The iterative advancement of artificial intelligence technology has triggered profound adjustments to the global information ecosystem and social interaction structures, as well as the resulting transformation of public diplomacy practices. Public diplomacy is defined as a state's communication with foreign publics through dissemination, public relations, media, and other means to clarify information, spread knowledge, and shape values in service of national interests, characterized by three core features: foreign-oriented target audiences, non-coercive methods, and hierarchical objectives. The leap in information technology has continuously driven the expansion of public diplomacy's practical boundaries, yet the algorithm-dominated granularized public opinion sphere has made the traditional "extensive coverage" model inadequate for establishing cognitive consensus. The characteristics of AI technology align highly with the needs of public diplomacy and are becoming the key to breaking through this impasse. Academic research has focused on the evolutionary trajectory, functional applications, and systemic risks driven by technology, but most analyses remain descriptive, lacking systematic perspectives to explain how intelligence forms interconnected reconstruction across the dimensions of information perception, narrative production, and relationship building. AI has transcended its technical attributes to become a critical variable driving public diplomacy's leap from "digitalization" to "intelligentization," profoundly affecting the power structure of the international communication order.

I. The Intelligent Evolution of Public Diplomacy

The three-stage evolution of public diplomacy from digitalization to intelligentization since 2010. The exploratory stage from 2010 to 2016 saw public diplomacy shift toward two-way interaction on social platforms, with early AI technologies introduced to assist text classification and sentiment analysis, achieving platform-based communication spaces and digitalized information perception. However, constrained by technological maturity, human input remained predominant. The deepening stage from 2017 to 2019 witnessed breakthroughs in deep learning driving leaps in transnational cognitive shaping capabilities. Policy discourse in various countries focused on "artificial intelligence," while the proliferation of social bots and computational propaganda prompted the institutionalization of cognitive manipulation prevention. The establishment of the U.S. Global Engagement Center and the EU's signing of the Code of Practice on Disinformation exemplified the dual logic of technological governance. The mature stage from 2020 to the present has been marked by breakthroughs in generative AI and multimodal technologies bringing transformative changes to content production. Public diplomacy has moved from discrete tools toward systematic infrastructure construction, forming a closed-loop mechanism of "input—processing—output—feedback." Typical practices include the U.S. Northstar system, South Korea's intelligent diplomatic data platform, and China's "Luoshu," with AI explicitly incorporated into diplomatic and national strategic communication frameworks, completing the internalization from auxiliary tool to structural capability.

II. Intelligent Practices in Public Diplomacy

An exploration of the systematic reshaping of public diplomacy's three core mechanisms by artificial intelligence. Regarding the listening mechanism, intelligentization drives the upgrade of public sentiment perception from sample-based monitoring to comprehensive situational awareness. Through cross-lingual parsing, interpretive analysis, and early warning capability building, it achieves structured interpretation of issue frameworks and narrative chains as well as risk prediction, securing response time for preventive diplomacy. Regarding the advocacy mechanism, traditional periodic manual planning shifts toward algorithmic narrative engineering. Relying on versioned content production and optimized deployment rhythms, it forms scalable, multilingual, multi-modal content repositories, combined with dynamic optimization based on platform logic, significantly enhancing the agility and localized adaptation capabilities of transnational communication. Regarding the cultural diplomacy mechanism, practice evolves from unidirectional project display to interactive trust accumulation, specifically manifested in the digital assetization of cultural resources, customization of cultural participation, and value alignment of cultural expression. Through digital reconstruction, it lowers the threshold for cultural understanding; through personalized interaction, it extends participation chains; and through native corpus training and value alignment mechanisms, it fundamentally reshapes the baseline reference for cross-cultural communication, providing strategic pathways for non-Western countries to defend cultural autonomy and compete for international cognitive initiative.

III. New Characteristics of Public Diplomacy in the AI Era

An examination of the new characteristics of public diplomacy in the AI era across four dimensions: audience structure, practical methods, capability forms, and influence mechanisms. At the audience level, the "public" shifts from a homogeneous collective toward granularity and dynamic stratification, with individuals forming "algorithmic identities" transcending geographical boundaries, rendering traditional coarse-grained operational paradigms ineffective. At the practical level, precision and constancy emerge as defining features: shifting from "one-to-many" broadcasting to "drip irrigation" scenario-based communication, and from "pulsed" intervention to round-the-clock continuous presence. At the capability level, operational logic shifts from institutional endogeneity to "human-machine collaboration," with diplomatic institutions and algorithmic systems forming new structures of responsibility and power, and actions shifting from one-time planning to dynamic calibration. At the influence level, effects deepen from information coverage and connection speed to cognitive schema construction, achieving vertical development along the "information—knowledge—value" axis, providing strategic space for the accumulation of transnational identity.

IV. Challenges Posed by AI to Public Diplomacy

An analysis of the triple challenges brought by AI technology to public diplomacy. First, AI intensifies the information cocoon effect, with precision recommendation algorithms delivering content matching user preferences at "atomic-level" precision, forming cognitive closed loops; simultaneously, AI embeds itself invisibly into daily life in forms such as search assistants and chatbots, significantly increasing the cost of "breaking the cocoon." Second, the proliferation of deepfakes constitutes a destructive risk, with AI-generated false content manipulating cognition at scale, not only causing short-term public opinion chaos but also eroding national credibility and the trustworthiness of diplomatic discourse in the long term, making even authentic information subject to doubt. Third, technological dependence triggers structural vulnerabilities, including technological bubbles leading to lagging normative construction, algorithmic black boxes amplifying decision-making risks, and uneven distribution of algorithms, data, and computing power forming new power asymmetries, with Global South countries facing systematic deprivation of discourse power. The chapter concludes by noting that AI is not a "panacea" for resolving transnational cognitive divergences, and that intelligent public diplomacy practices must abandon technological determinism and incorporate systematic governance frameworks.

V. Conclusion

An elaboration of the intelligent leap and new characteristics of public diplomacy in the AI era, an analysis of endogenous risks including algorithmic cocoons, deepfakes, and technological dependence, and from a Chinese perspective, the proposal of strategic adjustment pathways: promoting AI-empowered public sentiment perception, precision outreach, and cultural production; returning to human-centered approaches to build long-term trust networks; leveraging latecomer advantages based on livelihood scenarios; and actively participating in global AI governance to promote sustainable development.