This post was in response to bb1790a’s blog post at: http://bit.ly/LPvcNb and is also posted below in the comments section of that blog.
The question of nation-branding is a pertinent one. I think nation-branding definitely qualifies as a public diplomacy effort, in that it aims to utilize existing soft power resources to cultivate affinity for the nation. I think the central question here is not even how effective nation branding efforts can be (I think Japan has successfully branded itself as ‘cool) but whether or not that brand will actually result in any tangible benefits to the state trying to brand itself. The Japanese government’s leveraging of ‘cool’ cultural phenomena is a good example of what could be labeled an active attempt to use passive soft power resources. Culture is neither a political or economic resource and exists in a bit of a vacuum.
What I mean is, another country or public cannot see Japanese culture as a model for change in political or economic terms. Nakamura points out that Taro Aso’s plan to build a national Pop-art center for manga anime and other pop culture, “…had been criticized by the then opposition DPJ as a colossal waste of money at a time when government spending should be cut to reduce that nation’s growing deficit.” I couldn’t agree more. Love for manga and anime may cause some attraction among groups of people around the world, but ultimately it won’t lift anyone out of poverty or start any revolutions. No one will rush to Japan’s aid in fierce defense of Doraemon. I think you adeptly point out that Japan is in danger of having its brand become one-dimensional and I believe that therein lies the danger of nation-branding. Definitions can also be quite limiting, especially for a nation of millions of people. Nations are dynamic, multidimensional and vibrant. If a government is going to spend money to highlight its main characteristic, it should be one that is highly marketable.
Japan, in an effort to make itself more likeable, has relied on the softest of its resources. Japan is a country that has many advantages but also several disadvantages. Japan could market itself as an innovative, tech-savvy laboratory for future invention. Its meteoric rise from absolute defeat in the wake of World War 2 lends Japan extensive experience with post-war efforts and pulling a nation together. Its command of industry and mass-production of automobiles and electronics makes it an economic juggernaut that could promote industry in developing nations. Its existential dedication to peace positions it as a possible major player in peace-brokering in conflict zones. Japan could leverage all of these potential soft power resources but has instead depended upon its pop culture to win hearts and minds. Pop culture, in my opinion, should serve as a tertiary priority at best. Instead of pigeonholing the Japanese image and relegating it to an inane description of ‘cool,’ Japan should spend money promoting its money-making and policy-changing potential abroad.
Multiple Perspectives on Public Diplomacy 
I find your arguments very interesting. And maybe it is in Hayden’s reading where it can be better understood this Japanese debate between 2 different perspectives: Aso’s and Ogoura’s. I believe Ogoura’s arguments must be taken very seriously from an IR perspective. After all, many soft power initiatives are related to partnerships of States and non State actors. Nevertheless, I agree that pop culture might not be the most adequate way to promote Japan’s interests. Even though pop culture is an interesting niche for young people (actually it is something that is also happening in Hollywood recently with all the superheroes action movies) I do not think it’s a resilient attraction. I believe Japanese “nouvelle vague” in films or writers like Murakami are more appealing than manga. Or maybe it is that I am getting old =)