Some of the bloom is "off" the social media rose. Two years have passed since the initial demonstrations in Tahrir Square, and today not many journalists or other “new media” enthusiasts still claim that Twitter started, sustained or steered the 2011 Egyptian uprising. Indeed, many of the participants vociferously challenge the idea that Twitter or Facebook were anywhere nearly as important as their own determined efforts.

How does the evidence Hanson points to reveal some sense of change in the institutional logics that underscore the practice of public diplomacy and, more generally, that of U.S. diplomacy? "Baked in" suggests that technologies and their use have settled into more legitimated practices, been incorporated into institutional norms, and otherwise become a part of the common-place material "equipment" of diplomacy.

Stephanie Stallings recently suggested that creative collaboration is a useful model for cultural diplomacy. She is definitely onto something. Circumstances have changed around the work of diplomacy. Publics are now much less distant, more assertive, and actively engaged participants in the making of their encompassing cultural worlds.

My job involves a high amount of communication with both internal and external actors from all spheres, thus consistent and thorough communication is an essential tool for good planning and successful organisation of activities. Although we primarily use a wide range of official communication tools, in the digital era, the input and coverage that can be reached via social media should by no means be neglected. The use of online instruments is gradually becoming an indispensable part of modern diplomacy.

China’s Communist Party has branched out into the development of online games in a bid to inculcate its ideology upon the nation’s young people.