La migración se ha instalado como el otro amenazante en América Latina, y Chile no es una excepción. Tomando la conceptualización de la comunidad imaginada, el artículo analiza la importancia y características de la cobertura de medios de prensa sobre migración y el populismo punitivo durante la elección presidencial de Chile, en 2017. Se analizó una muestra aleatoria de todas las piezas informativas de los dos principales diarios durante el año 2017. La migración se ha convertido en un tema de debate nacional y los medios muestran un discurso político centrado en el populismo punitivo, la innecesaria generalización de imágenes estigmatizadoras y la consolidación de la metáfora que vincula la migración con el peligro, principalmente la criminalidad. Más crónica que análisis, es la principal característica de las coberturas que permiten enfatizar imágenes amenazantes y políticamente rentables, posiblemente tratando de proteger esa comunidad que el discurso político realza de forma constante.
This study focuses on the gendered nature of ambassadorial appointments. Analyzing the diplomatic services of ten Latin American countries between 2000 and 2018, we examine the factors that explain the designation of women to ambassadorships. More especially, we are interested in whether the election of women to the presidency in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, and Costa Rica had an impact on the gender gap at the top of those countries’ foreign services. Drawing on an original dataset on diplomatic appointments, we show that the presence of women ambassadors has increased only marginally over the past two decades. Furthermore, multivariate regression analysis demonstrates that women presidents on the left have (partially and temporarily) corrected the gender gap in their foreign services through political appointments, provided they had the discretionary powers to do so. Our findings suggest that the impact of women-led presidencies is conditional on the chief executive’s vested interest in gender parity and the scope of presidents’ prerogatives to appoint ambassadors. In so doing, the study contributes to debates on the descriptive underrepresentation of women in executive positions and the gender gap in diplomacy.
In a world of the fastest evolution ever, Philip Seib, Professor of Journalism, Public Diplomacy and International Relations at the University of Southern California, contributes to the ongoing debate in diplomatic studies with a short yet very accurate and interesting title that mixes the current points of view on both, the communications' and international relations' epistemic communities.1 His book entitled The Future of #Diplomacy is composed of five chapters and an introduction, each written in an easy and accessible vocabulary so that even non-academics can understand. The first chapter ('Open Diplomacy') argues that social media are not at the core of diplomacy as the reader might believe, and that the term 'digital diplomacy' is misused (p. 15), in accordance with Shaun Riordan,2 but in disagreement with Jovan Kurbalija's ideas.3 Seib states that the use of 'digital diplomacy' gives the technology great impact in the diplomatic arena, but that diplomacy is still a matter of the five elements listed by Nicholas J.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.