People, Places, Power - Episode 25: The Media: Friends or Foes of Country Image?

Note from the CPD Blog Manager: This post features the podcast People, Places, Power co-hosted by CPD Faculty Fellow Nicholas J. Cull and Good Country Index founder Simon Anholt. The podcast is produced by Elizabeth Islas USC M.A. Candidate of Specialized Journalism (2021), and features Cull and Anholt in weekly discussion on international reputation, foreign policy and related issues along the way. 

Previously: Ep. 1: Biden's America | Ep. 2: Brexit Britain | Ep. 3: In Search of the Good Leader | Ep. 4: The European Union | Ep. 5: What Price Monarchy? | Ep. 6:  Cities and International Image | Ep. 7: Mega Events? Buyer Beware. | Ep. 8: Germany: From Pariah to Paragon | Ep. 9: Culture: Decorative or Useful? | Ep. 10: Can Individuals Make a Difference? | Ep. 11: Migration Nations | Ep: 12: Credible India? | Ep. 13: The Bad Image | Ep. 14: Populism | Ep. 15: Oh, Canada! | Ep. 16: Digital Disruption: New Technology & Soft Power | Ep. 17: Japan at the Crossroads I Ep. 18: Scotland's Next Step | Ep. 19 Public Diplomacy and Place Branding | Ep. 20: The Talent Trade: Who's Looking for Einstein? | Ep. 21: France: Trouble at the Top? | Ep. 22: Systems and Structures: Organizing Public Diplomacy | Ep. 23: Trust: The Linchpin of Reputation | Ep. 24: Nordics: The Saga of Success?

Episode 25: The Media: Friends or Foes of Country Image?

This episode focuses on the attitude of the mass media toward the issue of national brands, international images and public diplomacy. Simon laments the enduring focus on the superficial message of rankings. Nick ponders the role of media as a component of national image in their own right and the possibility that the BBC is the 'goose that lays the golden egg' of British soft power. The conversation turns to the reputation of damaged places like Cambodia in the 1970s or more recently Rwanda and Syria. Nick talks about recent research on Great War propaganda and suggests that roots of distortion lay more in the popular press than in government bureaucracies. The episode concludes with an acceptance that the public seems to get the media that they deserve and that the flaws of international coverage match problematic attitudes in the wider world.