|
Israeli PR fails the decent, honest and
truthful test
By Stuart Littlewood
Redress, September 3, 2008
Stuart Littlewood shows how Israeli public relations fodder pumped
out in London and Tel Aviv fails a crucial PR test. He argues that,
if the Palestinians and other Arab were to get their media act
together, they could “make mincemeat” of Israeli propaganda.
When Ron Prosor arrived in London last year to take up his post as
Israeli ambassador he was eager to step up public relations. He told
the Israeli newspaper Haaretz: "I'm not afraid to appear anywhere,
and there is no platform ... that I will not utilize for PR work."
- We are familiar with the usual Israeli PR mantras:
- having to contend with suicide bombers
- how Arafat turned down former prime minister Ehud Barak's
so-called 'generous offer' in 2000
- how the Israeli public has moved to the left in recent years
whereas Palestinians have moved to the extreme right
- Israel is a democracy under attack
- Jerusalem is the capital of Israel forever
- Israel is against any negotiations with Hamas because it is a
terrorist movement.
This last is all the more preposterous when echoed by the US,
Britain and the EU, which have connived to keep Palestine under
Israel’s military jackboot for 40 years.
Israel, of course, is an ethnocracy with racist laws, not a
democracy as we know it in the West. This week an Israeli human
rights organization, Gisha, is appealing against a decision by
Israel’s so-called ‘democracy’ banning radio advertisements to
highlight the plight of Palestinian students enrolled at foreign
universities but prevented by Israel from leaving the Gaza Strip.
The director-general of the Broadcast Authority said the subject was
“politically and ideologically controversial”.
I wonder if the Ambassador is aware that in the UK PR campaigns are
supposed to observe rules set down by the Advertising Standards
Authority? In short, all marketing communications must be legal,
decent, honest and truthful. The main difficulty for Israeli PR, as
others have pointed out, is that Israel is probably the world's
worst brand, followed closely by Zionism. Any marketing effort that
is remotely decent, honest or truthful would sink both.
Let's take the recent Telegraph article, in which the Ambassador
says "the constant barrage of rockets being fired on Israeli
citizens... the average British citizen is painfully unaware that,
since Hamas seized control of Gaza last year, 1,400 rockets and
1,500 mortar bombs have landed on Israeli soil." He fails to mention
that these crude, home-made projectiles are nothing compared to the
thousands of high-tech munitions fired by Israeli F16s, helicopter
gun-ships, armed drones, tanks, troops and warships at the 1.5
million civilians imprisoned in the Gaza Strip. Is that honest?
Under the rules "no marketing communication should mislead, or be
likely to mislead, by inaccuracy, ambiguity, exaggeration, omission
or otherwise".
Ambassador Prosor claims that "Britain has become a hotbed for
radical anti-Israeli views ... Israel has been cast as a pantomime
villain... a climate of hatred is fomented on campuses". This would
be hard to prove. Under the rules he must hold documentary evidence
to support all claims, whether direct or implied, that are capable
of objective substantiation.
If anti-Israeli views do exist, I imagine they're directed not so
much against Israel and its people as the Zionist Tendency that
rules it.
As for hatred, the Israeli government provides a running
master-class on how to stoke it up. Take the latest example. A
report by Peace Now, an Israeli non-governmental organization, says
that at least 2,600 new Israelis-only homes are currently under
construction illegally - in Palestine’s West Bank, an increase
of 80 per cent over last year. In occupied East Jerusalem, which
Palestinians justly claim as the capital of their future state, the
number of new Israeli government bids for construction has increased
from 46 in 2007 to 1,761 so far this year.
This breaches earlier agreements as well as international law and
obviously undermines final status talks. Tzipi Livni, the Israeli
foreign minister, says the construction will not affect talks. "The
peace process is not, and should not be, affected by any kind of
settlement activities" and the settlement building programme should
not be used as an excuse to avoid negotiations, she tells
Palestinians. What planet is the woman on? Everybody knows perfectly
well that settlement building, like the Separation Wall, is a Trojan
horse used by Israelis to bite deep into Palestinian land, seize
control of precious water resources and fragment any future
Palestinian state. The Israel government is busily creating ‘facts
on the ground’ that are likely to prevent any peace deal, so cannot
be regarded as a real ‘partner for peace’.
Enter Condoleezza Rice, having lost all touch with reality and
ignoring Peace Now and other reports. She says she has faith in
Israeli intentions. "I don't believe that it is Israel's policy to
increase activity in the settlements, rather it is to decrease
activity," she remarked during a press conference. Rice is supposed
to be bright but evidently inhabits the same planet as Livni.
