What we spend our money on, the projects going on overseas, and a person who was always pointing out, he repeats this so often, i can save, it is the sum of these two things. Adam is no longer what the state department, so i can mention that. It is true, we probably spend 3 4 of our money spending on fulbright, international visitors, targeting those people that can make a difference in the opinion landscape. That is the way you can target certain people who are very important, and the shotgun effect when we use the media to reach broader audience. In washington that was not was fully understood and i wanted to put that in the report, that it is not just messaging, not just how you engage in audiences, how you make them see what you are doing and show them we have a point of view that is respectable. I think it is important if you look at the cover of the report, if you see who is on there, it is not a spokesman on there. That is an englishteaching officer, someone in pakistan with me. He stood for that other side of Public Diplomacy that is not often reported, but English Teaching is something we use effectively out there, the target it to certain audience we think are more at risk, but it is a way we get out our word to a to for an audience and give them a broader sense of what is going on in the world, and maybe they will be able to inform other people what is going on as well as getting ahead in their own lives because english is such added advantage. It was important to have that on the cover and not a spokesman at a podium. I would like to say to wrap of why the report theres Something Else that motivates to love us. Officers in the field are very patriotic. So many of us feel really strongly about what we are doing, but nobody had really looked at what we were and what we were doing. This is a reported where i wanted to say here is how we see what is going on overseas. Here is how we think it should be implemented. This is how we will take something that comes from the white house and shape it for the audiences out there. The heroes of my report are that Public Diplomacy ocean in the state department, the ones charged with leading the diplomacy efforts worldwide. I wanted to tell their story and get out what goes on. That is why i took what ive got here, i spoke to Public Diplomacy officers, and this is a summation of this. I wanted to get that story from what was going on, because the heroes here are of my colleagues in the state department that are overseas, working difficult environments, engaging audiences, making them more receptive to our policy initiatives. If you look at the report itself, and i do not want to go through it all, but i think i have not engaged in policy structure because that is what the white house does. I tried to give a howto outline of how we do overseas, the challenges and opportunities we have. To highlight a couple of them, more than a couple, but one thing i think its interesting is when we approach societies, i divided the report, in telling americas story versus engaging attitudes in a country. People are unclear what we put an emphasis on, and what i have said is every country will be different, and that is why that ties in the field are so important, because they can help us work through. Anyone should weigh up, what are we trying to do here . Do we want to take people overseas who might turn violent and say they do not take that route, but that they do not go the violent route. In this part of the world, after 9 11 it is a question we have to ask. Every country is different. Every one of them will have a different percentage assigned to one side or the other. I wanted to highlight it very much, and not everybody understands we have these wall functions out there. I also felt and i mentioned in the report that we need a third office, and we created what in pakistan to engage in changing attitudes and behaviors, if her from press or Cultural Affairs work. It was important to vote out there that there are a number of different ways to approach these questions. In places like pakistan and afghanistan, we have so much money given to us to do Public Diplomacy we have the lecture of being able to create anything we want. Even officers without resources can do a lot to change things. Another point i brought across is the diverse as he of audiences. One thing is you hear people say that muslims or Something Like that. There are many different audiences and many effort types of muslims believing a lot of Different Things. People need to become attuned to that right away and understand certain communities believe what they, another community believes another. In Washington People do not understand those differences. It is understand that it is interesting to understand who is more susceptible to a message, who do we have to work harder with, who is important, who is not, but diversity out there is incredible. It ties in with the need to speak to these people in the languages they speak. In india it is funny, i bring this up, do you ever see two indians speaking english to each other . Unless they have an english language listener, they will speak hindi to each other. In the middle east, once they engage in each other, they need to be speaking those languages. We need to be there in those languages. It is where you have to listen to them to what they say, not rely on english. Those english language newspapers out there, i remember in pakistan i was speaking to an editor, i said, can you tell what is this about . They said, these are for you, the foreigners. This is not something that pakistanis used to communicate with each other. That was an important insight, and is one thing that we have to make sure we do not rely on english to out there to interpret what is going on because that is not where the action is. It is in the vernacular and it is important to be there. I wanted to talk about security, which i did in here. In afghanistan or around pakistan, and libya and yemen, security is a huge concern for us. In other places while we have these embassies that are much more secure, real Public Diplomacy takes place outside and disease. I argue people we want to reach do not come into our facilities. That is where the value is, going into their institutions and meeting them out there. I quoted Thomas Friedman who came to turkey after the bombings in turkey and he looks at our new consulate, and remarked how this was a bad message. It can be or it is a difficult message out become it can become, but as Public Diplomacy officers, you get out of that environment. That is vital. That is why that is not such a key stumbling lock. It is very important to see these other places you get out and that is what officers do. Finally, or not finally sorry the next steps in the report by set out a series of recommendations. One thing that is important is and i go back to this 26th report written since 9 11, the one recommendation for everybody was to spend more money on Public Diplomacy. That