RSS
Preparing for the Coming PR War
Mourners carry a coffin during the funeral of Wissam Tawil, a commander of Hezbollah’s elite Radwan forces who according to Lebanese security sources was killed during an Israeli strike on south Lebanon, in Khirbet Selm, Lebanon, Jan. 9, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Aziz Taher
JNS.org – The pro-Israel community was completely and inexcusably unprepared for the public-relations nightmare following the events of Oct. 7. It took two months for major organizations to create the “10/7 Project” to push “for accurate and complete coverage of the Israel-Hamas war.” Does anyone know anything the project has done in the last 10 months? If it did anything at all, it was a total failure. War with Hezbollah and Iran was as predictable as a confrontation with Hamas, and yet the community seems equally inept, so let me lay out what we know will happen:
The media will:
Ignore Israeli casualties and focus on Arab victims.
Accept fabricated Arab statistics.
Interview unreliable Arab sources.
Air stories without researching their accuracy.
Focus on dramatic photos and stories without context.
Fail to explain Hezbollah dictates what can be reported.
Israel’s accidental bombing of civilians in the Arab town of Kfar Kana in the Galilee shifted opinion against Israel in the last war with Hezbollah. This was not a case of media bias—it reported what happened accurately—but an example of Israel being unable to offer explanations in a timely and persuasive way to mitigate the impact of the stories. This is also an example of a predictable event that PR war planners should have anticipated. On July 18, 2006, an Israeli pilot told a reporter: “One mistake can jeopardize the whole war, like Kfar Kana, in one of the last operations in Lebanon, where artillery bombarded a refugee camp, killing over 100 people, which resulted in international pressure that halted the operation.”
Israeli statesman Shimon Peres argued that good policy results in good PR, but sometimes, Israel’s policy options are limited or poor, as is the case of needing to destroy buildings above tunnels and attack schools, mosques, hospitals and U.N. facilities where terrorists are hiding. Hezbollah uses the same tactics as Hamas, and Israel will need to have explanations for its actions.
We know Israel will be accused of disproportionality, provoking a refugee and humanitarian crisis, denying health care, and committing “massacres” and “genocide.” Israelis will be charged with being aggressors and compared to Nazis. The usual epithets unrelated to the war will be tossed around, such as comparing Israel to South Africa and accusing it of “settler-colonialism.”
It’s always better to get in the first blow and try to set the media’s agenda. Israel’s enemies have mastered this tactic. It’s vital to offer context and facts in those instances immediately; errors should be identified, and corrections demanded. Unfortunately, it’s often too late to change perceptions once a narrative takes root, as in the report falsely blaming Israel for bombing a Gaza hospital early in the war.
The conflict must be explained in simple terms without trying to give a history lesson. Israel is fighting for its existence. The people of Israel want peace. Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East. It shares American values and interests. The war is not with the people but with the leaders whose radical Islamic views threaten America, as we’ve seen from Iranian plots to kill Americans and Iranian proxy attacks on U.S. forces. Publicize what the leaders of Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran say.
It is always better to strike first and try to set the media’s agenda. Israel’s enemies have mastered this tactic, frequently putting the pro-Israel community immediately on the defensive. If it is possible to find out about a forthcoming negative story; it is vital to immediately offer context and facts. Once a negative report appears, errors should be identified and corrections demanded.
Advocacy must start with the best information, and then the material should be packaged most engagingly to suit the medium or audience. For example, elites and academics may want to read articles with references; Internet surfers may want short tidbits or humorous videos; print reporters may want personal stories; and broadcast journalists will want powerful images. Divisions must be created to attend to the various media and target audiences (blogs, print/broadcast journalists, politicians, academics and students).
Focusing on peace is perhaps the most compelling argument in our arsenal. One reason Israel is losing the PR battle is that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu refuses to offer any hope or timeline for an end to the conflict.
It is also essential to empathize rather than demonize all Palestinians. Their suffering in Gaza is undeniable. Context does matter, and their anguish is a result of the actions of Hamas. The Lebanese are also victims of Hezbollah, and the inevitable death and destruction from a war should be anticipated. Little to nothing has been done to educate the public about how Hezbollah has insinuated itself into the civilian population and the tunnel network it has built. We know Hezbollah will control the narrative by limiting journalists’ access and freedom to report accurately.
On Oct. 7, Israel had emotion on its side but lost momentum as the months passed. It is vital to keep the stories of the hostages and victims at the forefront. There has been no honest discussion of the hardships of the citizens of the north, the victims of the Hezbollah strikes, or the damage to property, agriculture and the environment.
One of the most important but challenging tools to employ is rhetorical questions. Advocates are accused of “whataboutism,” but the critics must be challenged to answer what they would do if they were in Israelis’ shoes. What would the United States do if terror forced thousands of citizens to leave their homes or if rockets bombarded American cities? What would you do if your family was murdered in front of you, your daughters and wife raped and mutilated, and your house burned down with your grandparents inside?
