Talk:Hasbara

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 April 2025

The final two sentences in the subsection entitled "Hamas is ISIS and the West is next" are tu-quoque ad-hominem additions, not given any context, and are not directly related to the subject of the article overall nor the specific subject of the subsection. They read: "Ukraine used similar rhetoric to win Western support in its fight against Russia.[85] Western support for Ukraine began to waver as the Gaza war began.[86]". I could make a case for adding context (Russia has, unlike Hamas, threatened "the West" on multiple occasions for over a century https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-106hhrg66968/html/CHRG-106hhrg66968.htm), but the addition of data to support the sentences would further depart from the purpose of the article, which is to define "public diplomacy of Israel", and of the subsection, which is to illuminate the Israeli government's use of conflation between ISIS and Hamas as justification for peer support of military efforts against the latter. The sentences should be eliminated. Sophie Matilde (talk) 15:13, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done I agree with your reasoning. The situation in Ukraine is not necessarily analogous to the situation in Israel, and these two sentences aren't relevant. - Brian Kendig (talk) 22:34, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Context for word propaganda

I think its important to highlight the meaning of propaganda when it was used by early zionists. Particularly in Sokolow's article, he explains "Although the first President of the Zionist Organization, and those who followed, habitually used the accepted term "Propaganda", in the Zionist context, an ethical element was added to that of persuasion, the desire to search for the truth and to set things right. "We show ourselves as we are: we simply speak the truth", declared Herzl at the opening of the Second Congress" Hasbara is about explaining and not how others view propaganda as it is used today.

Kouts, Gideon. “From Sokolow to ‘Explaining Israel’: The Zionist ‘Hasbara’ First ‘Campaign Strategy Paper’ and Its Applications.” Revue Européenne Des Études Hébraïques, no. 18, 2016, pp. 103–46. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/26624281. Accessed 27 July 2025. 

Mypart1 (talk) 01:52, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Incidentally, per WP:PIA you are not entitled to comment here.) It's true that the word "propaganda" has a more negative connotation now than it did in Sokolow's day, but that only serves as an explanation why he was happy to use the word and it doesn't prove that his propaganda would be called anything different today. Every entity that engages in propaganda claims to be explaining the truth. Zerotalk 07:10, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I read through the page you shared and could not find anything about not being able to comment here. I think it is important you state their intended purpose and highlight that more than it being referred to as propaganda at that time. It is misleading. By your logic we should be introducing all news organizations, etc. as primarily propaganda. There is no reason to single this entity out. Mypart1 (talk) 00:00, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Zero0000 doesn't WP:PIA say the opposite – that non ECR editors should post on the talk page if they want a particular edit made? Smallangryplanet (talk) 12:40, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Smallangryplanet:@Mypart1: WP:PIA says that non-EC editors are restricted to making edit requests. Follow the link extended confirmed restriction. They can't add other sorts of commentary. The boundary is not always clear, but I judged this one to be a comment rather than an edit request because no specific change to the article was suggested and it reads like an opinion based on several parts of a source. Usually a "change X to Y" type of request is required, though I think we should allow requests that can be understood that way even if they aren't structured that way. Zerotalk 12:59, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Zero0000 got it -- +1 Smallangryplanet (talk) 20:37, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Smallangryplanet (talk) 12:38, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your guidance. Please remove the statements below. They introduce hasbara as propaganda because the term was used at that time when it meant something else than it does now. These statements are misleading and cause you to associate hasbara as propaganda. Unless you are going to introduce every communication organization as propaganda on wikipedia, you are singling this organization out and delegitimizing it in the opening section. The following section provides sufficient description of hasbara that this statement repeats and slants.
"Historically, these efforts have evolved from being called "propaganda" by early Zionists (when the term was considered neutral), with Theodor Herzl advocating such activities in 1899,[1] to the more contemporary Hebrew term hasbara introduced by Nahum Sokolow, which translates roughly to "explaining". This communicative strategy seeks to justify actions and is considered reactive and event-driven."
As I states earlier, the meaning of propaganda when it was used by early zionists was not used as misleading as it is used today. Particularly in Sokolow's article, he explains "Although the first President of the Zionist Organization, and those who followed, habitually
used the accepted term "Propaganda", in the Zionist context, an ethical element was added to that of persuasion, the desire to search for the truth and to set things right. "We show ourselves
as we are: we simply speak the truth", declared Herzl at the opening of the Second Congress" Hasbara is about explaining and not how others view propaganda as it is used today. To introduce hasbara as propaganda and not other organizations this way is unfair.
Kouts, Gideon. “From Sokolow to ‘Explaining Israel’: The Zionist ‘Hasbara’ First ‘Campaign Strategy Paper’ and Its Applications.” Revue Européenne Des Études Hébraïques, no. 18, 2016, pp. 103–46. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/26624281. Accessed 27 July 2025. Mypart1 (talk) 01:56, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 9 August 2025

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) TarnishedPathtalk 11:33, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Public diplomacy of Israel → Hasbara – The name "Hasbara" is the WP:COMMONNAME for the public diplomacy of Israel. No reason not to use its name. See the ngrams 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 11:11, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support per WP:COMMONNAME — 🧀Cheesedealer !!!⚟ 15:48, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 10 November 2025

Hasbara is lies and schemes ~2025-32260-83 (talk) 16:50, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Day Creature (talk) 17:06, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why is it called "The public diplomacy of Israel" and not propaganda?

Any public display of positive government publicity is propaganda. Alexceltare2 (talk) 14:42, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I guess because World War I moved the word towards the negative end of the association spectrum. Sean.hoyland (talk) 16:19, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think using euphemism is a good example on itself of how we can be lulled away. Clickbait being the opposite psychological response. We might need to learn to detect this kind of modulation of the factual information. It is sad that we have to learn to view language as Orwellian by default nowadays. Dbague (talk) 18:22, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
because that was the old name of the article. See Talk:Hasbara#Requested move 9 August 2025 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 10:09, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 29 January 2026

Please rename the article back to "The public diplomacy of Israel". The term "hasbara" in international discourse no longer describes an activity but functions as an accusation. It is a WP:NPOV loaded term whose purpose is to remove Israel from the normal category of states that engage in persuasion. Telecart (talk) 00:42, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: Changing the article title would require a requested move discussion, which you cannot initiate as a non-extended confirmed user because the article relates to the Arab-Israeli conflict, a contentious topic that has been placed under an extended confirmed restriction by the Arbitration Committee. See WP:ECREXPLAIN. Day Creature (talk) 08:26, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

February 2026

I was asked to explain the addiction of tags in the “AI and Digital Influence” section. I was referring to the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft source. This article from Snopes is largely what led to my addition of the tags. OrbitalVoid49 (talk) 16:28, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

allikas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Public_diplomacy_of_Israel