Category Archives: Media

When You Can Make the News Your Story, You Master Public Relations

Starbuck’s cups say “Come Together”

Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz demonstrated marketing genius this week.  He took his common drink of choice for millions of Americans and turned it into the news of the day.

The biggest obstacle to generating consistent publicity for any brand is the often aggressive attack of current events that consumes the media. When war in Israel breaks out or a massacre at a shopping mall or school occurs, news channels develop heartfelt collages choreographed to a stirring musical theme to begin and end each commercial break and that item becomes the only news angle of the day, week or even month.  Take the fiscal cliff, and see how Starbucks made it their story.  (Read more here)

1 Comment

Filed under Creative Writing, Crisis Management, Media, News and Views, Politics

Juda Engelmayer on Huffington Post Live discussing rebranding the GOP

Juda Engelmayer on Huffington Post Live about Re Branding the GOP

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Obama, Politics

And the Winner is: A Deafening Silence that Shames us all

Just a shout out to my father, Shammai (Sheldon) David Engelmayer for his recent win of The American Jewish Press Association’s Simon Rockower Awards for Excellence in Jewish Journalism.  The award was in its Category 4:

Award for Excellence in Editorial Writing – Division A. Newspapers over 15,000 circulation and all Magazines/Websites.

First Place
Jewish Standard, Teaneck, NJ

A Deafening Silence” by Shammai Engelmayer and Larry Yudelson

Comments: A stirring pair of editorials denouncing the silence by both American Jews and Israeli officials in the face of unacceptable violence by ultra-orthodox Jews against Jewish school children in the town of Beit Shemesh.

See the Editorial here

or read below:

Editorial

Published: 13 October 2011
Imagine this scene: A Jewish girls’ school opened in a town that serves as a suburb of the capital of Country Y. The neighbors were not pleased. To begin with, they wanted the building for their own children. In addition, they objected to the religious persuasion of the school and its students.

So every day, from the second day of school, mobs of neighbors protested, screaming “sluts” and other unconscionable epithets as the girls exited the building in the afternoon. Some of the protesters threw eggs and bags of excrement at the girls and at the school, to punctuate their points.

How do you think world Jewry would react?

How should we in America react? Should we call upon the Anti-Defamation League or the Simon Wiesenthal Center to demand intervention from the White House? Should we lobby the U.S. State Department to publicly condemn the behavior of Country Y and to insist that Jewish human rights be observed there?

Perhaps we should demand that the United Nations investigate. Perhaps, too, we should stage a massive demonstration in Dag Hammarskjöld Plaza.

We would do just those things if the country in question were Belgium, or Belaraus, or Bahrain. As we report on page 14, however, the country is Israel, which may explain why we have heard and read precious little from those only too quick to condemn even a hint of anti-Semitism anywhere else in the world.

The flashpoint is a school for girls in Beit Shemesh, a town near Jerusalem. The town’s rigidly Orthodox charedi community objects to the presence of a modern Orthodox school in their neighborhood. Is it because this is a Jew vs. Jew conflict — or worse, an Orthodox vs. Orthodox conflict — that there has been so pronounced a silence from the organized Jewish world?

It is not acceptable that little girls are being screamed at by grown men.

It is not acceptable that little girls must pass through a gauntlet of angry men who are armed with bags of excrement.

It is not acceptable that Jewish leaders both here and in Israel remain silent about this disgrace.

American Jewry needs to let the Israeli leadership know that our concern for Jewish schoolchildren extends to Israel — just as we would protest if the harassment took place in Moscow or Marrakesh.

Israel’s leaders need to understand that by tolerating charedi violence, the State of Israel is undercutting the Zionist rationale of providing a secure homeland for the Jewish people.

The pride we take in the high level of aliyah from our own community turns sour when we see former neighbors of ours, such as Englewood native Esther Boylan Wolfson and her family, being subjected to what can only be called anti-Semitism in their new Israeli homes. “It’s a confrontation with a kind of evil that frankly I’ve never experienced,” she told The Jewish Standard. That is not why the Moriah graduate and her family moved to Israel 14 years ago.

Protecting nine-year-olds from assault should not be the sole responsibility of the parents and the neighbors.

Where is the Israeli government in this?

When it came time to integrate schools in the American South, it was clear which side President Dwight D. Eisenhower was on. Where does Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu stand in the Beit Shemesh case?

