Ep 620 Influential Origins with Alan Mindel and guest Ramon Maislen P3 on hmTv

Ep. 620 — Influential Origins with Alan Mindel
Guest: Ramon Maislen — Part 3
hmTv at HMTC

In Part 3 of Influential Origins, host Alan Mindel concludes his conversation with Brooklyn real estate investor and community advocate Ramon Maislen with a powerful discussion about media, misinformation, antisemitism, and the dangerous blurring of news and opinion.

Alan and Ramon examine how trusted institutions, including major newspapers, can shape public understanding not only through what they report, but through what they choose to emphasize, downplay, or frame as opinion. The conversation explores how digital media, social media, and activist-driven narratives have changed the way people consume information and how easily falsehoods can become accepted as fact when repeated often enough.

Ramon discusses his concerns over coverage related to October 7th, the denial or minimization of atrocities against Israeli victims, and the impact of publishing unverified claims that create false moral equivalencies. Alan and Ramon also address how antisemitism is showing up in local politics, public protests, universities, Jewish institutions, and even everyday community spaces.

The episode closes with a call for stronger civic awareness, critical thinking, media literacy, and moral courage. Alan and Ramon emphasize that young people must be taught how to distinguish news from opinion, facts from propaganda, and activism from hate.

This final installment is a direct warning about the power of narrative and the responsibility each generation has to defend truth, protect Jewish life, and stand against hatred before silence becomes permission.

Transcript

Influential Origins with Alan Mindel
Episode 620: Ramon Maislen — Part 3
hmTv at HMTC

Alan Mindel:
This is Alan Mindel with our third episode with Ramon Maislen.

Ramon, we are going to get to the heart of the matter a little bit here. There is a statement attributed to Goebbels. There is not a video quote of him saying it, but it is attributed to him more as a philosophy than anything else, and it is part of what made Hitler’s machine work. The theory was that if you tell a lie often enough to enough people, eventually people will believe it.

For me, I grew up reading The New York Times. One of the things that always made America such a great country was freedom of speech and freedom of the press. But with that freedom, there was always a responsibility. There was a theory that everyone was entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts.

With social media, people get to pick their facts. In a newspaper, we do not think that happens. But the world is changing, isn’t it?

Ramon Maislen:
Yes. It is changing very rapidly, and I do not think people are equipped to deal with how rapidly it is changing.

I recently saw a graph of The New York Times subscriptions. It was pretty small for many, many years. It was a very influential newspaper, but it mostly catered to highly educated people who were willing to pay to have the newspaper delivered to them.

Then, around the time it became digital, everything slowly shifted. What happened was that Trump got elected, or even before Trump got elected, there was so much interest in Trump, which was whipped up by the media.

Alan Mindel:
Because it helped sell newspapers.

Ramon Maislen:
Exactly. Not because they believed in any cause related to it. It is incredible how much of his power came from creating outrage, excitement, frustration, all of it.

Alan Mindel:
Silos of humanity.

Ramon Maislen:
Right. Especially because of digital subscriptions. It is much easier to get a digital subscription than it is to get a paper version. It is also much easier to sign up for a digital subscription and then forget about it, and just let it keep going.

Their subscriptions went up by more than 10 times, maybe 15 times. They have something like 15 or 16 million digital subscribers now, as opposed to less than a million print subscribers that they used to have.

At the end of the day, that changes the business model. When you are a newspaper and you are supposed to report the news, and you rely on advertising, your advertisers do not want to place advertisements next to propaganda, falsehoods, or things they could be linked to.

Alan Mindel:
Because they could be linked to it.

Ramon Maislen:
Exactly. A reputable company is not going to want to advertise in the National Enquirer. Most people would think of The New York Times and say, “I want to advertise my product there, whether it is BMW, Rolex, pet food, or anything else, because I know the people reading this believe that what is written here is basically true.”

But once you are relying on subscribers paying for access, as opposed to advertising, you need to cater to that population so they do not leave their subscriptions. That does not mean you necessarily need to spread falsehoods, but it means that if people mostly want to hear one side of the story, or mostly want to hear editorial content, you will give them more and more editorial content.

It can seem like news, but a lot of it is actually political editorializing on the news.

Alan Mindel:
That is an incredible and important point. I always believed everyone was entitled to their opinion. But an opinion is something like, “I think the Jets are going to win more than half their games this year.”

