Brand Israel
On Wednesday evening, May 9, Ido Aharoni, the Israeli consul general in New York, spoke at Ansche Chesed, a Conservative synagogue on New York's Upper West Side to which our family belongs. I attended with two aims: to see how members of our quite liberal but strongly Zionist congregation responded to the talk, and secondarily to ask a question or make a comment if the audience turned out to be too willing to swallow what I was sure would be a large dose of Israeli hasbara. I was pleasantly surprised on several counts.
First, attendance was miniscule, with only 29 or 30 people in attendance out of a congregation of two to three hundred families. When I was growing up in Connecticut in the nineteen fifties and sixties, a talk by the Israeli consul would have packed the auditorium at my Conservative shul. Although there were no doubt other factors, including the fact that the talk was on a week night and not in the middle of one of Israel's many wars, it had been announced in the synagogue's newsletter and placed on the events calendar, and the rabbi followed up with an email on the morning of the talk. I interpret the scant turnout as a clear sign that large numbers of liberal, congregationally affiliated Jews are no longer interested in listening to what they probably peg as official Israeli propaganda.
By way of contrast I also note that a couple of years ago our rabbi, Jeremy Kalmanofsky, to his great credit scheduled a talk by Rabbi Arik Ascherman, Israeli-American co-founder of Rabbis for Human Rights in Israel. The talk, on the subject of Israeli house demolitions and anti-Arab violence by settlers in the Occupied Territories, was held in the same room as Wednesday's gathering, but drew twice as many people.
Second, I expected the audience, which was heavily skewed in an elderly direction, would be very supportive of the Israeli consul, but I was wrong. The consul's talk was entirely about the "Brand Israel" marketing campaign as the wave of the future in Zionist PR. Aharoni spoke frankly as if we were close allies, which I guess was his expectation. Instead, many in the overwhelmingly Zionist audience were quite dissatisfied with, and even hostile to, the hollow hasbara discourse and marketing plan which the consul described.
Although the talk had been billed as a discussion of the "successes and challenges of Israeli diplomacy,” the consul began by asking Rabbi Kalmanofsky what subject he should focus on. The rabbi specified the“delegitimization” of Israel and what could be done about it.
Aharoni then proposed to the audience a psychological experiment. How would we rate a Mr. Smith, a well-dressed, apparently prosperous man in his early sixties -- “he's actually sixty-four” -- who appeared before us if we knew nothing about him? He answered this question by stating that “psychological research” has shown that, knowing nothing about him, we would rate him a five on a scale of one to ten.
Aharoni told us that a Mr. Jones, younger and not well-dressed, apparently poor, would appear next, and tell us that Mr. Smith was his next door neighbor, had built a fence between them that stole part of Mr. Jones's land, and was settling some of his relatives on the stolen land. Now how would we rate Mr. Smith? Again he answered the question by stating that “research has shown” that we would lower our rating of Smith to a three.
Finally, Mr. Smith re-appears and denies Mr. Jones's claims, stating that the supposedly stolen land has actually been in his family for three thousand years, and he has a document -- the bible -- to prove it. According to Aharoni our rating of Smith would now return to a five.
The point of this story is that Mr. Smith (Israel) can never get above a five in this context, that being what Aharoni referred to as the “geopolitical” aspects of the situation. According to Aharoni about seventy percent of Americans support Israel, but actually neither know nor care much about it. This is a result of that seventy percent being bombarded by an endless stream of news about the Arab-Israel conflict, which causes them to turn away from the whole subject.
Aharoni's solution to the problem -- Israel being stuck at a neutral five rating, large segments of the public not really caring about or identifying with Israel -- is to completely change the conversation from a broadly targeted campaign selling Israel's side of the conflict story, to a narrowly targeted campaign that totally ignores the conflict and instead promotes Israel's positive aspects to specific niche markets. Ths campaign is “Brand Israel”, and unless I misheard him, Aharoni claimed that he had been an originator of the concept. The target markets he mentioned included:
- Gays -- the infamous pinkwashing with Tel Aviv's gay scene as the lure
- Runners -- Israel has three marathons and one Ironman triathlon each year, as well as a number of half marathons
- Investors -- (see Start-up Nation by Dan Senor and Saul Singer)
- Birding -- many inter-continental bird migration routes meet over Israel, making Israel a birder's paradise every spring and fall, as hundreds of avian species cross the region
- Environmentalists (e.g., Green Zionist Alliance)
- Art, music, film, fashion (e.g. AbbaNibi.com)
Aharoni claimed that “Brand Israel” is having its intended effect, that tourism in Israel is up substantially since the campaign began. Almost as an afterthought, as if to say “we're getting our money's worth”, he added that the Israeli government has spent a lot of money on market research to design the “Brand Israel” campaign, including hiring the big four accounting and consulting firm Ernst and Young to do a detailed study. The study included a comparison of Israel's marketing problem with that of New York City following the city's fiscal and crime crises in the nineteen seventies.
