Today which is the heart of what we all talk about, Public Diplomacy. And you can go back a century to the beginning of the u. S. Governments First Official formal messaging, world war i, john brown did a program about that last year. After world war ii and during the cold war we had education on cultural exchanges very much on the floor and today one of president obamas signature efforts, the Young AfricanLeaders Initiative is bringing hundreds of African Leaders to washington to meet with the president and others today and tomorrow. And then there is the social and digital revolution and media. And that is something which continues to unfold. We have an announcement most recently, i believe thursday is the latest iteration of the innovation in u. S. Messaging this time to attempts to head off recruiting by isis and other terrorists groups appealing to emotion. You may have seen that in the friday the New York Times and other papers. This is a quickly changing field and we have somebody who is known to many of you to discuss the field, whats happening tight and what hes doing about it. Our speaker is the new director of the edward r. Mur row center at Tufts University fletcher school. Many of you have known him as a journalist. Hes reported for the Washington Post from tokyo, the wall street journal, covered threemile island for the philadelphia inquirer. But today hes here to speak as an academic. He is someone who, if you go to the website most of his online biography is on page two of your program. But if you go to his by yo bio online, a new digital era. Lets hear about the new recasting from edward schumachermatos. [ applause ] gee its a great honor to be here. One thing you didnt say was i was an om budsman for the philadelphia herald. My friend was the editor of the herald and he hired me to do that. Thank you for coming. I hope for give me for looking like im going to the beach. You catch me between having been on cape cod last weekend and going off next. And i went off starting this trip thinking i had packed the pants and the shirt and the tie. So i woke up this morning and started pulling out of this crowded suitcase and couldnt find it. And so i was panicked and i thought oh my god, these guys are going to skewer me here, particularly considering what really started this what led to this talk today. And that was some concern about what fletcher is doing about Public Diplomacy and some worry that fletcher and maybe even me personally was leading us away from a subject i know thats near and dear to the hearts of many of you. So let me say the three things i would like to talk about. One of the education battles over Public Diplomacy and what fletcher is doing about it, secondly, some of my thoughts and fears about Public Diplomacy itself in todays digitally networked world. Adam made some reference about some of the things happening today. And third is to talk about some of the projects that weve launched at the mur row center and really i hope to get your advice, reaction and input on them. First the academic battles. Here in the audience there are two former state department morrow fellows who have been at fletcher. I dont know you personally. Great. And then lin, a fellow who was acting director. Thank you for your work that you did in your day. And sherry who came and introduced herself to me, got the first ph. D. In fletcher in Public Diplomacy. And anybody who reads knows Alec Henderson and hes taught for fletcher many years, hes retiring at this end of the year. Told me to look all of you guys up. So i owe it to him for my being able to know you. And i know there are others here who have study at fletcher and have a great interest in this subject. So, you know, fletcher is not abandoning Public Diplomacy. Let me just say that categorically. We all know the phrase i mean, its become particularly sensitive because the phrase is attributed to a former dean at fletcher who used it in the founding of what was then call the mowerrow center for the advancement of Public Diplomacy back in 1965. The center was created because ed murrow himself, as he was leaving usis, was going to teach at fletcher. And then he died after a very young age. And instead of murrow coming, all of his books and papers came to fletcher. And the center was founded in his name. What we have done is weve tried to reinvigorate the center and redistrict it for todays world. We renamed it called the edward r. Murrow center for a Digital World now. But it has the subtitles right, cyber, media and Public Diplomacy. Public diplomacy remains key and youll see as we go through today how. Because murrow was both a journalist and head of usis as we know. But this new name is kind of done to respond to whats the new times. Right . Kind of a digital revolution is taking place in the emergency dimension of cyberspace. The state department and governments everywhere are struggling with how to respond to the new international environment. Its our job we think in the academic world to sort of help lead the way. So we want to teach not just about the past but also where are we going. So as we look at that, what fletcher should do, theres a real honest fact of life about who is best, who does the most work and i know there are lots of folks here from lots of schools, from george mason, from georgetown, from hopkins, American University here in washington, and its great to have you here. But lets all face it. U usc is nurm ber one as teaching Public Diplomacy as an academic discipline. Its number one even though it began at fletcher. There