Israel is losing the PR war so badly that even evangelical support is eroding
Interesting bit of PR advice from the JPost to Israel and its supporters. It starts off:
The war that Israel keeps losing is the war of world opinion, the war for individual hearts and minds. Consider recent stumbles.
Israel's military campaign in Gaza should have been named "8,000 is enough!" This would have communicated a determination to stop the barrage of missiles from Hamas, using surgical precision to destroy its arsenal, but destroying all of it, not just a part. Enough was enough: 8,000 missiles launched on the nation's civilian population would no longer be tolerated.
Unfortunately the operation was dubbed, "Cast Lead." The resulting image in the English-speaking world was not helpful. Lead is a soft metal associated with poison. The implication, then, was an unprofessional plan with ambivalent determination, biased motives and toxic methods.
Well, yes, I did used to refer to the operation as 'Lead Balloon' but clearly the effects of the war, as witnessed by millions around the globe thanks to Al Jazeera and Press TV, provided the killer argument here, not just the poorly chosen name?!?
[snip]
Even so, the United States is on the verge of engaging Hamas as entity that is on par with Israel. No, not on par: morally superior. Consider the recent image splashed across America by political cartoonist, Pat Oliphant, portraying Israel as a headless, heartless, jack-booted Nazi devouring helpless, little Gaza.
Where did that idea come from? Look at Article 20 of Hamas's 1988 charter and see who is winning the PR war.
Of course it is more than public opinion that is being lost; it is the death of common sense; it is defeat in the war for truth.
The "death of common sense"... "defeat in the war for truth". The only truth here is that increasing millions of people are starting to see is that Israel has for about fourty years now, occupied and colonised (at ever increasing rates) land it 'acquired' by military conquest, contravening international law and in the process deliberately making the establishment of a Palestinian State(let) impossible. With Hamas those facts have nothing to do.
EVEN EVANGELICAL SUPPORT is eroding. A vocal minority remain effusive on Israel's behalf. But the broader community is not monolithic. Many of its members are hungry for change, not unlike the political appetite that won Barack Hussein Obama the presidency. Among evangelicals the religious equivalent is a movement led by people like Brian McLaren, author of A New Kind of Christian; Stephen Sizer, a pastor who has gained popularity by condemning "Christian Zionism"; and, of course, Jimmy Carter, who accuses Israel of committing a "holocaust." How widespread is the erosion of evangelical support for Israel? Google this: "Letter to President Bush from Evangelical Leaders." Look at those who signed it - and the organizations they represent. Their claim to "represent large numbers of evangelicals" is true.
And behind it all? A resurgence of replacement theology, an ideology that, for almost 1700 years, has been used to ignite atrocities against Jewish communities.
It wouldn't be the JPost if it couldn't somehow drag the anti-Semitism card into it. Zionists, however should hang their heads in shame for having sought the support of anti-Semitic Christian numpties like John Hagee and his congregation.
[snip]
But it is not enough. What else can be done? How can Israel be a more effective light that draws the nations to her?
Yes, how's the Blight onto the Nations to improve its plight?
Most importantly, seek wisdom from the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Listen for the whisper of His counsel. He alone is God of all the nations. Under the banner of His leadership, Israel will win.
Let no one tell me again that claims that Israel is slowly turning into a theocracy are 'anti-Zionist lies'.
All in all the JPost's guide to 'New Hasbara' is feeble and doesn't really get past the We rock! stage of Gabriel Ashe's We rock! They suck! You suck! Everything sucks! guide to making the case for Israel. Suckers...
posted by Gert @ 3:12 PM
4 comments
4 Comments:
While I generally agree with some of the points you make, I have to mention something that bothers me.
In literature, what you're doing here is called a synecdoche. You take one op-ed and claim it's representative of the whole newspaper or the whole country. You did that a few days ago when you presented an op-ed by a former Yesha (Settler) Council chairman as "Ynet's peace plan".
Now, you're presenting a guest op-ed by Brian Schrauger as the voice of the Jerusalem Post. Even worse, you think this article is evidence of Israel sliding into theocracy. Well, I googled the author and found out that he isn't Israeli or even Jewish. He's an evangelical (whose "support" I dislike as much as you do, by the way).
This is kind of like saying that Moshe Arens, the right-wing former defense minister, or Yisrael Harel, the settler, are the voice of Haaretz, or that David Brooks and William Kristol are the voice of the New York Times (sorry, I'm not familiar enough with British newspapers to give you an example from the UK).
There's a difference between op-eds and editorials. Also, there's a difference between newspapers that only give voice to one kind of opinion and newspapers who have columnists from all across the political spectrum.
Thanks for your points but:
"You take one op-ed and claim it's representative of the whole newspaper or the whole country."
... isn't true, at least not intentionally: it's ONE article but I can't each and every time insert a CAVEAT (Caution: not necessarily representative of the whole paper or country). That's what I have you for ;-) -- my resident Zionist!
I'm not saying you should add a disclaimer each time, just attribute the opinions to the writer, not the media organization (which is what you usually do anyway). It's "Shrauger's guide to Hasbarah", not the "JPost's guide to Hasbarah".
Because it's you, I'll see what I can do...
Post a Comment
<< Home