The decline in Israel's PR standing is a concerning phenomenon, but it's fixable - opinion

As Israel fights a difficult war against enemies who seek to destroy us, military successes are overshadowed by our lack of achievements in the realm of public relations. There is no doubt that the Republican victory of Donald Trump over Democratic candidate Kamala Harris in the US presidential election marks a turning point in the relationship between the US and the Israeli governments. In his victory speech this week, Trump stated, “I won’t start wars; I will end them.”

Since the Six-Day War, when the small and threatened state of Israel defeated three Arab countries, there has been a dramatic shift in global public opinion, with some journalists, including Jews, embracing radical leftist views. Certain journalists have resurrected antisemitic statements that blend with anti-Israeli sentiment, creating a false narrative about Israel’s struggle for existence.

A recent standout in this regard is Thomas Friedman, one of the most influential US journalists, an American Jew, and a foreign affairs columnist for The New York Times. Now he claims that since we eliminated Sinwar, Gaza can be returned to the Palestinian Authority (PA). This journalist, whose memory apparently isn’t his strong suit, claimed as recently as June that Sinwar should be appointed to oversee the rebuilding of Gaza. It’s hard to believe.

Friedman has developed positions that have drawn sharp criticism from many Israelis and a significant portion of the American Jewish community, who accuse him of inaccuracies in the coverage of Israel, presenting hostile views toward the Jewish state, and media bias favoring the Palestinians and Arab states. One of his critics’ main arguments is that he adopts a one-sided approach when discussing Israeli policy, particularly regarding military operations, settlement construction, and Israel’s conduct on the diplomatic stage. He believes Israel occupies and exploits its military power against the Palestinians.

Friedman has been accused multiple times of presenting a distorted picture of reality in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Examples of journalistic inaccuracies in his columns include presenting incorrect data, distorting statements or quoting them out of context, and sometimes ignoring the full history of the conflict. There are instances where Friedman describes Israeli policy in a way that reinforces the Palestinian narrative instead of conveying the complexity of the security threats Israel faces.

Three weeks ago, Friedman wrote, “The Palestinian Authority will be responsible for the reconstruction of Gaza using aid money provided by Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and other Gulf states, European countries, and perhaps the US.” He added, “The elimination of Sinwar also creates the possibility for the ‘greatest’ step since Oslo towards a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians.” Friedman doesn’t let facts confuse him.

To refresh Mr. Friedman’s memory, the PA did control Gaza until Hamas expelled it, slaughtering many of its members while others fled with their tails between their legs. This did not, however, prevent PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas from convening the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) Executive Committee for an emergency meeting to “pray for Sinwar’s memory and plan the entry into Gaza.” Abbas has described the mass murderer as “the great national leader who fell as a martyr on the path of Allah” and sent condolences to his Hamas brothers, its activists, and the family of “martyr” Yahya Sinwar.

Can Mr. Friedman explain to his readers how a Holocaust denier like Abbas, who praises the evil murderer Sinwar, can return to rule Gaza?

Criticism of Christiane Amanpour over bias against Israel 

Another influential journalist is CNN correspondent Christiane Amanpour, born in England and educated in Iran. Over the years, Amanpour has covered wars and faced severe criticism for what has been described as a blatant bias against Israel and inaccuracies in the coverage of the reality on the ground.

One prominent example is her coverage during the rounds of fighting in Gaza, where she portrays Israel as using excessive force and targeting the Palestinian civilian population. Amanpour often focuses on Palestinian casualty numbers (provided by the Hamas-led Gaza health authority) without presenting the full context of the fighting, including the use of Palestinians as human shields by terrorist organizations or the intentional targeting of Israeli civilians.

During Operation Protective Edge in 2014, Amanpour’s reporting included many accounts of Palestinian casualties while ignoring the reasons that led Israel to act militarily in Gaza, such as ongoing rocket fire and terrorist attacks against Israeli citizens. Amanpour routinely describes Israel as a cruel occupying force, without addressing the Palestinian refusal to recognize its right to exist as a Jewish state.

I have yet to see either Thomas Friedman or Christiane Amanpour immediately condemn Lebanon for its attempts to assassinate a prime minister in Israel, or the terror state of Iran, whose organizations sent a drone that hit a house in Caesarea.

