I’ve long said that sometimes it’s best not to immediately reply to what some PR practitioners perceive to be a PR crisis.
I’ve come to that conclusion because often what appears to be a crisis is only a one or two day story that disappears and by rushing a response only will prolong negative media coverage.
Of course, that depends on the situation.
A crisis that involves a loss of life or serious injuries or conditions should be answered promptly with a sympathetic response saying how the entity will respond to the crisis. But often rushing out a statement before an investigation is complete results in disseminating incomplete or wrong information. Thus, in many PR crisis situations I recommend a statement along the lines of, “We are investigating the situation and will issue a detailed statement when the investigation is completed.
But as I often said when a PR crisis occurs, “A crisis is not like a one-size-fits-all garment. Every crisis needs news thinking.”
Such a case is Israel’s government’s response to the decade’s long Palestinian propaganda attack. Whether you sympathize with the Palestinians or Israel does not negate an important lesson that the conflict provides: There are important PR lessons to be learned by account handlers that can apply to any type of account.
The decades-long attacks by Palestinians and their American supporters has without a doubt been highly successful. It has resulted in Palestinian charges against Israel being reported as fact by major American news outlets, often without them checking its veracity or minimizing (and often ignoring) an Israeli response.
An example is the following:
An internet search reveals many instances when major media outlets had to amend earlier coverage, blaming Israel for acts that they did not commit because they believed Palestinian propaganda.
Arguably, the one Palestinian claim that received the most coverage and was later proved false occurred on Oct. 17. 2023, when many major media outlets published stories that an Israeli air strike in Gaza City killed hundreds of people at the Al-Ahli Arab Hospital, with the Hamas-run Gaza Health Ministry reporting an estimated 500 deaths.
The New York Times initial report on the incident, on Oct. 17, included a large headline across The Times website repeating claims by Hamas government officials that the explosion was caused by an Israeli air strike.
However, an editor’s note on Oct. 23, said, “The New York Times acknowledged that its initial Oct. 17, 2023, report regarding an Israeli strike on a Gaza hospital relied too heavily on unverified claims from Hamas.” The note continued: “The report left readers with an incorrect impression about what was known and how credible the account was.”
The initial report was also published by other major news outlets , including the Washington Post, which corrected its story by reporting the following: “Blaming an Israeli air strike for the October 17, 2023, Al-Ahli Arab Hospital explosion were incorrect. Evidence suggests the explosion was caused by an errant rocket fired by Palestinian militants.” That correction was published on Oct. 26. (Everyone in the newspaper business knows that corrections never receive the same readership as an original story. In fact, television news outlets rarely report corrections.)
Subsequent intelligence and forensic analyses by international agencies—including the U.S. National Security Council, United Kingdom Intelligence, and Human Rights Watch—concluded the blast was caused by a misfired rocket launched from within Gaza by Palestinian militants. But the damage to Israel’s reputation was already done.
There are two things that the above incident proves: 1) There is a distinct anti-Israel, pro-Palestinian predisposition among the media and 2) PR practitioners should never base a program or speech on one source.
Below are mistakes made by Israel and what PR practitioners can learn from them:
1. For years, leading American organizations that support Israel counted on lobbying efforts with members of Congress to ensure support. Too often, during a crisis, companies rely on outreach to certain populations as a tactic. While that’s important, in my opinion, it should be accompanied by a structured outreach to the general public, because in the final analysis it’s’ the public that will make the decision to continue supporting a company.
2. For decades, the Palestinians have been accusing the Israeli’s of atrocities. The Israeli responses have usually been to deny the accusations. That approach has been disastrous. The denials have resulted, if ever, in a short graph lost in an article of hundreds of words, accompanied by pictures. What the Israeli’s should have done is immediately offer a spokesperson to major TV and print outlets, as well as taking out ads, that would detail the inaccuracies in the often erroneous Palestinian charges. In our world, if a news report during a PR crisis contains major inaccuracies, a high level company executive — not a PR person — should be made available to the media to correct the errors (and then leave follow-up responses to corporate executives directly connected to the crisis, never by a PR person).
3. Instead of just replying to accusations, the Israeli government should have always emphasized in its replies to Palestinian accusations that for years the Palestinians use schools and hospitals as staging areas for attacks, use their own populations as cannon fodder and call for the removal of Israel from the maps of the world. In our business, during a PR crisis, the company should always detail how it has been a good citizen and helped the community in the past and will continue doing so during the crisis and thereafter.
4. A major blunder was the Israeli government’s not considering that things change. For too long they relied on the past staunch support of the U.S. Congress and public. They should have aggressively responded to the Palestinian propaganda attacks forcefully years ago. In our business, too many practitioners rely on PR tenets from the past. A better approach to gain media attention is for practitioners to create out-of-the-box techniques. Being different from the crowd attracts media attention.