Only Israel’s Ministry of Education has acted with any sense of justice and equity. The charedi mayor of Beit Shemesh suggested that the violence would end if the school moved somewhere else and the building was handed over to the charedi community. We applaud the ministry’s rejection of that offer, which is nothing less than extortion.

We would applaud even louder if the deputy minister of education — a representative of the charedi Agudath Israel party — would join the parents in protecting the schoolchildren and condemning the violence. He will not do so, however, because charedi leaders say they do not want to identify with what they see as anti-charedi elements. Translated, that means the modern Orthodox.

Would we accept that as an excuse for refusing to denounce anti-Semitism anywhere else in the world?

In America, as in Israel, the leadership of the charedi community needs to be called upon to declare on whose side they stand: with the hooligans, or with the girls?

A spokesman for Agudath Israel of America, Rabbi Avi Shafran, when questioned by The Jewish Standard on Tuesday, condemned the harassment as inappropriate and a violation of Jewish law.

Yet he defended the silence: “I do not believe that a decision to not condemn behavior necessarily implies tolerance of said behavior,” he said.

We disagree, taking the Talmud’s word that “Silence is like assent.”

 This article was reprinted from the Jewish Standard where it first appeared.

Leave a comment

Filed under anti-Semitism, Creative Writing, Judasim, Media, News and Views, Religion

What Public Relations Means to us Outside of the United States

by: Kenneth Murray, @Kenny_murray

I am a student of Public Relations and Marketing in Scotland, day in and day out I work with Scottish issues and I am heavily involved in the political scene in Scotland – however something I can’t escape is the brand of America.

Now I’ll be clear, when I say “the brand of America” I’m not referring to Jersey Shore and Big Macs. What I refer to is the pull America has as a nation. A nation built on immigration and integration – eventually. Around this time last year I visited one of the top Public Relations firms in America with my Scottish college that firm was 5WPR. Now to say I was impressed is an understatement; I was overwhelmed.

I had never experienced America really in person and only had TV shows to go on, but the design of the offices, the friendly nature of the staff and the knowledge of the impressive character who showed us around. Juda Engelmayer was clearly one of the best in the Public Relations industry and he in the matter of minutes had us all open jawed at his prowess and the popularity of 5WPR as a firm.

Now whilst studying in Scotland it seems we cannot escape PR cases from the states. It seems clear to many of us, that the most exciting PR industry is present in America – now of course our home country has many different clients – but what really gets our blood pumping is America. America has such an array of sectors within PR and is at the frontier, yet again in the Public Relations industry. The key advances are being made in America, the biggest cases develop there and of course – the biggest array of skilled PR professionals is there.

I am now in my 3rd year of study and it is clear to me, I want to work in America – to pursue that American dream, the “dream” that was surely one of the biggest PR scores for a country, ever. Why though? Besides the fact that every day in university we are given case studies of American firms, we are told to look at firms like 5WPR and Weber Shandwick for the right way of doing things? Well to put it quite simply – it’s the brand.

Every PR expert knows about branding and attempts not to be pulled in – but America, you have pulled many of us in. In fact I can assure you almost every PR student I have spoken to looks at America in awe and aspires to make it there.

Sure there would be differences, sure it would be a challenge and sure it would be galling; but surely as someone who works in PR that is qualities that should be there anyway? The willingness to overcome challenges, that sheer passion for your industry – and of course networking and taking advice from professionals like Ronn, buying his book (which is better than most textbooks I’ve read recently) and subscribing to his videos.

Dear America, you have one student here – the most influential PR student in Scotland according to the Behind the Spin blog, run by the Chartered institute of Public Relations in the UK and he has fallen for you.

How have you fallen for the brand of America? How do you think it could be improved?

Articles Source: “The Most Influential PR Student in Scotland”

please contact me at : kennethjosephmurray@gmail.com

Leave a comment

Filed under Juda Engelmayer, Media, News and Views, Social Media

The End of Days in Palestine

Palestine the Book, by Jonathan Bloomfield

What would we do if we lived in a flood plain with no egress at all, or along a hurricane evacuation zone that just prolonged the inevitable without taking you out of the path? It is probably something few really consider until the storm is bearing down on them and reality is about hit hard. Living in the New York metropolitan area, having experienced hurricanes, nor’easters and blizzards that destroyed property, wiped out beaches, killed people and devastated lives and families, many of us can imagine the sense of urgency when an emergency is near.