Israel is always put on the defensive, but you are usually losing the argument if you’re explaining, justifying or rationalizing. Israel should eschew self-flagellation over every mistake. Sometimes, explaining why Israel has taken a particular action will be necessary. Still, advocates should not fall into the trap of the spouse explaining why they don’t beat their partner.
Israel is often put in an impossible position when the other side charges that an atrocity has occurred, without caring whether the allegation is true, and Israel must take time to investigate the incident. Meanwhile, the allegation is virally circulated, and it is too late to undo the damage when the Israeli analysis is complete.
The Israel Defense Forces has improved at providing daily briefings with documentation, photos, maps and videos to influence the narrative. It needs a disciplined campaign that deploys articulate, photogenic and informed spokespeople globally. Israel needs ambassadors who can fluently make Israel’s case. The pro-Israel community needs to marshal spokespeople who are academics and former officials from the government and military to counter the anti-Israel Arabists who are given prominence in the media.
The media’s bias will not change. We must operate with that as a given rather than expect to change it. Another reality is that many enemies among us undermine our case with their “As a Jew” claims. Divisions are inevitable even among friends, as we see in Israel and the American Jewish community. Like the media, we won’t change the culture of “two Jews, three opinions.”
That said, the criticism of Israel in the coming battles is predictable, and there is no excuse to be caught unprepared again.
The post Preparing for the Coming PR War first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Northwestern University Touts Progress on Addressing Campus Antisemitism Amid Federal Scrutiny
Signs cover the fence at a pro-Palestinian encampment at Northwestern University in Evanston, Ill. on April 28, 2024. Photo: Max Herman via Reuters Connect.
Northwestern University on Monday touted its progress in addressing the campus antisemitism crisis, issuing a statement containing a checklist of policies it has enacted since being censured by federal lawmakers over its handling of pro-Hamas demonstrations which convulsed its campus during the 2023-2024 academic year.
“The university administration took this criticism to heart and spent much of last summer revising our rules and policies to make our university safe for all of our students, regardless of their religion, race, national origin, sexual orientation, or political viewpoint,” the statement said. “Among the updated policies is our Demonstration Policy, which includes new requirements and guidance on how, when, and where members of the community may protest or otherwise engage in expressive activity.”
The university added that it has adopted the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, a reference tool which aids officials in determining what constitutes antisemitism, and begun holding “mandatory antisemitism training” sessions which “all students, faculty, and staff” must attend.
“This included a live training for all new students in September and a 17-minute training module for all enrolled students, produced in collaboration with the Jewish United Fund,” it continued. “Antisemitism trainings will continue as a permanent part of our broader training in civil rights and Title IX.”
Other initiatives rolled out by the university include an Advisory Council to the President on Jewish Life, dinners for Jewish students hosted by administrative officials, and educational events which raise awareness of rising antisemitism in the US and across the world. Additionally, Northwestern said that it imposed disciplinary sanctions against several students and one staff member whose conduct violated the new “Demonstration and/or Display Policies” which regulate peaceful assembly on the campus.
“In closing, although Northwestern has made significant progress in the fight against antisemitism on campus, the university remains vigilant and will continue to do what is necessary to make our campus safe,” the statement concluded. “Importantly, the fight against antisemitism is NOT [sic] a zero-sum game. All members of our communities on campus — all religions, races, national origins, genders, sexual orientations, and political viewpoints — deserve to feel safe and know that our rules will be enforced to protect them against hate, discrimination, harassment, and intimidation. Northwestern is committed to this principle.”
As previously reported by The Algemeiner, Northwestern University struggled for months to correct an impression that it coddled pro-Hamas protesters and acceded to their demands for a boycott of Israel in exchange for an end to their May 2024 encampment.
University president Schill denied during a US congressional hearing held that year that he had capitulated to any demand that fostered a hostile environment, but his critics noted that part of the deal to end the encampment stipulated his establishing a scholarship for Palestinian undergraduates, contacting potential employers of students who caused recent campus disruptions to insist on their being hired, creating a segregated dormitory hall that will be occupied exclusively by students of Middle Eastern and North African (MENA) and Muslim descent, and forming a new advisory committee in which anti-Zionists students and faculty may wield an outsized voice.
The status of those concessions, which a law firm representing the civil rights advocacy group StandWithUs described as “outrageous” in July 2024, were not disclosed in Monday’s statement.
Northwestern University is not the only school creating distance between itself and the anti-Zionist movement, a step many colleges have taken in response to US President Donald Trump’s vowing to cut the flow of taxpayer funds supplementing their budgets should they refuse to crackdown down on illegal protests and antisemitism. Following the Trump administration’s cancelling of over $400 million in federals contracts and grants awarded to Columbia University, former interim president Katrina Armstrong proposed a list of reforms the school would agree to undertake — in areas ranging from undergraduate admissions to campus security — to restore the funds.