But when he went on to compare “Brand Israel” to New York City's “Big Apple” marketing campaign, asserting that the campaign turned the city's image around and led to a huge increase in tourism, a woman in the back spoke out: “But crime really did decline.” This opened the floodgates. A minute or two later Rabbi Kalmanofsky commented that the woman's point was a good one, that the consul (and presumably Israel) was not addressing the substantive issues (i.e., human rights) that concern most liberal Zionists.
A man who appeared to be in his late forties or early fifties brought up the issue of Israel's treatment of J Street. After apologizing profusely for what he was about to say, he complained that the Israeli government did not respect J Street or engage in genuine dialogue with them. Aharoni responded that J Street is a special case because they lobby on behalf of Israel's opposition parties, activity which he claimed disrespected Israeli democracy and was beyond the pale.
There's chutzpah and then there's chutzpah, but this was really too much. I interrupted Aharoni to point out that the behavior he was (I believe falsely) imputing to J Street was in fact what Israeli governments, politicians and AIPAC (de facto agency of the current Israeli government) do in the United States as a matter of routine.
One of the older women present, probably in her eighties, sounding very agitated, accused Aharoni of ignoring the substance of the problem. Others made similar comments. There were a few supportive comments as well, but even a fortyish self-professed AIPAC supporter seemed miffed that what Aharoni was describing was not specific enough -- he wanted proof that this plan was working.
At the end of the question period, as people rose and began to leave the room, an acquaintance who has many Israeli relatives turned to me and said in a tone of semi-disgust, “he didn't say anything about the real issues.” I think that about summed up the night.
While I would not draw any exaggerated conclusions about the declining power of hasbara from this event, I do think that the evening clearly demonstrated the slowly but steadily fading allure of the Zionist project for liberal Jews . And the open and detailed description of the Israeli marketing campaign, “straight from the horse's mouth,” while not surprising in its gist, was a fascinating glimpse into the official Israeli mentality.
I love that a member of Ansche Chesed, a congregation with tons of progressive street cred, wrote this on MW. Good job.
Next up – a brave soul from B’nei Jeshurun maybe?
and
This speaks to the massive split inside the active, engaged, organizing Jewish community that J Street has helped to grow and formalize. They have done a lot to loosen up people’s tongues at events like these, and to keep them from feeling marginalized when they go up against an Israeli consul.
The holey olde Hasbarrow is filled with denial, fantasy, irrelevant nonsense, misquotes, strawmen, ‘other words’ and outright lies, all too often repeated. People are starting to look at the ‘explanations’ only to find ‘justifications’ that simply don’t pass scrutiny.
Changing the label on a bucket of sh*te doesn’t make it edible.
I’m going to have to defend Clench here. While I do not agree with jstreet leadership positions with regard to the I/P conflict. The grass roots membership is definitely opening their eyes to what’s going on. As Phil says things are changing.
hi light, not sure talknic was referencing jstreet or what clench was saying. unlike your comment (posted underneath another) talknic’s comment was to the main post. i assumed he was talking about the presentation at the synagogue.
Thank you, Phillip Harris.
You have the steady hand of a surgeon-writer.
I think this photo shows the real Israel Brand – on the back of the cyclist
link to warincontext.org
Thousands of years of history but unfortunately nothing survives from the years AD 70 to 1948.
The birds still come to Palestine even if the owners no longer live there.
And the Ziobots really built something on the land- such a pity they never paid for it.
I was disappointed not to see Beitar Jerusalem in the video.
Palestine is still an amazing country, regardless of all the shite that has happened over the last 64 years.
I think Israel is gone way beyond the point where homeopathic PR campaigns can turn the situation around.
RE: “Aharoni responded that J Street is a special case because they lobby on behalf of Israel’s opposition parties, activity which he claimed disrespected Israeli democracy and was beyond the pale.” ~ from Philip Harris’ article above
MY COMMENT: Beyond the pale? Lol! How medieval! Open mouth and insert foot!
SEE “BEYOND THE PALE”, phrases.org.uk:
SOURCE – link to phrases.org.uk
• JPEG IMAGE OF A PALE - link to facebook.com
RE: “JPEG IMAGE OF A PALE” – me, above
ELABORATION: This screen capture (of a medieval pale in Sweden) is from the following film.
Arn: The Knight Templar (Arn: Tempelriddaren), 2007, R, 133 minutes [a very good, but not great, film - J.L.D.]
Based on Jan Guillou’s Crusades trilogy about Swedish Knight Templar Arn Magnusson (Joakim Nätterqvist), this adventure saga follows the son of nobility from his monastic education to his return to the family to help fight for the crown of Sweden.
