If 9/11 made global viewers of us, the massacre in Paris was the moment when online media was where readers gathered.

It’s a term that seems so obviously dreamed up in a government boardroom; something to do with the developed world’s constantly advancing technologies and foreign relations.  In short, digital diplomacy is a means for foreign governments to engage with a country’s people rather than its government.

Following the attack on satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo that left 12 people dead Wednesday in Paris, Twitter users around the world showed their solidarity using the hashtag #JeSuisCharlie, or “I am Charlie.” As of this writing, the hashtag has been used 3.7 million times.

The success of Obama, Modi, and others has been particularly good for digital diplomacy, which is the use of new communication technologies to help achieve diplomatic goals. It is hard to even imagine how many countries and heads of state didn't have a Twitter or Facebook account not that long ago.

Despite the widespread adoption of digital diplomacy, few studies have investigated how governments use SNS in order to frame foreign countries and themselves. Self-framing is practiced by countries as part of nation branding activities. 

A hashtag expressing solidarity for the Jewish population of France is gathering traction on Twitter.  #JeSuisJuif began trending shortly after it was revealed a second siege was unfolding at a Jewish supermarket in Paris.

Digital diplomacy is therefore part of the state’s attempt to remain relevant and to assert power in the digital space. And while the goals of any one initiative might be lauded (as this one can), we need to view and ultimately assess it as only one component of a wider suite of digital foreign policy actions. Taken as a whole, digital foreign policy is fraught with challenges and hypocrisies.