Shifts in modern media landscape

The modern media landscape has undergone significant changes over the past two decades. The shift from traditional media such as newspapers and television to digital media, particularly social networks, has made the PR struggle more complex. Israel must combat hostile narratives, particularly from media organizations such as CNN, BBC, and CBS, that perpetuate negative opinions against it.

The decline in Israel’s PR standing over the past decades is a concerning phenomenon. Effective public relations have always been an essential part of Israel’s struggle on the international stage, but over the years, Israel has lost ground in this area, leading to significant reputational damage that could affect not only the country’s foreign relations but also global public support and diplomatic and economic ties.

Israel is fighting against hostile narratives and one-sided coverage from large international media organizations that often portray it in a negative light and frequently use terms like “occupation,” “apartheid,” and “disproportionate response,” which help entrench anti-Israeli narratives in the global public consciousness. These narratives, which originate from political figures or pro-Palestinian organizations, are disseminated through the media and strengthened on social networks, where Israel struggles to respond effectively and in real-time.

The Jewish state is not endowed with significant financial resources, unlike, say, Qatar, which has English and Arabic television channels viewed by millions. Qatar buys seats at leading universities in the US through massive donations, acquires publicly traded companies, and donates to football clubs.

Israeli PR messaging tends to suffer from a lack of consistency and the absence of a coherent and straightforward message that can be clearly understood and is aimed at gaining international support. Its messaging tends to be focused on internal audiences (within Israel and Jewish audiences in the Diaspora), while the broader, international public is less engaged.

One of the central problems in public relations is insufficient communication with foreign correspondents covering Israel who are not always able to grasp the full picture regarding our security and political situation here. As a result, their reporting is biased or relies on incorrect or partial information from Palestinian sources or anti-Israel organizations. Improving relations with these correspondents and providing extensive access to accurate and up-to-date information will likely positively improve coverage.

For a long time, the national PR system had ceased to function. The system established to coordinate between various bodies to convey Israeli messages has not fulfilled its purpose. It is also unclear what happened to the budget of NIS 300 million allocated to the system. In contrast, the Foreign Ministry’s PR budget is only NIS 28 million.

In the past year, the Foreign Ministry has begun allocating financial resources for public relations on social media. Defense Minister and outgoing foreign minister Israel Katz held regular meetings with serving ambassadors to present Israel’s position. Simultaneously, there has been an order to accelerate public relations activities in digital spaces and face-to-face meetings with social media influencers abroad, to assist in public relations efforts.

Digital activities yielded over 9 billion views in the past year. At the initiative of the foreign ministry, an event was held in New York a few months ago involving 300 Jewish social media influencers to assist the Israeli public relations effort worldwide. A similar conference is set to take place in New York in December, aimed at strengthening ties with Jewish student leaders on campuses, in response to the public relations challenges that have arisen since October 7 and the protests against Israel. Additional conferences will soon be held in the US and key European capitals, and the ministry plans to hold a conference for pro-Israel influencers in one of the Arab capitals. No further details were available due to the sensitivity of the topic.

In interviews with the media, Israel’s Consul General in New York Ofir Akunis explains that the “death threats” against Israel and America prove that our October 7 is their September 11, and we are facing a common enemy that we must fight together.

Collaboration between Israel and the Jewish community in the Diaspora is critical. Organizations such as AIPAC in the US and Jewish associations in Europe can assist in the fight against one-sided media coverage that often stems from ignorance due to a lack of information.

Incoming Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar announced Wednesday that Israel’s Foreign Ministry is set to receive an unprecedented budget increase of NIS 545 million for 2025 for a steep upgrade in PR. The funds will be used, among others, for campaigns abroad in foreign media and on social media. As part of enhancing public relations activities, the ministry will conduct focused activities on campuses in the United States to change attitudes toward Israel and its policies, in cooperation with the Jewish community in the US and without undermining the operations of the Diaspora ministry.

One can only hope that this difficult war will soon end, that residents of the North will return home, and that hostages will speedily return. However, in the battle, we are only at the beginning.

The writer is CEO of Radios 100 FM, honorary consul general of Nauru, deputy dean of the Diplomatic Consular Corps, and president of the Israel Radio Communications Association.