JTA — 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 August 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,” read 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........

© The Times of Israel