Traditional Diplomacy has it become old-fashioned?

"Old diplomacy" can be differentiated from its antecedents (Ancient and Medieval worlds), mainly due to the fact that represents relations process between modern states, and with boost of relations between nations, the government of those countries found it crucial to negotiate between each other on a regular basis, for that diplomats had to be sent abroad, “attached” to them a series of rights and immunities, such as the right to perform their business without trepidation and be fairly treated by the host country.
That is what is still happening nowadays, if we think about embassies and diplomatic agents, such as ambassadors, that “exist” to represent their country abroad and to ensure that its citizens have its rights protected in a foreigner country. To refer that Italy was the pioneer on the establishment of those institutions/embassies abroad.
The “old diplomacy” was structured mostly on a bilateral basis and normally undertaken in secrecy, means that it only involved two states.
Is the traditional diplomacy considered old-fashion?
Yes, since the relations between states can no longer be bilateral, although the states are still the main actors, they have to share the negotiations process with other institutions such as NGO’s and intergovernmental organizations. The traditional diplomacy Agenda is too narrow, and the fact that only states play a role in the preoccupations of diplomacy, often means that those will mainly reflect the government preoccupations. Thus, the participation of other actors such as NGO’s (focused on more broad aspects) became essential.
Furthermore, in the traditional diplomacy the embassies are only concerned about the physical security of its citizens, which is not enough, as the social and economically conditions of its citizens has
to be taken into consideration.
The embassies should ensure the well-being of its people at whole levels while they are in a foreigner country.