are a lot of people that dont like to admit that, including the fletcher alumni. But its the truth. If thats the case what should we be doing both to respond to the academic environment and two, how can we best contribute to what the country needs, to what the state department needs, to what diplomacy needs, to what world peace and order need. What can we best do. Thats how we framed this. Not that Public Diplomacy was dead but what could we do. And the almost universal response from everybody, including inside the state department was what fletcher could do was draw on its real strength which was being an interdisciplinary school. So and being sort of removed from the washington battles, right . To be able to stand back and sort of look at where were going and try to see if we cant actually come up with something that would be of help. As we know, so much of the field right now is dominated by not Public Knowledge but by the Digital Field is dominated by the cybersecurity. Dominated by the military debate and not by the political social culture debate. And thats where i want to talk the Murrow Center. So but if you look at our course catalog, if you look at the Murrow Center site online, you will see that we have 20 courses that deal with Public Diplomacy in one way or another. Right . The course we dont have, but its there and we hope that we will have it we have state department fellows every year and we hope that they will continue as some of you have done, to teach the course on the practice of Public Diplomacy the course of the practice itself, most recently taught by bill. He was really good. People liked his course. I personally want to have that course. I think we should have it. But something has happened. Student demand for that course was not high. And i understand it. Because student demand for things in journalism is not high either. Its all part of the whole evolution of whats taking place in the world and in academia. You know, young people are seeing theyre coming at this from a different perspective from what we came at it with. And either we adapt to that or we die. And it doesnt mean that you do away with Public Diplomacy. Not at all. Thats not what im trying to say. I am trying to say that we have to be honest about one, the competitive environment and two, what the students want. Right . So but the courses that we do have are very popular. I personally teach courses on how to write oped pieces. How do you change the public debate. And in that course we go very much into, you know, int international biases and the differences between conservative societies and liberal societies and all of this kind of stuff. Really everything about how do you change the global debate. Thats what the course is called. We have other communication courses that do it from video angles and from public speaking angles and then we have other courses that have to do with how to you frame economic debates so that it has a policy impact. How do you communicate really difficult economic issues. Then we have courses on what do you do in terms of public when theres a natural crisis. How do you respond to that from a crisis point of view. We have courses on nature branding, which is a part of the element of Public Diplomacy, right . We have courses on negotiations and so forth. In addition to what i said, the history courses and everything, then there are courses on count terrorism that deal on those sorts of things, on social networks, digital citizenship and development. All of these things deal with whats part of the practice of Public Diplomacy. Youre shaking your head. Well come back to that. Okay. No. There is some debate about how do you define Public Diplomacy. We know that. Were never going to come up with one answer to that but ill come back to it. So its were dealing with Public Diplomacy but were trying to deal with it in a way that responds to the needs and the demands of the world today and of students, which then leads me to sort of the second area i want to talk about in general, which is this changing world itself. And what the challenges are. You know, is Public Diplomacy just what governments do . Or is it a national pop lakess International Exchanges in their whole entire. What society is doing. And we know that thats a long standing debate and lets not try to answer it here. But lets do say whats going on. And you know, as jeff cowan himself, the founder at usc with adam, the first center for Public Diplomacy at usc, right, as direct or no, pointing to you. In the back. As director led us, you know, into it led usc into the whole study. As jeff says, weve gone from really what was a monologue in government diplomacy to a dialogue, right, to you know collaboration. You know and real Relationship Building among nations. Sort of the general trends of International Relations historically in the world. And in the damage tall world what that means is the governments has lost the control over the message. So has the news media. Before the private news media and governments controlled the pipelines of information. In this world and within their countries. And they did for centuries, ever since the founding of the Printing Presses. That period, if its not over is coming to an end. With social media, everybody has a voice internationally and nationally. And some societies like china and russia try to control it but only to partial success. When anybody can compete with the the New York Times, the the New York Times no longer controls the news reporting on that. And the same thing for governmen