Консультант по связям с общественностью уволен из JFNA за рекомендацию избегать термина «сионизм»

A communications consultant was let go by the Jewish Federations of North America last week for saying something that a number of Jewish leaders and thinkers have been saying for years: Maybe Jews and supporters of Israel should be more tactical about using, and not using, the word “Zionism.” Matthew Berger, who had been hired by the umbrella group to head a new strategic communications project, was speaking to members of JFNA’s Young Leadership Cabinet last Tuesday in Minneapolis about effective messaging about Israel. Among his recommendations, according to a slide he showed during the presentation, were “showcase diversity,” “focus on the common enemy” and “avoid ‘Zionism.’” (Quotes around Zionism included.) The slide, shared with the conservative Jewish news service JNS by an unnamed attendee, was the focus of a JNS article on Aug. 5. In response, a JFNA spokesperson reaffirmed that the umbrella group is “proudly Zionist,” and appeared to defend the presentation by Berger, who had been hired to head Project Halo, a JFNA effort to help federation leaders “counter antisemitism and anti-Zionism” in their communications. “This slide was part of a discussion about what data shows to be effective messaging in today’s polarized political environment and should not be taken to imply anything else,” Niv Elis, JFNA’s associate vice president for external communications, told JNS. Within hours of its publication, after the JNS story was shared on social media by various pro-Israel users, JFNA ended its contract with Berger. “The presentation at our National Young Leadership Cabinet Retreat was not prepared by Jewish Federations of North America, but by a Project Halo consultant, and does not represent our approach to Zionism.” according to a statement by JFNA that Wednesday morning. Elis declined to comment to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency beyond sharing the statement. In an interview with JTA on Tuesday, Berger, who worked as a reporter for JTA from 2000-2006, declined to comment on either JFNA or the presentation in Minnesota. But he did share his thoughts on the uses, and misunderstandings, surrounding the word “Zionism.” “My purpose as a communicator is to use messaging to advance a goal. If the goal is to raise awareness of antisemitism and build allyship, then we have to understand the word ‘Zionism’ is being misconstrued,” said Berger, the former executive director of the Foundation to Combat Antisemitism. “And we can either spend our energy trying to define it and fix that or use language that people are going to understand to open doors to engagement.” The controversy might suggest that Berger had somehow violated a Jewish communal taboo, when in fact numerous Jewish organizations and commentators who are emphatically Zionist are noting how the term itself is sowing confusion. Like Berger, they are not questioning the tenets of Zionism — the right of the Jewish people to self-determination in their historic homeland — but its rhetorical weight. The Anti-Defamation League regularly tracks how “Zionist” is deployed as an antisemitic slur. The American Jewish Committee’s “Translate Hate” glossary notes how using ”Zionism” and “Judaism” interchangeably “blames Jewish people for the actions and policies of the State of Israel.” “‘Zionist’ is increasingly used as a defamatory code word for Jews, in order to disguise antisemitic narratives,” according to “Reclaim Zionism,” a website launched earlier this year by the American Zionist Movement coalition. “This deliberate or unconscious distortion fuels hostility and creates a social climate in which Jewish life is questioned or threatened.” The distortion of the words by Israel’s enemies is not the only challenge organizations are seeing. JFNA’s own polling suggests that a Jewish majority that nonetheless wholeheartedly supports Israel avoids using the term to describe their own beliefs. A February JFNA poll found that only 37% of American Jews describe themselves as Zionists. Yet 88% said Israel has the right to exist as a Jewish, democratic state. Only a relatively small percentage of respondents identified as anti-Zionist. The study, a JFNA official explained at the time, suggested reasons why Jews might hesitate to use the term “Zionist”: They are unclear on its definition, or they think it implies blanket support for Israeli government policies and actions they don’t agree with. “If we misread the trend about ‘Zionism’ to mean that large numbers of Jews, especially young Jews, are turning against the existence of Israel itself, we will draw the wrong conclusions and take the wrong actions,” Mimi Kravetz, JFNA’s chief impact officer, wrote in a JTA essay timed to the poll’s release. In the same essay, she acknowledged that the word has undergone “definition creep.” A similar interpretation of the poll results was also included in a Project Halo “backgrounder” in February, providing communications guidance for Jewish organization staff when speaking with Jewish and non-Jewish audiences. “The term ‘Zionism’ is often used to mean different things depending on the speaker, fueling confusion and misunderstanding,” according to the backgrounder. As Berger did in Minneapolis, Project Halo recommended that Jewish professionals “focus on using terms that have broader appeal among Jewish audiences.” When using “Zionism,” meanwhile, the backgrounder recommended that speakers define it — as a movement for self-determination, a Jewish democratic state and Israel’s right to exist that does not imply support for the sitting government.