Armstrong later resigned from her position, saying in a statement which explained the decision that she wishes to return to her role as executive director of the university’s Irving Medical Center, as well as several other positions she holds.
Meanwhile, Harvard University recently fired a librarian whom someone filmed ripping posters of the Bibas children, two babies murdered in captivity by Hamas, off a kiosk in Harvard Yard and denounced him as “hateful.” Additionally, it paused a partnership with a higher education institution located in the West Bank, a move for which prominent members of the Harvard community and federal lawmakers had clamored in a series of public statements. The Trump administration initiated a review of $9 billion in taxpayer funds it receives anyway, prompting interim president Alan Garber to defend Harvard’s handling of the issue.
“For the past fifteen months, we have devoted considerable effort to addressing antisemitism,” Garber said. “We have strengthened our rules and our approach to disciplining those who violate them. We have enhanced training and education on antisemitism across our campus and introduced measures to support our Jewish community and ensure student safety and security.”
Northwestern University is in the Trump administration’s crosshairs too. It is one of 60 universities being investigated by the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights over its handling of campus antisemitism, a project that will serve as an early test of the administration’s ability to perform the essential functions of the agency after downsizing its workforce to increase its efficiency.
“The department is deeply disappointed that Jewish students studying on elite US campuses continue to fear for their safety amid the relentless antisemitic eruptions that have severely disrupted campus life for more than a year,” Education Secretary Linda McMahon said in March. “US colleges and universities benefit from enormous public investments funded by US taxpayers. That support is a privilege, and it is contingent on scrupulous adherence to federal antidiscrimination laws.”
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
The post Northwestern University Touts Progress on Addressing Campus Antisemitism Amid Federal Scrutiny first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Pressure Mounts on UN Members to Block Reappointment of Controversial Anti-Israel Official
Francesca Albanese, UN special rapporteur on human rights in the Palestinian territories, attends a side event during the Human Rights Council at the United Nations in Geneva, Switzerland, March 26, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Denis Balibouse
The United Nations is facing growing pressure to block the reappointment of Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese, who has an extensive history of using her role to denigrate Israel and seemingly rationalize the terrorist group Hamas’s attacks against the Jewish state.
The UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) is set to reappoint Albanese for another three-year term on Friday, despite calls from several countries and NGOs urging UN members to oppose her reappointment due to her controversial remarks and alleged pro-Hamas stance.
Since taking on the role of UN special rapporteur on human rights in the Palestinian territories in 2022, Albanese has been at the center of controversy due to what critics, including US and European lawmakers, have described as antisemitic and anti-Israel public remarks.
In the months following the Hamas-led Oct. 7, 2023, atrocities, across southern Israel, Albanese accused Israel of perpetrating a “genocide” against the Palestinian people in revenge for the attacks and circulated a widely derided and heavily disputed report alleging that 186,000 people have been killed in Gaza as a result of Israeli actions.
She has also previously made comments about a “Jewish lobby” controlling America and Europe, compared Israel to Nazi Germany, and stated that Hamas’s violence against Israelis — including rape, murder, and kidnapping — needs to be “put in context.”
Last year, the United Nations launched a probe into Albanese for allegedly accepting a trip to Australia funded by pro-Hamas organizations.
In the past, she has also celebrated the anti-Israel protesters rampaging across US college campuses, saying they represent a “revolution” and that they give her “hope.”
On Monday, US Rep. Brian Mast, chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, sent a letter to the president of the UNHRC, Ambassador Jürg Lauber, to express his strong opposition to Albanese’s reappointment.
In the letter, Mast claimed that Albanese has failed to act “in an independent capacity with a professional, impartial assessment, and maintain the highest standards of efficiency, competence, and integrity.”
“Ms. Albanese unapologetically uses her position as a UN special rapporteur to purvey and attempt to legitimize antisemitic tropes, while serving as a Hamas apologist,” the letter read.
“In her malicious fixation, she has even called for Israel to be removed from the United Nations while likening Israel to apartheid South Africa,” Mast wrote in a letter signed by six fellow lawmakers. “Regrettably, Ms. Albanese’s rhetoric has perverted the very institution and its foundational principles in which she was appointed to serve.”
Governments worldwide, including France, the UK, Germany, Canada, and the Netherlands, have condemned her statements as antisemitic and urged that she not be given another term in her role.
Last month, 42 members of the French Parliament publicly urged the government to oppose Albanese’s reappointment, arguing that it “would send a regrettable signal to victims, human rights defenders, and states committed to credible multilateralism.”
This week, British Labour Member of Parliament David Taylor also objected to Albanese’s reappointment, saying “there is no place for such alleged antisemitism on the international stage.”
