Trump gives thumbs up
Jewish organizations should make fewer statements about Trump, but take more action. (Photo/JTA-Chip Somodevilla-Getty Images)

Nine reasons Jewish organizations should issue fewer public statements

Since the presidential election, there have been unceasing demands that Jewish organizations issue public statements condemning or condoning this or that policy, nominee, comment made by a public official — and, remarkably, even this or that other Jewish organization for their accomplishment or failure to do one of the above.

In recent months, organizations like the San Francisco Jewish Community Relations Council have been lobbied by opposing sides to speak out on the ambassador designate to Israel, the prospective move of the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem, a candidate to head the Democratic National Committee, the president’s statements on anti-Semitism, a Hanukkah party at a certain hotel, the White House travel ban — and so on.

Neither of us is against issuing public statements. Indeed, our organizations have issued them and we recognize the merits in sometimes doing so. The Jewish experience during the Holocaust tells us that silence gives permission for persecution. Speaking out can save lives. The civil rights movement demonstrated how speaking out against publicly expressed bigotry is a tool for social change that drives bigotry to its rightful place: the margins of society. In addition, public statements can help build consensus and clarify values. In the wake of the executive order on refugees, for example, Jewish organizations spanning the ideological and religious spectrum issued statements opposing the ban. That unity communicated a powerful message both internally and externally.

But we are becoming more skeptical of the impact of these public relations statements. The American Jewish community should not be so quick to churn them out. Here are nine reasons we should slow down, if not cut back:

1. They don’t always make an impact

Too often we expend enormous energy in issuing a statement that few see or hear about. Before issuing a statement, we should ask ourselves: Who is the target audience to read this? How will the statement reach this audience? How do we want to inform, move, or engage this audience? Is a public relations statement the most effective way to achieve those goals?

2. They’re a huge time suck

Issuing a public statement is not just a matter of writing a few paragraphs. Done well, where the benefits outweigh the blowback, it is a cumbersome process involving multiple stakeholders, prolonged debate, and back-and-forth editing. Is this what our organizations were founded to do? Is writing and issuing statements why our constituents invest in us? These reasons lead us to #3:

3. Statements can be a substitute for action

There are many ways of advancing the issues our organizations care about. On championing immigration reform, ensuring the separation of church and state, eliminating anti-Semitism, etc., we must ask: Will issuing a statement move the needle? Or would it be more effective to meet with public officials, mobilize our community to do e-advocacy, call a member of Congress, or develop a briefing paper for decision-makers? Put simply, has issuing statements become our proxy for the more difficult work of real action?

4. They can preclude behind the scenes action

When we constantly speak out against political actions or policies, we make it more difficult to be engaged with public officials. Effective community relations work is done when one has a seat at the table and is engaged with decision-makers. If every Jewish organization is constantly condemning, who is going to help educate decision-makers?

5. They might breathe oxygen into that which we oppose

We like to think that when we speak out publicly against something we make it go away. But sometimes we inadvertently popularize the very thing we oppose. Sunlight can disinfect, but it can also nourish.

6. We can drown ourselves out with them

Some proponents of public statements worry that by not speaking out, we allow the dysfunctional or diabolic to become normal. Another failing, however, is to speak out so much that people become inured to our objections and stop paying attention.

7. They create a cascade of demands

When we speak out on one matter, people ask us to speak out on another. “You spoke out when a conservative did X, why don’t you speak out when a liberal did Y?” The more that we issue public statements the greater the demand that we do so.

8. They can damage organizations

Organizations such as ours were set up as convening, consensus-building public voices. But too many Jewish organizations with different missions needlessly become embroiled in polarizing conflicts over a particular public stance. When organizations issues statements on matters beyond their core mission, they risks alienating their supporters.

9. Statements can be a form of virtue signaling

Rather than a genuine attempt to influence discourse, issuing a public statement can be an exercise in signaling to like-minded people that we are one of them. Those demanding a public statement often want the target organization to prove its ideologically purity. Is that a good enough reason to issue a statement?

For our part, we’re going to focus on our organizations’ histories, missions and the hard work of effectively advance our core principles. Public statements have their time and place. Let’s keep them in check.

Abby Porth is the executive director of the Jewish Community Relations Council of San Francisco. David Bernstein is president and CEO of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs. Follow him on Twitter @DavidLBernstein. This piece appeared previously at eJewishPhilanthropy.

Abby Porth
Abby Porth

Abby Porth is the executive director of the Jewish Community Relations Council of San Francisco.

David Bernstein
David Bernstein

David Bernstein is the founder of the Maryland-based Jewish Institute for Liberal Values. Follow him on Twitter at @DavidLBernstein.