Devious PR goes unchallenged
Let's dwell for a moment on Barak's 'generous offer', another of
the myths Israelis love to peddle. The West Bank and the Gaza
Strip, seized by Israel in 1967 and occupied ever since, comprise
just 22 per cent of pre-partition Palestine. When the Palestinians
signed the Oslo Agreement in 1993 they agreed to accept the 22 per
cent and recognize Israel within ‘Green Line’ borders (i.e. the 1949
Armistice Line established after the Arab-Israeli War). Conceding 78
per cent of the land that was originally theirs was an astonishing
compromise on the part of the Palestinians.
But it wasn't enough for Barak. His 'generous offer' required the
inclusion of 69 Israeli settlements within the 22 per cent remnant.
It’s plain to see on the map that these settlement blocs create
impossible borders and already severely disrupt Palestinian life in
the West Bank. Barak also demanded the Palestinian territories
be placed under "Temporary Israeli Control", meaning Israeli
military and administrative control indefinitely. The 'generous
offer' also gave Israel control over all the border crossings of the
Palestinian State. What nation in the world would accept that? The
truth contained in Barak’s maps was hidden by propaganda spin.
At Taba, Barak presented a revised map. The Palestinians considered
it a basis for negotiation but Barak repudiated it after his
election defeat. You don’t have to take my word for it – the facts
are well documented and explained by organizations such as Gush
Shalom.
Another rule to remember is that you "should not exploit the
credulity, lack of knowledge or inexperience" of your audience.
Several weeks ago I and others, describing ourselves as Friends of
Mohammed Omer, wrote to Ambassador Prosor asking for an explanation
after the young journalist was beaten up and admitted to hospital by
Israeli security thugs when he arrived at the Allenby Bridge border
crossing on 26 June. Mohammed, who had committed no crime, was on
his way home to his family in Gaza after receiving the coveted
Martha Gellhorn prize for journalism at a ceremony in London.
Mr Prosor ignored our request and several reminders, and finally had
his Deputy Head of Mission send a woefully inadequate response to an
MP. In it the Israelis tried to demolish Mohammed’s ‘testimony’ and
discredit him. But according to Mr Omer no Israeli investigator
contacted him and no-one asked for medical reports. Refusing an
independent inquiry or tribunal in such a case, and not even
interviewing the victim or his doctors, or the Dutch diplomats who
accompanied him, spells whitewash – and a PR blunder of the first
magnitude.
As if that wasn’t bad enough, when the two Free Gaza boats broke the
illegal blockade last week Israel’s propaganda machine lashed out to
brand the 40-odd multi-national and multi-faith activists who
undertook the voyage a "handful of provocateurs seeking a public
relations stunt… aimed at boosting Hamas”. This ridiculous claim
didn’t end there. The siege-breakers, said Israeli officials,
“support Hamas suicide bombers and rocket attacks on Israel towns
and cities” and show "a complete and total disregard for innocent
Israel terror victims".
Unable to say anything intelligent about the voyagers – or indeed
Hamas – the Israelis as usual resorted to nasty accusations that
could not possibly be justified.
Most of the PR fodder pumped out relentlessly by Israeli
propagandists in London and Tel Aviv could never hope to pass the
‘decent, honest and truthful’ test. Those responsible for it
are plainly incompetent in the professional marketing sense. If only
the Palestinians and the Arab League would get their media act
together they could make mincemeat of their Israeli tormentors in
the all-important battle for hearts and minds.
But I hear on the grapevine that the Palestinian Authority – that
den of collaborators in Ramallah – promised their US sponsor not to
embarrass Israel in public. So the PA, knowing which side their
bread is buttered, make no effort. Thus Israel’s devious PR goes
unchallenged – except by Hamas.
It’s a mistake to think you can turn around a poor brand by throwing
more PR at it. You have to improve the product. In Israel’s case
they’ll have to cut out the crime and racism, hand back what they
have stolen, scrupulously observe international law and UN Charter
obligations, and show contrition for past sins. Only then will it be
possible to begin turning Israel into an acceptable and marketable
entity with a fine reputation for justice and good neighbourliness,
which surely is what most people wish to see.
When that’s on track is when good PR kicks in.
Stuart Littlewood is author of the book Radio
Free Palestine, which tells the plight of the Palestinians under
occupation. For further information please visit www.radiofreepalestine.co.uk.
http://www.redress.cc/palestine/slittlewood20080829
|