Most recently, last April and May we watched the 24 hour news channels as large regions of Kentucky, Tennessee, and Mississippi were hit by the largest storms since the early 1900s, and the Morganza Spillway was intentionally opened, destroying nearly 5000 square miles of inhabited land to spare total destruction of Baton Rouge and New Orleans, on the heels of the 2005 hurricane that nearly wiped out the whole Gulf region. What if the people who lived there or were visiting the area then had no way to escape?

The prospect is frightening and for just about all of us, unimaginable. Now imagine the threat is not a tidal wave, rushing floodwaters, a violent tornado or some other natural disaster, and something that can wipe out life as we know it for years to come, destroying not just property, but everyone and everything in its wake. Imagine the threat is a nuclear explosion, the mushroom cloud in the distance, the flash of light and the torrent effect of the ripple that tears through everything in its path, leaving death and darkness then nothingness.

This is a fear that we face living in a nuclear world, but one that we here in the United States feel is either so remote or could hit elsewhere, but not in my backyard. However, in Israel, the fear is real. With the entire country being just 8,019 square miles; extending about 200 mi north to south and just 70 miles east to west; with its narrowest point being only 12 miles across, there is nowhere to go to outrun a nuclear attack, nowhere to hide and nothing to do but watch the end of the world take hold.

A recently released short film captures the gripping moments of Israel’s hypothetical destruction. Israeli filmmaker Ronen Barany, who has a knack for creating bizarre short films, just released a five-minute film on Youtube called, The Last Day, or Yom Ha’Acharon. It is made in the style of an amateur video shot on the future date of February 23, 2013, just about one year from now. The home video is the remnant of a flash drive recovered by a United Nations reconnaissance team after an Iranian first strike with nuclear warheads.

It was taken by a couple desperately trying to flee Jerusalem as missiles are seen flying overhead. They are driving on “Highway 1” and capture on camera explosions from conventional warheads along the way, while listening to an emergency radio broadcast advising that there is no more contact with Haifa or the southern regions in what appears to be a concerted surprise attack on Israel. All the while you can hear the couple’s exasperated a voice speaking to one another in Hebrew wondering what is happening, where is Israel’s army and expressing concern that they cannot raise their parents by telephone. The announcer reports that the communications network across the country is failing.

A flash of light appears and the radio goes dead. The couple stops the car to help stranded drivers and runs to the aid of a young boy who stared at the flash and is blinded. As the camera pans the distance they see a huge pillar of smoke begin to expand and more people appear wounded alongside the road. A man recites “Shemah Yisroel”, the Jewish prayer recited by one who senses death is near – “Hear, O Israel: the Lord is our God, the Lord is one,” as Israeli war planes rush overhead and more explosions seem to level a mountain up ahead. Suddenly an almost dull sound begins to rumble and the sky lights up in shades of orange and yellow with black clouds rising from the ground.

All you hear is the explosion and a large ripple drawing near, then the image appears to become pixilated; then blackness and nothing at all. The film ends.

This is hard to watch and seems as real as if it had happened, and the fear sent a shiver down my back. In Mr. Barany’s film, Israel is presumably attacked by its neighbors, and destroyed in a final act of aggression by Iran. The people had nowhere to run, but watched as the end of days consumed them.

As the war of words heats up between Iran and the west and as Israel grapples with just what to do, artists such as Ronen Barany are not alone capturing the fears of the people. A new author, Jonathan Bloomfield, published a book last summer aptly named Palestine. That book depicts a very similar scene of Tel Aviv residents escaping the city as conventional weapons destroy buildings, bridges and roadways.

The threat of an Iranian nuclear launch has been eliminated by a per-emptive Israeli strike using Saudi airspace with permission. What remains is the threat of localized nuclear detonations from Iranian bombs that were smuggled into Israeli cities. That chilling tale ends with Israel’s ultimate victory, and is told in an almost Tom Clancy-like manner where Israeli agents find the plot and the bombs before the timer finishes its count-down.

These are both works of fantasy, and the hope is that it remains as such, even as the genuine possibility exists and is a very real threat for Israel. Some say these are scare tactics to get people worked up enough to force leaders into some unknown action. Others, however, believe it is an imminent reality and must be dealt with. Yet there are those who just chalk these up to entertainment and have no real meaning at all.

As the Republican primaries rage on, and candidates try to emphasize just how much each supports Israel and Jewish communities, Israel’s safety and very existence is a common theme. While stumping in Florida this week, Newt Gingrich sent out a robo-call to Jews accusing Mitt Romney of going cheap on kosher meals for seniors in Massachusetts, and it raised enough concern to make it onto the daily news reports. Just imagine what the threat of Israel’s annihilation can do.