is not going to happen. Basically, what i tried to come up with, with jeannies help was, we could come up lowcost or nocost solutions, because the state department is not looking to dump tons of money into something new, and in this budget environment it will be a while. What we came up with a lot of the things we could do by shifting emphasize, real things the state department can do. I believe some of them are underway to a certain extent, and i looking forward to this afternoon speaking to a life of people to find out where we are in that way in the state department. Let me wrap up and say the limitations of this report the limitation is obvious. It just deals with one part of the world. There is a whole world out there. People say, why did you not cover indonesia . In india i am finding a series of Public Diplomacy ideas that are different than what i had in my report because im dealing with a different environment where we are running a country, working in a country that is up to 70 approval ratings, different from what we have that is covering this report. What i am saying is there were limitations because of time, money, effort, all that sort of thing, but i hope this will spark more reports of what we are doing overseas. It is vital that we understand public the promising. Im delighted to go to state to speak to people who do that, and i will give them a mini report on my report. I will stop there. What i would like to do, i hope i have given a bit of an overview here. I hope you have a copy of the report, have read it, or looking forward to read is because there is a lot here that will define something that has not been seen before. I am glad that the academics i brought in say we have not had a report from the field, and they have been awaiting this. It was delayed in coming up. The research for this went into the summer of 2012, but now they have something in the courses where they can look at what were doing in the field and try to make judgments that might be different than what we hear if they were aligned on material coming out of here. Thank you very much, and i look forward to some questions and answers. [applause] thank you, walter. As you suggest, there is a lot to chew on there. One thing you did not talk about at all in your report really was the issue of metrics. And one of the things i see the state department, in the fascination with metrics for social media, because social media tends to produce area precise metrics. From your position in the field, what is your sense of the role of metrics, how do you use them, and how are people misusing metrics in ways that we have to stop . Metrics is a question that is a difficult one or Public Diplomacy. You mentioned i was in advertising before, and you always had is the product sell or not . It1 was an interesting metric and if it did not sell well, they fired the ad agency. You would pay that way. They tended to blame the ad agencies first. Metrics are something that is difficult. We know that Public Diplomacy conservatives to the fault of the soviet union. We talked about it, but it played a role in undercutting the intellectual likelihood of the soviet union. Today, it is difficult because you cant measure inputs, but not outputs. There is some work done in the private sector, mostly when someone takes an action to understand that they have absorbed that idea i mention it is not just the tweets you do, it is the retweets you have to count. Thats one way we do it, but nobody has come up with an idea that says they have changed the way of looking at the United States based on what we have given them their any have tried to do that, the vehicle to do. I did come up with a recommendation, and this is over the years speaking to hill people, hill staffers, one thing we need are narratives. How does this stuff play out writ large . We can bring to get all these Public Diplomacy programs are on the road, what message are we getting out, pointing to success stories, nodding having exact metric saying we moved the needle from 50 to 60, but saying we are putting out these ideas, there is an effort, it makes sense, and if your narrative aches cents, able can trust your on to something. That is one of the recognitions i have there, to get out to the hill, get to the state department in the field, more about these narratives that are going on. And would that suggest that the number of people engaged, the number of people who are in our audience is less important than creating a dynamic, and we need to be more attuned to the dynamics we create rather than the size of the audience i mean, it sounds to me you are recommending sort of looking at waves and creating ripples rather than trying to measure the force. I think that is right. If you go on broadcast television, you get huge numbers. How many of those people are important to the influencing policy . That is an open question. We have Exchange Programs and everything we do where we say that as someone who is important to the debate, we want to expose them more, get the people on an Exchange Program in the United States where they can see what we do. You make judgments about the value of the audience out there, some more valuable than others. When you put it together you draw the conclusion of what youre getting out there, what word is going out there, how much you are causing a debate. To actually measure the impact is difficult. You have got to put all these factors together on that one idea you want to get across and maybe there is another idea and how those blend together. You have got to use all these tools. There are probably at anyone post you could draw up a p. D. Toolkit that would have 25 things that we basically and it is all from using a local staff in the vernacular language using the ambassador as a speaker, do use and econ officer as a speaker, using Exchange Programs to bring in speakers into these countries all these Different Things to get the message out, hitting different audiences that we think our part. How you measure the impact, what moves the needle, that is important. As a manager, how do you think about the problems of allocating resources across the entire tool kit . At the beginning of going anywhere, you have to sit back and say what are our objectives here . This is something that i have learned that csis and going to exercises with you and around here was trying to see what the goals are upfront and do not worry about the limitation write a but set out the strategic goals. There is a tendency to mix implementation and strategic goals, and you have to see them as something separate and reach into the toolkit at what works best in that environment. That becomes a judgment call him a more an art than science. If youre in an open country like india, you can do a lot of things. Im getting out of my where were the report is. You might have difficulties in other places where it is more closed. In the middle east you have a tremendous variety of countries, more open