08 Jul NEGATIVE PUBLICITY PAYS: USING HATRED FOR PROMOTION

It’s hard to miss the
growing trend among
prominent American
figures: some who
were once clearly
pro-Israel have
shifted positions and
now promote anti-Israel or even antisemitic
rhetoric. Others, who were always critical,
have become far more extreme. Influential
voices like Tucker Carlson and Candace
Owens, once seen as allies to the Jewish
community or the State of Israel, have taken
sharp turns in tone and messaging. And
those who always harbored hostility are
now openly embracing dangerous and
hateful ideologies—such as the disgraceful
rapper who recently released a song brazenly
titled “Heil Hitler.” What is driving this
disturbing shift?
Before we attempt to answer, let’s take a
closer look at Bilaam in the parashah. Time
and again, he tries to curse and harm the
Jewish people, even though he knows that
Hashem loves them and that his efforts are
doomed to fail—and that he will ultimately
be punished for it. Why would someone
persist in such a destructive path, fully

aware of the consequences? What drives a
person to knowingly oppose Divine will,
especially when the outcome is already
clear?
The Talmud (Gitin 56b) recounts a
conversation between the spirit of Titus
after his death and his nephew Onkelos,
before his conversion. Onkelos asked him,
“Who is considered important in the World
to Come?” Titus replied, “The nation of
Israel.” He then went on to advise that if
Onkelos wished to gain power or prominence
in this world, he should provoke and attack
the Jewish people—because that is how one
gains attention and influence.
Onkelos went and summoned the spirit of
Bilaam—the wicked prophet who had
attempted to curse the Jewish people before
their entry into the Land and led them to sin
with the daughters of Moav and Midian. He
asked him, “Who is considered important in
the World to Come?” Bilaam answered, just
as Titus had before him, “The Jewish
people.” Onkelos then asked, “Should one
attach himself to them?” Bilaam famously
replied: “Do not seek their peace or welfare
all your days, forever.” In other words, even

though he recognized the truth and the
greatness of Israel, his hatred ran so deep
that he advised continued opposition and
hostility toward them, no matter what.
An obvious question arises: if both Titus
and Bilaam knew that the Jewish people are
important and central in the World to Come,
why did they advise opposing and harming
them? The answer lies in the distinction
between the two worlds. While they
acknowledged Israel’s eternal significance,
their concern was with this world—fame,
power, and influence in the eyes of men.
And for that, they offered a cynical but
proven strategy: attack the Jewish people.
It’s a well-known recipe for success
throughout history—when one wants to rise
to prominence, stir controversy, or gain a
following, targeting Israel has always drawn
attention.
Another question worth examining is: why
does this tactic work specifically with the
Jewish people? If similar rhetoric were
directed at any other nation or group, it
would likely be condemned universally, or
at the very least ignored. But when aimed at
the Jews, not only does it gain attention—it
often receives support. Many openly agree
and even cheer it on, and even those who
criticize it still contribute to the publicity
and help amplify the speaker’s platform. In
the case of the Jewish people, hate doesn’t
silence—it spreads, and in doing so,
becomes a powerful tool for fame.
Tosafot (Chagiga 13b) addresses this very
question and explains that it is divinely
orchestrated. When someone rises to harm
the royal nation of Israel—the people who
belong to the King of the world—Hashem
ensures that the attacker holds a position of
prominence. This way, no one can say that
Israel was harmed by someone lowly or
insignificant, which would diminish their
honor. Instead, Hashem elevates those who
oppose us, so that when they fall, it is clear
that even the mighty cannot prevail against
His chosen nation.
In Yalkut Gershoni, there is an insightful
explanation. He writes that when someone
begins targeting or provoking the Jewish
people, they may continue doing so
freely—often gaining popularity and
momentum—until Hashem raises them to a
position of power. But once they reach that
high status, Hashem takes over and they
lose their own control. In other words, as
we’ve explained in the past, the Gemara
teaches that the higher a person rises in
power, the less autonomy they have—
Hashem takes the reins. So while it may
seem that their rise is unchecked, it is only
temporary; once they are elevated, their

downfall is already in motion.
It seems that in today’s world, the driving
force behind much of what people say and
do—especially public figures—is the
pursuit of attention and exposure, often
measured by how many views, clicks, or
shares they receive online. In this
environment, extreme or controversial
statements tend to generate more
engagement, regardless of truth or
consequence. As a result, individuals may
adopt more radical positions because
provocation guarantees relevance. The
louder and more outrageous the message,
the more visibility it brings—often at the
cost of truth, morality, and decency.

For example, just last week a disgraceful so-
called “singer” performed on one of the

world’s most widely viewed stages,
broadcast live by the BBC. During the
concert, he led the crowd in chanting the
vile words “Death, death to the IDF.” This
individual is neither Muslim nor from the
Middle East—so why did he choose to use a
musical performance to promote such
hateful and one-sided rhetoric? The answer
lies in today’s media culture: by doing so, he
instantly became a global sensation, with
his name and message repeated across news
outlets and social media platforms
worldwide. In the age of viral exposure,
hatred sells—and he knew it.
One might ask: aren’t figures like Tucker
Carlson and Piers Morgan already powerful
and famous enough without attacking
Israel? Why do they need to go down that
path? The answer lies in the addictive nature
of today’s media culture—views, shares,
and likes are toxic. They have the power to
distort judgment and completely shift a
person’s priorities. Once someone discovers
a formula that brings in significantly more
engagement, they’re often willing to pursue

it—regardless of truth, integrity, or long-
held positions.

The moral conclusion is that the fault does
not lie with us as a nation, despite their
accusations. Rather, it stems from their own
lowly desire for fame and relevance—
desires they choose to weaponize against us.
Their attacks reveal more about their
character than about our actions.