“Albanese’s response to the largest antisemitic massacre of the 21st century was to describe it as ‘a response to Israel’s oppression,’” Taylor told the Jewish Chronicle. “She described Israel as being a ‘settler colonial conquest.’”
“Making statements of this nature in a UN capacity is abhorrent and does so much damage to communities already torn apart by horrific violence, going against everything the United Nations stands for,” Taylor said.
Human rights groups and NGOs have also campaigned to prevent the anti-Israel rapporteur from receiving a second term.
UN Watch, a Geneva-based NGO, has organized a petition against her reappointment, which has garnered over 83,000 signatures.
Last month, Maram Stern, executive vice president of the World Jewish Congress, sent a letter to the president of the UNHRC urging him to reject the renewal of Albanese’s mandate, citing what she described as the UN official’s history of anti-Israel animus and antisemitic statements.
“Ms. Albanese has repeatedly made public remarks that propagate harmful antisemitic tropes, question the legitimacy of the State of Israel, and employ rhetoric that undermines the credibility of the Human Rights Council itself,” the letter read. “Her persistent lack of objectivity and failure to uphold a balanced and impartial approach required of her as special rapporteur compromises her credibility as an independent expert.”
The American Jewish Committee (AJC) also urged UN Members to reject Albanese’s second term, saying she “has systematically demonstrated a troubling pattern of conduct and expression that is incompatible with the responsibilities, neutrality, and integrity expected of a UN special rapporteur.”
“Her actions not only betray the victims of terrorism and antisemitism but also are a stain on the credibility of the Human Rights Council itself,” the AJC wrote in a letter.
The post Pressure Mounts on UN Members to Block Reappointment of Controversial Anti-Israel Official first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Three Jewish Coaches Lead Teams in NCAA Men’s Basketball Tournament Final Four
Florida Gators head coach Todd Golden and Auburn Tigers head coach Bruce Pearl talk before the game as Auburn Tigers take on Florida Gators at Neville Arena in Auburn, Ala., on Saturday, Feb. 8, 2025. Photo: USA TODAY NETWORK via Reuters Connect
The men’s 2025 NCAA Tournament Final Four bracket includes four No. 1 seed teams, three of which have Jewish coaches who will lead the way in the two national semifinals taking place on Saturday.
Auburn University Tigers head coach Bruce Pearl has contributed Auburn’s success in the NCAA in part to God and his Jewish faith. He described Israel as the “ancestral homeland for the Jewish people” and called for the release of American-Israeli Edan Alexander from Hamas captivity at a post-game conference last month. He also took the Auburn team on a trip to Israel, where they made stops at the Western Wall and Yad Vashem – The World Holocaust Remembrance Center.
The Tigers will compete on Saturday in the NCAA Tournament Final Four against the Florida Gators whose Jewish coach, Todd Golden, is an Israeli citizen who previously played two years professionally for Maccabi Haifa in Israel.
In 2009, Golden was co-captain of the USA Open Team, coached by Pearl, that won gold at the Maccabiah Games, which is an international multi-sport event for Jewish and Israeli athletes. Golden has been the coach of the Tigers for two seasons, but prior to that he was the assistant coach at Columbia, the head coach at San Francisco, and even worked under Pearl. Golden was director of basketball operations for the Auburn staff for the 2014-15 season and was promoted to assistant coach for the 2015-16 campaign.
Duke and Houston also play each other on Saturday in the Final Four. The head coach of the Duke Blue Devils, Jon Scheyer, also formerly played in Israel and holds Israeli citizenship. He played professionally for Maccabi Tel Aviv from 2011-12. In October 2023, not long after the start of the Israel-Hamas war, Scheyer commented on the conflict and said in part: “My heart breaks for the people in Israel — that have hostages, American lives that are taken, mourning loved ones.” Scheyer is leading Duke to the Final Four in only his third year as head coach.
The Houston Cougars – the fourth men’s team competing in the Final Four – do not have a Jewish coach, but they have a player who was born in Israel and played for Israel’s national youth squad. Guard Emanuel Sharp, who is the son of Derrick Sharp, was part of Israel’s under-16 national basketball team and also played for Maccabi Tel Aviv for over a decade.
This year’s Final Four have a combined record of 135-16. Since seeding began in 1979, this is only the second time in history that all four No. 1 seeds advanced to the Final Four. It previously happened in 2008. Larry Brown was the last Jewish coach to win the NCAA Tournament when he led Kansas to the victory in 1988.
The 2025 NCAA Tournament Final Four begins on Saturday, with two national semifinals taking place at the Alamodome in San Antonio, and ends on Monday with the national championship.
The post Three Jewish Coaches Lead Teams in NCAA Men’s Basketball Tournament Final Four first appeared on Algemeiner.com.