Juda Engelmayer is an executive with the NY PR agency, 5W Public Relations.  This article was reprinted from The Cutting Edge News

Leave a comment

Filed under Islam, Israel, Media, Religion, Video, War against Israel

Iron clad isn’t necessarily rock solid: How Israel fares to America

January 26, 2012
By Juda Engelmayer

Our iron-clad commitment to Israel’s security has meant the closest military cooperation between our two countries in history.” — President Barack Obama

This 19 word sentence contained within the 6992 word State of the Union address, President Barack Obama practically singled out Israel as if to highlight to his Jewish supporters and detractors alike, that he is the best friend the Jews have had. Other nations, or nation’s capitals were mentioned as allies, but only Israel was assured such an “Iron-clad commitment”.

For all the accolades and loud cheers in the House Chamber, however, the words that the President chose were quite careful and maybe even telling. Unlike Europe and Asia, which he called America’s “oldest alliances,” and the “Americas”, with which he said our ties “are deeper,” America, he said, is committed to Israel’s security. We accept that and know it, and have seen the “closest military cooperation between” Israel and the United States in history take shape in the iron-clad Iron Dome mobile missile defense system that the U.S. has helped build in Israel.

The President’s security and military assurances might imply a harsh acceptance of the present and future. Is it easier to arm a nation and prepare it for a battle than it is to resolve the root cause of the threat in the first place? Not to make a perfect comparison, , but when Mayor Rudolph Giuliani saw some of New York City’s more dangerous neighborhoods, he did not put guns in the hands of the decent people living there, but eliminated the dangers, locked up the criminals and took the streets back. The same strategies are being deployed in cities like Newark, Compton and others across the country, where law enforcement and public leaders seek to eradicate crime and eliminate the root causes of the danger.

Of course crime is not the same as ideology, and the issues that affect dangerous cities and those that drive the forces in the Middle East are not the same, but the essence of the argument is no different. Sure Israel needs better weaponry for the time being, as she needs to have a strong deterrent for her enemies, but wouldn’t the prudent course be to help clean up the neighborhood rather than, or in the case, along with, arming the decent people who are stuck in the middle. Israel is indeed in the middle of a world of nations seeking to destroy it.

The right thing to do is for the President to call the issues as they are and boldly condemn those who would seek to harm Israel. He should pound the point of the unyielding cries within the “governments” of Hamas and Hezbollah to destroy Israel. He should decry the hypocritical comments by people like Maen Areikat, the PLO “Ambassador” to the United States who said Jews would not be allowed in the Palestinian State, while Palestinians demand access to all of Israel. He should acknowledge that the divide separating Jews and Moslems in the Middle East is not about land, but about a true and deep seeded belief among many in positions of influence that the G-d of Islam wants his adherents to stamp out the Jews and erase all traces of Israel. Only then can we begin to discuss the terms of any “peace,” and try to find land agreements that would keep the distance sufficiently

Instead, this President and his administration have chosen to ignore the true cause of the problems in the region; the ideological hatred that will not be negotiated away. In his third State of the Union the President declared that “a wave of change has washed across the Middle East and North Africa, from Tunis to Cairo; from Sana’a to Tripoli,” but left out the inconvenient truth that the fundamental Islamists are winning the hearts and minds of the people and miring those lands deeper into trends of intolerance, violence and hatred. Liberty is not coming; tyranny is rising, and that will not bode well for Israel or the United States.

On May 19th, 2011, President Obama said that “the borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines.” This sentiment is nothing new; those words have been spoken by many before – Jews and Israelis alike.. However, it seemed to have belied what many thought the President had learned to appreciate – the need for defensible borders. Four month later, when he stood before the U.N. General Assembly on September 21, he said,

Let us be honest with ourselves:  Israel is surrounded by neighbors that have waged repeated wars against it. Israel’s citizens have been killed by rockets fired at their houses and suicide bombs on their buses.  Israel’s children come of age knowing that throughout the region, other children are taught to hate them.  Israel, a small country of less than eight million people, look out at a world where leaders of much larger nations threaten to wipe it off of the map.  The Jewish people carry the burden of centuries of exile and persecution, and fresh memories of knowing that six million people were killed simply because of who they are.  Those are facts.  They cannot be denied.

Then in November, the administration was so harsh with Israel over building in Jerusalem and the West Bank, it was as if the President’s words to the U.N. – only two months prior- were delivered to placate Jews after the May 19th debacle.

