Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to analyse how Twitter is utilized by five prominent American destination marketing projects (Illinois, San Francisco, Idaho, Texas, and Milwaukee) to understand the overall trends and usage patterns of microblogging, and the relation of social media ecology and place branding. Design/methodology/approach – This is a comparative study of five Twitter accounts belonging to five destination marketing offices (@enjoyillinois, @onlyinsf, @visitidaho, @texastourism, and @visitmilwaukee). This research looks at two different types of communication activities on Twitter: one-way communication (i.e. broadcasting messages), and two-way communication (i.e. conversing with other users). A total of 5,582 tweets created between October 10, 2011 and October 10, 2012 were analyzed in terms of main topics and subjects covered, and main communication activities engaged. Findings – The research found that destination marketing projects tend to use Twitter pre-dominantly to share about events – such as festivals, concerts, and fairs – taking place in their jurisdiction with their followers. These projects do not necessarily make use of interpersonal communication and networking capabilities of Twitter. Rather, this social media platform is used to distribute information online. Originality/value – The findings of this research have practical and theoretical implications. On the practical side, this research sheds light on how Twitter is utilized, and creates recommendations on how destination marketing projects can widen the broadcasting of messages and reach target audiences. On the theoretical side, this research tests the explanatory powers of Kavaratzis' influential city branding framework.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

This article presents a multilayered framework, called pathways of connection, as an approach to public diplomacy evaluation. It is well established both in the study and practice of public diplomacy that evaluation is a daunting task, mostly due to the complex and convoluted nature of the concept. To overcome such obstacles, the proposed framework first defines public diplomacy as a foreign policy tool. This definition is then used to state that the only success criterion for a public diplomacy project is its contribution to advancing national interests, regardless of the type of the project or the practitioner country. Second, three layers on which the outcomes of public diplomacy projects can be observed are described by incorporating mainstream international relations theories in the practice of public diplomacy. Third, pathways of connection are introduced to explain how the changes in target audiences contribute to the advancement of national interests.intangible and long-term outcomes of projects to the institutional culture that focuses on success stories. Regardless of the cause, there is no universally accepted practice or academic model to assess the effectiveness of public diplomacy projects.It should be noted that such a lack is seen as inherent to the practice. James Pamment (2014, 57), for instance, argues for the need to consider evaluation within "the context of how and why actors employ public diplomacy." Thus a certain methodology is not necessarily better than the others but is rather more appropriate for a given organizational culture, or for the assumptions of an actor on what influence and public diplomacy might achieve. Similarly, Craig Hayden (2012) underlines the importance of unpacking the assumptions on influence and soft power before assessing the success of public diplomacy projects.This article posits the possibility of and proposes a methodological framework that can be used to assess the impact of public diplomacy projects. 1 This objective should not be seen as contrary to the arguments for the contextual nature of evaluation. The methodological framework, labeled the six pathways of connection, does not attempt to unify all public diplomacy practices. Rather, it provides a comprehensive outlook on the process of public diplomacy. Essentially, public diplomacy is not solely seen as a communication process but also as a foreign policy tool and should be evaluated as such. The different pathways enable the practitioners to categorically consider the possible outcomes of public diplomacy projects and establish their measurement criteria accordingly. This is why the true measure of effectiveness for public diplomacy projects is their contribution to advancing national interests, a concept that is unequivocally abstract, yet not impossible to operationalize. This particular claim, in addition to constituting the theoretical basis of pathways of connection, summarizes the complexity of evaluation endeavors as it also suffers from elusiveness. The six pathways of connection framework pr...