Soccer Dad

Perceptions of Israel

A few months ago, Gallup released a poll showing that Americans support Israel more than they support the Palestinians:

Fifty-two percent of Americans said their sympathies were with Israel in the dispute with the Palestinians, while 18% said they were more sympathetic to the Palestinians.

Truthfully, results like these from Gallup are not at all unusual. A 3 or 4 to 1 ratio of those who favor Israel over the Palestinians has been pretty consistent over the past fifteen years.
At the time, Michael Freund wrote:

What is truly extraordinary about the results is the fact that despite the widespread bias of the mainstream media, the overwhelming majority of Americans still side with Israel. It is almost as if the steady diet of anti-Israel propaganda being fed to the American public by various media outlets has little, if any, real impact on their world-view.

(both links via Backspin)
I have to disagree for a few reasons. Even if the 52% supporting Israel is high, 52 - 18 still only accounts for 70% of those surveyed. What about the other 30%? The fact that only 70% have opinions is pretty amazing.
Another thing is that as nice as 3 - 1 margin is, it is not that impressive. If Americans had a true view of the nature of the conflict, I have no doubt that the advantage to Israel would be at least 5 - 1 with many fewer undecideds. Instead that media has successfully introduced the idea of moral equivalency. Does it make a difference that one society produces Nobel winning scientist and the other suicide bombers? No. To the media one must understand what drives the terrorists. And it's impossible to believe that this attitude does not rub off on those who read, listen to or view the news.
This brings up the next question: What is the best Israel can do to fight this perception problem?
This is a question that Jonathan Tobin deals with in "The Selling of Israel." Tobin presents two competing views. One:

To that end, a group calling itself ISRAEL21c: A Focus Beyond the Conflict has set itself the commendable task of giving greater context to the hyperviolent portrayal of Israeli society that those who have never been to Israel, believe to be the country's whole truth.

The other:

Others disagree. They contend that for all of the great things to be said about Israel, the reality remains that as long as its right to exist is called into question, an infinite number of pleasant stories about life there will not convince anyone it deserves to survive.

As pollster and Republican Party political consultant Frank Luntz writes in a booklet about his research on the question, "You can't get beyond the conflict until you get beyond the conflict. A strategy of focusing on all the contributions to 21st-century life... will go unheard unless and until your audience hears and believes that Israel is a proponent of peace, and advocate for justice, and a force for compromise."

My preference is for the Israel21c approach. If people know more about Israeli contributions to science and its missions to assist countries after disasters then they will start questioning those who doubt its legitimacy. Instead by focusing on the conflict, Israel can't win.
A few weeks ago Israel caught a woman who had hoped to blow herself up inside a hospital exploiting a humanitarian pass Israel had given here to seek treatement inside Israel. Did a single news account describe the pass as a "confidence building measure?" Why is it that only releasing terrorists is considered a "confidence building measure" but not the treatment of Palestinians in Israeli hospitals. Because for a variety of reasons the Palestinians (and Arabs generally) own the terms of the conflict. Israel's only hope is to show as many people as possible that it benefits the rest of the world. Only then will people start questioning the unbalanced information that they are fed by the media.
When people read that five Iraqi children were treated at Israeli hospitalswouldn't they find news that the Iraqi constitution doesn't allow Jews to reclaim their property to be outrageous. If each of these stories were emphasized - and similar ones were emphasized - people would stop buying the moral equivalency.
UPDATE: Atlas Shrugs shows these contrasts effectively.
Crossposted at Israpundit and Soccer Dad.

Posted by SoccerDad at July 24, 2005 10:38 AM | TrackBack