Obviously, there is not much fact-based evidence there.

Ramon Maislen:
Certainly not with the Jets.

Alan Mindel:
Definitely not with the Jets. Historically, as a season ticket holder, I can tell you there is no evidence to show that.

Ramon Maislen:
My father is an avid Jets fan, so he feels your pain.

Alan Mindel:
It is an easy target. Everyone gets the reference right away. They do not even have to like football to know.

But if I said, “The Jets beat the Denver Broncos by two touchdowns last night,” and they did not even play, that is not an opinion. The truth is the Jets did not take the field. Neither did the Broncos. The NFL season did not start. There was no game, and no team won, especially the Jets.

That is not what opinion pieces were meant for. But that is not what is going on at The New York Times, is it?

Ramon Maislen:
No. I think what you have is a cultural shift that has happened.

I believe it was James Bennet who worked there when Tom Cotton published his op-ed during the George Floyd protests. The newsroom went up in arms and said, “You are making Black people less safe by printing this op-ed by Tom Cotton.”

James Bennet either resigned or was fired for allowing that op-ed to be published. This was a sitting senator writing an op-ed for The New York Times. Whether you agree with his opinion or not, he had an opinion.

Alan Mindel:
And it was not about changing the facts themselves.

Ramon Maislen:
No. The op-ed was basically making the argument that Trump should use the National Guard to put down some of the protests. You can agree with it or disagree with it. It does not matter. If a sitting senator writes an op-ed and has that opinion, you should publish it, and then you can write a rebuttal to it.

But there was absolute pandemonium within the newsroom. The journalists who are there now, especially the younger ones, are more activist-oriented.

Alan Mindel:
That is one way of putting it. In other words, the facts, the who, what, where, when, and why, are not where they are focusing.

Ramon Maislen:
No. There is a goal of using the fact that The New York Times and other large media institutions have a tremendous ability to shape public narrative, public discourse, and people’s views.

If there are people who want power but do not have power, let’s say they are not elected officials, they can still wield tremendous political power by shaping the narrative. So in a lot of these media organizations, you see a shift toward more partisanship and less straightforward reporting of the news.

Some of that is based on people’s education, upbringing, and where we are culturally as a society. I am not a sociologist, so I am not going to get into all of that. But at the end of the day, the straw that broke the camel’s back for me, and for many of us, was the Kristof article.

Alan Mindel:
This is where I wanted to go with you, the Kristof article.

Before that article came out, let’s set the table. There was a multiyear report put together because of people in the BDS movement who said, “There were no rapes,” or “This did not happen,” or “That did not happen.” All of the videos, hundreds if not thousands of hours of atrocities, were cataloged.

There was an independent report by people hired to do this. In addition to the report, there was evidence from medical examiners, the names of people whose pelvises were broken, proof of rape, reports, beheadings, photographs, and everything was categorized so history could not be rewritten by saying these things did not happen.

Ramon Maislen:
I think it is important for people to understand that within the Jewish tradition, we do not like to photograph the dead, and we also try to bury people very quickly. For a non-Jewish audience, they may not understand those two things intuitively.

On October 7th, so many people were murdered, and very gruesomely in many cases. There was not enough staff or personnel to handle everything that happened because it was such a massive event.

Alan Mindel:
It was Israel’s 9/11, but magnified.

Ramon Maislen:
Exactly. If you add together the complexity of dealing with an event of that magnitude, along with the cultural practice of not photographing the dead and burying people quickly, there was less evidence available than there might have been otherwise.

There is still a lot of evidence available. But had Israel acted in a way that said, “Let’s document everything,” maybe there would have been more. From Israel’s standpoint, though, this was clear. Everybody saw it being livestreamed. It was there. They did not think they needed to document everything in that way.

Alan Mindel:
But then they had to.

Ramon Maislen:
Then they had to, and they did.

I was at a small dialogue with the CEO of the Israel Rape Crisis Center, and that group helped tremendously with the reporting and compiling of the documentation. All of that was set for publication.

Alan Mindel:
With hundreds of examples, so the facts were clear.

Ramon Maislen:
Correct. And just before it was published, Nicholas Kristof wrote an opinion piece. This is why it is very important, because it was not in the news section. It was an opinion piece. But he wrote an opinion piece that seemed like news.

