LAUSR

International organisations (IOs) are increasingly going public by pursuing proactive public communication. How is this trend changing the terms under which global public debates on international issues take place? The article argues that IO public communication may have highly problematic repercussions for public discourse, because it tends to prioritise some voices, while marginalising others. I discuss a problematic prioritisation/marginalisation of voices in relation to three logics of public communication. First, as public information, public communication privileges organisational leaders by heralding their official narrative of goals, internal processes and outside action. Second, as governance, it strategically sides with norm entrepreneurs and orchestrates advocacy campaigns. Third, as self-legitimation, it seeks to construct symbolically procedural fairness and inclusiveness. Based on these logics, public communication may play a questionable role in marginalising critics of IO policies and procedures while facilitating public (mis)perceptions of its democratic credentials and the depoliticisation of institutional inequalities. My argument is illustrated by the results obtained from a combined reconstructive and quantitative text analysis of the United Nations’ communications in the Arms Trade Treaty process.