governments. Whats what may be even worse about that loss of control is that the news media itself is facing existential crisis that could lead to its total collapse, frankly. And its because the Business Model for advertising does not work online. There was a time we all everybody used to complain that the news media responded to advertisers. Thats not true. Advertisers responded to the news media. The that was the opposite. Power was in the hands of the news media and the governments. Governments over here but over in the private dissemination of the information, power was in the hands of the private news media. Advertisers had to go to them because that was the only way to get to their audience. But in the Digital World they bypass it. Advertising is on google and facebook. The two of them get 75 of all of the ad market of all advertising goes to google and facebook today. You dont need cbs or abc or nbc to reach a public for your product. You dont need the the New York Times or the wall street journal or the miami herald. Right now nobody wants to pay for information online. A few of us here who are amongst a lead are willing to do so but the great majority of people here and in every country around the world do not want to pay for information. So we have an existential crisis. This is a media controlled over information, we dont know where were heading. And governments do not have the power to be able to influence it like they used to. So if we talk about Public Diplomacy, we talk about okay, how do we do Public Diplomacy in that kind of a world. Thats the big challenge. Not the say that the traditional Public Diplomacy persontoperson stuff is important, Culture Exchange is important, clearly all of that is important and clearly nations have to disseminate their own points of view on things, but thats, frankly, small compared to the much bigger challenge. So i kind of had this great fear, frankly, that we may be moving in a direction that really the last 100, 200 years are just a blip in history and were going back to tribal societies. Really, thats my great concern. You know, its a concern kissinger didnt state it that way. In his last book we talked about a world order precisely because of the digital revolution. As communication leaps boundaries, boundaries mean less. Add to that the globalization that comes from the economic friends, add to that the globalization that comes from immigration trends, you know you find and add to that about what everybody is doing about pushing universal values or what businesses are doing about pushing universal values. Nations are being less and less. Thats not to say that nations arent important but less important than they were in the past. If thats the case, if were moving to a world where nations mean less, it sounds very kumbaya that were going to be a great global world of peace and everything but we know thats not going to happen. Right . And so, you know, who is going to organize social welfare if you dont have national governments. We dont have a world government to bring some kind of world order. It would be nice some day to work in that direction but were not there by a long shot. And yet if governments today lose their power and lose any kind of a sense of sovereignty and of ability to control things, where do we go . Where do we go . What does it all mean . That is where i see the great challenge. For all of us. All of us to study. And were not. Were not. Were talking about who gets the latest cyberattack against the dnc and im not saying thats not important. It is. But who is really looking at what all this means, you know, for international order. For the International System and for the nation state. Some people are looking at it theoretically, right . But really we know very very very little. And i would like to challenge all of you in this room to try and answer some of those questions. And that we should Work Together doing that. And so let me tell you some of the projects that were trying to do with fletcher and ill open it up to questions from there. So one is reprecisely a Research Initiative on cyberspace and world order. Second is a more defined issue on Digital Trust. The first one is a very broad thing and im trying to get a lot of faculty members interested, just trying to get the faculty going and see whatever we can do for individual projects and so forth. We just started talking about it. The one of Digital Trust is a little more advanced and were talking to funders on that. And then the next one is what im calling a Global Platform and its very advanced. Im working with a design firm out of new york called charming robot. We will be doing our alpha launch in about a month. An alpha launch is really a glorified whats the word i want to say. Its a yeah. Its a pilot but instead of, you know, youre asking for people, for their opinion and their response on that kind of a thing. Its a focus group. A glorified online focus group. Maybe 100 people to get their reaction to it. I think were going to focus on Human Security and then expand out to other issues and Different Things on what will be a global comparison of experts on the same issue. We do not have today there is not a global news medium. A true global news medium. You can get the the New York Times anywhere, get the bbc anywhere, the economist anywhere, the wall street journal anywhere but theyre edited from their home market. Theyre not global. They frame their news and information from whatever their home capital is. Thats natural. Its the same thing with the times of india, its the sa