Alan Mindel:
That is where the lines get blurred.

Ramon Maislen:
Exactly.

Alan Mindel:
In his opinion, Israel trained dogs to rape Palestinians. Without having to produce any evidence of it.

Ramon Maislen:
Zero evidence. But he made an even bigger claim than that. That was a sub-claim. The bigger claim was that Israel was systematically raping Palestinian prisoners. Basically, he was saying that Israeli state policy was to rape Palestinian prisoners.

Everybody can agree that rape is a problem in prisons everywhere. I am sure Israel is no exception, and when it happens, it is horrible. But in every country, wherever there is a prison, there are abuses. That does not mean it is state policy.

Alan Mindel:
And there is a way to prosecute those things in Israel, and there have been prosecutions. Not many, because evidence is required.

Ramon Maislen:
There is not a lot of evidence. Many people do not know that Yahya Sinwar, who was the mastermind behind October 7th, received cancer treatment while he was an Israeli prisoner. He received a graduate degree while he was a prisoner, learned Hebrew while he was a prisoner, and then was released as part of a hostage deal.

Alan Mindel:
In other words, prisoners have rights. They are entitled to education. There is a court system to appeal to. It is an open court for anyone to appeal to. It is not a Jewish court. It is an Israeli court, with Jews, Muslims, Arabs, and all kinds of people.

Ramon Maislen:
And I am sure there are abuses, as there are in any jail. But what Kristof did was so far beyond the pale. These are the same kinds of rumors that circulate in Middle Eastern capitals, that Israel trains animals. They say Israel trains dolphins to spy for Mossad, or whatever other absurdity.

The fact that The New York Times published this libel enraged many of us.

Alan Mindel:
And they published it just before the release of the report.

Ramon Maislen:
Correct.

Alan Mindel:
To downplay it.

Ramon Maislen:
Correct. This is the work of activists inside these newspapers.

Alan Mindel:
It creates the message that it is okay if Israeli women were raped to death, because Israelis supposedly do the same thing. In fact, the UN picked it up, and instead of condemning Hamas, condemned Israel. Even though there were no videos, no pictures, no evidence, no hundreds or thousands of victims. None of it.

Ramon Maislen:
It is the revision of history. Someone is going to be born today and grow up in 20 years. They are going to use whatever exists at that time, whether it is ChatGPT, Google, or something else. They will search “rape,” “Israel,” and “Palestine,” and they will see both of these things on the same timeline.

Alan Mindel:
And it makes them seem equal.

Ramon Maislen:
Exactly. I think there is an attempt by people working within The New York Times to delegitimize Israel and Jewish self-determination.

It spurred me and some other people to organize a rapid-response protest in front of The New York Times building to vent our disgust with what they were publishing.

Alan Mindel:
Did they ever make any comment like, “We are sorry, we will take it back”?

Ramon Maislen:
From the best of my understanding and what I have seen, they doubled down.

Alan Mindel:
They doubled down on the Israeli-trained-dog rape claim without any evidence, and they want to be considered one of the most reliable newspapers in the world.

Now the suffering of an entire people is made worthless and meaningless and is not even reported properly, in favor of a story someone made up and printed in a paper to go around the world.

Ramon Maislen:
I think the same anti-Zionism hate movement that motivates the people at the co-op, that motivated the people who wrote red triangles on the Brooklyn Museum director’s home and on the walls, is the same anti-Zionism hate movement that some journalists at The New York Times are part of. Their explicit goal is erasing, delegitimizing, and making Jewish self-determination disappear.

Alan Mindel:
Even Jewish rights in America. You have a guy like Dan Goldman, who I know, and he is a really nice guy. He prosecuted Trump. One would think that in certain progressive circles, that would count for something.

He is not the most pro-Israel congressman out there. He is very far left on most things. But he committed the horrible crime, a week or so ago before he got defeated in a primary with around 10 percent participation, of buying a cup of coffee in a coffee shop in Brooklyn.

They sent his money back and told him that he, as a “genocidal” person, was not welcome. Even though he has not voted particularly for Israel, he is Jewish. Goldman. He and his daughter were made to feel not welcome.

Ramon Maislen:
And they publicly shamed him. They put it on Instagram.

Alan Mindel:
For everyone to see.