That mission is interrupted, however, when Arn impregnates his lover and is sent to the Holy Land, where as penance he must become a warrior for Christ in the battles of the Crusades [with an interesting segment regarding Saladin* - JLD].
Language: Swedish (English subtitles) DVD/Blu-ray may have an English audio option.
Netflix Availability: Streaming, DVD and Blu-ray
• NETFLIX LISTING – link to movies.netflix.com
• Arn: The Knight Templar, Movie Trailer – link to youtube.com
* P.S. So much for the power of the “True Cross”!
Nice catch Dickerson. Some the great Eastern European Jewish rebels gained their reputation for refusing to recognize the “pale”.
Thanks for this story. Brand Israel is a flop even when marketed to an audience predisposed to be receptive. Finkelstein’s new book Knowing Too Much covers the same theme: American Jews are distancing themselves from Israel.
Along these lines, it’s worth while to remember that one of the top PR executives in the US, Charlotte Beers, worked for the GWBush regime in 2001-2003. She held the title of Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs. She attempted to overcome the bad image of the US in the Arab world. She dealt with it as a “marketing problem”. She failed, too.
PR is not enough. You have to change the policy.
The Palestinians are supported by nearly the entire world (except for the US and Israel). Israel could change the situation by (for example) releasing Palestinian prisoners, or accepting the offer from the Arab world that has been on the table for several decades. But more hasbara? It’s not working any more.
Great post, Phil Harris. I’m surprised an Israeli consul had enough self awareness for that thought experiment, at least in public. On my first read, I thought it was your rabbi. It means that (some in official) Israel knows they’re doomed if they don’t change something. Maybe they will, though the people in power now show little indication of it.
yes i agree, great post. thanks phil
I agree too. And yes, Mr Harris, your post was great–thanks!
PS, Phil Weiss, why did my yellow star vanish? It simply disappeared from my comments about a week ago and has never returned. I sent you an email but never received an answer. Anybody else here lose their yellow star?
i completely agree too. not sure how i missed this post until today alerted by another commenter..this is a great post Phil Harris and very much appreciated!
” is to completely change the conversation…”
Let’s talk about Gay night life! Birding! It’s such naked subterfuge, it’s almost comical. Even the majority of Americans who don’t know or care about Israel perceive Israel as being perpetually at war or on the verge of war. Why would I travel to a war zone to go clubbing or watch birds?
Phil Harris,
You do realize he left out one of the main “target audiences”: “Christian Zionists?”
Target audience: EVERYBODY without a conscience.
My first thought was the consul general believes Americans are fools who will never bother to find out what’s going on. But on second thought, from all I hear of how Israelis feel, they are engaged in exactly what the consul is trying to get going here – they go about their active lives, perhaps birding, running, etc. and ignore what is going on a few miles away. So the consul general can be forgiven for suggesting what is proven to work on home ground; thinking the same thing can be pulled off in the U.S.
I have a very good friend that I asked to watch the video I made about the situation in I/P, a few weeks before we met for lunch so she’d have time to do so. We have lunched regularly for many years where we talk enthusiastically about everything under the sun. So at this most recent meeting I asked her if she had watched my video. She replied apologetically that she had seen part of it (it’s ten minutes total!!!) but that she “just isn’t interested in those kinds of things”.
Now if a good friend cannot spend ten minutes of time to view the effort of someone she knows and likes, how can there be any hope to influence the American public? The United States is an unused democracy – the process could work but it is barely used as was intended by those worthy designers in the 18th century.
It’s no wonder lobbies rule Congress, the American public almost rolls out a red carpet for them to do so. Let me modify the saying: the only thing required for the lobbies to triumph is that the electorate do nothing.
I watched some of the vid. Is it legal in the US to claim East Jerusalem as part of Israel?
In the UK we banned the Israeli tourist board from making this claim.
‘Brand Israhel’? They SHOULD be branded; if not with Cain, certainly shame.
very interested story about the strangers mr smith and mr jones. the big problem with this story is the israel and palestine are not strangers to americans. maybe to kids, but that’s about it. you just cannot erase the past and start from a clean slate with the hasbara, aint gonna work, at all. and you cannot compare israel w/nyc, even nyc at it’s worst. you just can’t. the only kinds of things you can compare war crimes to, are other war crimes..or periods of our history we’ve grappled with..like our civil rights movement /jim crow/the genocide of our indigenous people/apartheid…all of those things israel will not compare favorably too. it’s not a crime scene that can just be ‘cleaned up’ with some luster.
people are just not that stupid. the only ones looking stupid here are the people pushing a silly plan that does not try to clear up the real mess. the kind of crime scene where you let the criminals run loose while redesigning the downtown, you’re still gonna have the crime.
so glad to hear the people are becoming more engaged. excellent!