5. An important lesson to remember is that PR practitioners should think like our advertising kin and suggest programs that can continue indefinitely and contain message points. Too often, PR people only think of the “big hit, even though a few big hits are not necessarily indicative of a successful program. For years, Israel’s successes were championed by the great majority of Americans and members of Congress. But Israel’s failure to follow up with an advertising-like public relations campaign that targeted all Americans was a major blunder that the Palestinian propagandists and their anti-Israel kin took advantage of by launching daily anti-Israel propaganda.
On July 18, the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) published an article detailing how the Israeli government is attempting to stop its decline of support in the U.S. It said, in part, “Israel is funding a multimillion dollar U.S. influence campaign using AI-driven texts and conservative media to improve its public reputation.“
Israel has retained at least six firms to help with the effort in the U.S. over the past year, said the article. “Three dozen new people, many of them marketing professionals, have registered as foreign agents for Israel. The country is on track to spend more than any other on U.S. influence disclosed with the federal government this year, said Nick Cleveland-Stout, a researcher who studies foreign lobbying at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft,” reported the Journal. I think targeting only conservative media is a mistake. What is necessary, in my opinion, is a campaign that targets Americans regardless of their political beliefs.
As a supporter of Israel, I liken the Israeli government’s effort as closing the barn door after the horses have bolted. Changing public opinion is not easy. It took many years for anti-Israel propaganda to be successful. It will take many years, if ever, for Israel to turn the tide. However Israel has no choice but to try and limit the damage to its reputation no matter how long it takes.
Also, a major facet of any pro-Israel campaign must target young people, who do not know that the Jewish state has offered many solutions to the situation, all rebuffed by Palestinian leaders whose continuous stated objective is to drive the citizens of Israel into the sea.
Young people do not know that during the 2000 Camp David Summit Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat told U.S. and Israeli negotiators he would be killed if he made major concessions on Jerusalem.
Young people do not know that Egyptian President Anwar Sadat was assassinated in 1981 for making peace with Israel, for which he won a Nobel Peace Prize.
Young people do not know that Abdullah bin Hussein, King of Jordan, was assassinated in 1951for attempting to make peace with Israel.
Young people do not know that the Palestinian Authority operates a “pay-to-slay” fund that provides monthly stipends to the families of Palestinians imprisoned, injured, or killed in connection with acts of violence against Israelis.
Anti- Israeli propagandists say that Israel was created illegally by the United Nations and young people and many of their parents who do not know the history of the mid-East believe them.
They do not know that many of the nation-states in the region, such as Iraq, Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon were not created until after World War I and that Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar and the UAE became independent several years later.
They do not know that many countries in Europe also were created after World War I, including Czechoslovakia,Yugoslavia, Poland, Austria, Hungary, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Turkey.
They do not know that more than 100 new countries were created after World War II. But only Israel is targeted as being created illegally.
In the annals of public relations campaigns the propaganda one by Palestinians and their supporters accusing Israel of every evil act that they can think of, while Israel is defending itself from being “wiped off the face of the world’s maps,” as is often stated by Israel’s enemies, must be considered one of the most successful campaigns in the history of our business. Conversely, Israel’s belated attempt to counter the anti-Israeli slanderous campaigns should be studied in advance PR courses as how not to respond to a crisis.
By waiting so long to commence with a public relations program to counter the anti-Israel one that has been conducted since the establishment of the Jewish state by the United Nations in 1948 it’s evident that Israel’s belated PR campaign has an uphill fight.
Israel’s use of force as being “disproportionate” was first used by then-United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan and European Union officials during the July 2006 Lebanon War. Since then it has been used frequently. The most recent use I saw was by William A. Galston, the WSJ columnist on August 12.
Israel has a population of approximately 10 million, There are approximately 80 million Arabs living in states that do not formally recognize or maintain diplomatic relations with Israel and countless millions more who are anti-Israel that live in countries that have a relationship with Israel, with another couple of million living in the Gaza Strip. (That does not include Iran, which supplies anti-Israel enemies with weapons.) You don’t have to be an Einstein to figure out that if every time Israel was attacked and they would only respond proportionately, eventually there would not be any Jewish people left and that there would no longer be a state of Israel. That’s simple math.
What is under-reported by the anti-Israel critics is that approximately 20 percent of Israel’s population are Muslims, and that they have full legal and voting rights, participate in government and the supreme court, and work across all economic sectors, as well as some being in Israel’s military as officers.
The title of this essay reads “A PR Crisis Is Not Like A Garment: There Is No One Size Fits Rule; Every Crisis Needs New Thinking & Israel’s Falling Support Is A Prime Example.” Israel’s PR effort should not be set in stone. It
must be flexible and change as conditions change. Relying on past strategies should never be a template. The same applies to all PR crises.
I’ve long counseled people who reported to me, and have written extensively, that PR people should pay close attention to the daily news reports, especially the political ones, because there are many lessons that can be learned from them that can be applied to crises in our business. And those are lessons that will not be taught in PR 101 classes, regardless how high your tuition is.
Editor’s Note: This article reflects the opinions and analysis of the author. It does not represent the views of Bulldog Reporter, its editors or management.