As soon as the pressure was off, he went back to the old routine of chastising the Jews and making moral equivalences to the plights of the two peoples living alongside each other. One people are the startup nation who built a burgeoning society that has contributed so much knowledge and value to the world, and the other is a people hell-bent seeing the former destroyed.

The President, in his speech, devoted most of his attention to the economy, jobs, taxes and government reform and he spent very little time on foreign affairs. That’s actually a good thing. Yet, in that small allotment of time, he gave Israel a shout-out and emphasized how the U.S. cares for her security. For his supporters, they will say that proves what a friend he is, but a real friend cares enough to help make sure that the use of the war machines are the very last resort.

Juda Engelmayer is an executive with the NY PR firm, 5W Public Relations.

This article was written for the Jewish Star

Source:
www.opednews.com

Leave a comment

Filed under Creative Writing, Islam, Israel, Judasim, Media, New York City, Obama, War against Israel

The Failing Of Humanity When An Israeli Is Killed

(From MediaReallyMatters.com)

A horrific crime occurred in Cheshire, Conn., in 2007.  A family—Jennifer Hawke-Petit and her daughters, 11-year-old Michaela and 17-year-old Hayley—were butchered and burned, while Dr. William A. Petit, Jr, was beaten to within an inch of his life. The crime was committed in the comfort and safety of the Petits’ homes by two ruthless men who allegedly set out only to rob the house, not commit murder. There are few things more tragic than seeing families being massacred senselessly, and we rightfully cry out, voice shock and outrage, and demand a full measure of justice for the people who committed the crime.

Petit family

The report of this murder went viral. Just about every media outlet rightfully picked it up and offered insight and indignation. The two killers, even though they claimed not to have intended to commit murder, were demonized in the media as crazed killers. Protests were mounted calling for a return of capital punishment. The New York Times itself offered considerable space to this tragedy, which it called “a brutal invasion” and a “gruesome” crime. That is what it was and remains to this day. The second of the murderers will be tried soon. The other was already tried, convicted and sentenced to death. When the New York Times reported on the first sentence, it referred to “horrific attacks” and explained why the second killer deserved the same fate.

Perhaps, then, I misunderstood what happened last weekend in Itamar, Israel. The same New York Times that rightfully called the murders in Cheshire horrific seemed to take a more balanced approach to the death by bludgeoning of a family of five asleep in their homes Friday night.

The Arab terrorists involved in the Itamar tragedy conducted a brutal home invasion, including horrific attacks on an entire family and left behind a gruesome scene, perhaps equally if not far more brutal-looking than that in Cheshire. Yet the Times simply stated that the “assailants” “stabbed five members of the family to death in their beds.”

The Fogels – Udi, 36, and Ruth, 35, Yoav, 11, Elad, 4, and Hadas, a baby girl of 3 months—were stabbed, had their throats slit and were left to die in pools of their own blood for their 12-year-old daughter to come home and find.

What would alarm the world from Connecticut received passing concern when from Israel. Life is not equal, and the treatment of the criminals is not, either. The message is that when you kill a Jew in Israel, especially a Jew living in a West Bank settlement, it is okay. The New York Times called the murderer a “Palestinian attacker,” as if he pushed someone and stole a wallet. The ruthless killers in Cheshire allegedly did not go to that home with intent to kill, yet they were portrayed as brutal murderers in the Times and everywhere else. Whoever carried out the attacks on the Fogels had murder in mind from the start—including the murder of a 3-month-old infant—yet he (or they) is portrayed by the beacon of journalistic balance as a “Palestinian attacker” making a political statement.

The weak coverage and the lack of outrage over such brutality underlie a deeper concern, yet to keep harping on the point of bias and politics is pointless; the Wall Street Journal’s Bret Stephens said it well enough. The issue we must look at is the cheapening of blood when it comes to political or religious debate. Does frustration over land warrant brutal murder? If the same Palestinian attacker committed a home invasion murder in the United States feeling that the home belonged to him, would we just brush it off as ideological debate? This was a very personal crime committed by someone who either has killed before or will kill again; someone who is dangerous and ruthless, and who does not value life, and is likely known as such by those familiar with him. He killed a family as they slept, and slit the throat of an infant; slaughtered like animals and the New York Times chalks it up to a protest.

Where’s the humanity? Where is the justice? Where is the outrage? It certainly exists for the killers.

Leave a comment

Filed under Islam, Israel, Media, War against Israel