How Israel Lost the Story

A compelling exploration of how media influence, moral judgments, and narrative control influence the shaping of public opinion

Scott Galloway is a Professor of Marketing at NYU Stern School of Business, where he teaches Brand Strategy and Digital Marketing. He’s the host of the Prof G Podcast and the Pivot podcast, which he co-hosts with Kara Swisher. He is the New York Times bestselling author of numerous books, including a new book, The Algebra of Wealth: A Simple Formula for Financial Security, which you can pre-order. He recently appeared on an episode of Call Me Back - with Dan Senor. I’ve summarized his portion of the discussion regarding Israel because I think he has something important to say. Feel free to listen to the entire podcast—it’s about 90 minutes or so.

Scott Galloway's reflections on the shifting public and personal narratives surrounding Israel following the October 7th Hamas attack provide a compelling exploration of narrative control, moral judgments, and media influence in shaping public perception. His insights delve deep into the consequences of historical misrepresentations and the complexities of geopolitical conflicts.

Galloway, an atheist whose mother was Jewish, finds himself uniquely positioned to offer a personally informed perspective and somewhat detached from the immediate emotional responses that often characterize discussions about Israel. His analysis is driven by a concern over the misuse of historical comparisons—specifically, the inappropriate application of terms like "genocide" and "Holocaust" to the current conflict between Israel and Palestine. Galloway argues that such comparisons fail to represent the facts accurately and escalate tensions unnecessarily through disinformation, invoking the profound horrors associated with these terms.

This misuse of historical terminology is a central theme in Galloway's critique. He points out the stark contrast between the Holocaust, which resulted in the systematic extermination of six million Jews, and the casualties in Gaza, which, while tragic, do not approach the genocidal scale of the Holocaust. Galloway is disturbed by the casual application of such heavy terms in public discourse, which he sees as a distortion of history that undermines genuine understanding and dialogue.

Moreover, Galloway highlights the inconsistency in the international community's responses to different conflicts. He notes that massive civilian casualties in other conflicts—such as those in Japan, Germany, Iraq, and Afghanistan—have not been labeled as genocides. This selective outrage, he argues, suggests a double standard that disproportionately targets Israel. According to Galloway, such disparities reflect broader geopolitical biases and media narratives that often simplify complex international issues into binary moral judgments.

The role of media and social platforms in perpetuating these biases is another critical aspect of Galloway's analysis. He expresses frustration with the dominance of anti-Israel narratives on social media, which he attributes to both misinformation and the absence of counter-narratives from influential figures who might share his views. This imbalance in the media landscape, Galloway argues, fuels a global perception of Israel that is skewed and often disconnected from the realities on the ground.

Galloway’s personal experiences further illuminate the impact of these distorted narratives. The dissolution of longstanding friendships over differing views on Israel highlights the divisive nature of the issue and the emotional weight it carries in personal relationships. This personal fallout exemplifies the broader societal divisions that polarized media portrayals can exacerbate.

In grappling with these issues, Galloway reflects on the broader implications for his personal identity and public reputation. He sees the transformation of Israel’s image from a symbol of resilience and survival to a broadly criticized state as indicative of a significant shift in global narratives. This shift, he suggests, is not just about Israel but about how conflicts are framed and understood globally. Galloway questions the fairness and objectivity of the international community's approach to Israel, pointing out the unique and often harsher scrutiny applied to its actions compared to other nations facing similar challenges.

Through his discourse, Galloway seeks to challenge the prevailing views and encourage a reassessment of how conflicts are judged and discussed in the public arena. He advocates for a dialogue that respects both sides' complexities and historical contexts, moving beyond simplistic and often misleading binary narratives of good versus evil.

Ultimately, Galloway's commentary is a call for a more nuanced, informed discussion about Israel and Palestine, one that recognizes the historical and present realities of both peoples. He urges a reconsideration of how narratives are constructed and the impact these narratives have on public opinion and international policy. His analysis underscores the need for balance, fairness, and depth in addressing geopolitical conflicts—a plea for a shift from sensationalism to substance in the global discourse on Israel.