Ramon Maislen:
Exactly. This was not a private act where they refunded him and nobody saw it.

Alan Mindel:
These same people are protesting in front of Chuck Schumer’s house in the middle of the night. For me, I do not think he has done anywhere near the job he should have done representing or standing up for Jews, not because he is Jewish, but because any senator or congressman should stand up for the rights of everyone.

If everyone does not have rights, then no one has rights. What starts with the Jews, funny enough, never ends with us. People do not seem to get that. The Holocaust lesson is missed. People think, “It is just about the Jews,” and we try to tell them, “No, it started with us. It did not end with us.”

Ramon Maislen:
In that instance, it did not end with us. Sadly, in many instances, with pogroms and things of that nature, it started and ended with us.

What I have seen is that the most outspoken, reliable, clear-headed people defending the rights of Jews have sadly been non-Jewish people. If you look at people like Ritchie Torres or John Fetterman, they are not condoning every action of the Israeli government.

Alan Mindel:
Because that is not even what it is supposed to be about.

Ramon Maislen:
Exactly. It is irrelevant. They are saying Jewish people are being targeted in America for being Jewish, and that can mean a spectrum of things. That is not okay. It is not okay to call for the dismantlement of the one Jewish country in the world, and no other country.

That has been frustrating. Somebody like Brad Lander, who defeated Dan Goldman, I could go on for hours. It was very depressing to watch my neighbors vote for him.

Alan Mindel:
Insane. How that guy sleeps at night, I will never know. That should be its own episode.

Ramon Maislen:
I saw Brad in front of my youngest child’s school when he was on the campaign trail. I went up to him. He knows who I am. We were in a documentary about young Mamdani supporters versus their parents who were not Mamdani supporters. So we know who each other are.

I went up to him and said, “Look, Brad, I hope you do not win. I am going to do everything I can to make sure Dan wins. But if you do win, because there is a good chance you will, can you please be sure to stand up against the rising anti-Jewish rhetoric and hatred on the left?”

He looked at me and said, “I do not know what you are talking about.” Obviously, he knows what I am talking about. Maybe he thought I was recording him, or who knows. But to me, that was very telling.

Alan Mindel:
It is a Mamdani thing that happens every day. People walk around and say, “But he stands up for so many people, and he stands up for working people.” And you say, “Yes, but this same guy has no problem having dinner with someone who led a movement at Columbia to threaten Jews, threaten Jewish girls with rape, and that person becomes a hero at City Hall.”

It got to the point where they had to evacuate Jews from Columbia University, and it was supported.

Ramon Maislen:
I have seen polling that, sadly, at least in my district and in the Park Slope area, most people do not care about antisemitism. They do not. Even Jews.

I do not think we are going to win the battle for hearts and minds on this issue alone. We need to come together with other people who share our values. Those are more universal values that will also root out antisemitism.

Most people are getting so much of their information on social media. They are getting it on Instagram. They see a video of Mamdani smiling, sounding nice, talking, and that is all they get. If that is all you get, he seems nice. They all seem nice.

The problem is that people like you and me dig a little deeper. As soon as you dig a little bit deeper, you realize how horrific many of these views are. When you try to explain it to people, most people are very shallow in their understanding.

Alan Mindel:
It is not just the views. It is the idea that I would do anything, and have proudly done anything, to protect the rights of people to go to a mosque to pray. There was a time 15 years ago when that was an issue here on Long Island, and I made sure to be the first person out there saying, “Absolutely not. People have the right to pray.”

We want everyone to be able to pray.

But when someone attacks Jews on October 7th, nobody cares. Every temple now has to have armed security and metal detectors. People who are not Jewish hold Shabbos-style events in churches or other places, claiming they are doing religious ceremonies. There are demonstrations and prayers held in front of temples and Jewish institutions.

Little girls should not be blocked from entering. There was a bill in New York State that was very reluctantly passed, and even then it was watered down and limited in what it does.

Ramon Maislen:
I want to give a shout-out to Julie Menin, who is on the City Council. I think she is trying to do her best to stand up to it. But we need to do better. It cannot be one person leading the charge.

We need non-Jewish allies to stand up to this. Unfortunately, many Jews are whitewashing this and allowing non-Jewish people to feel like it is acceptable. Without those Jewish people providing a shield for anti-Zionist and antisemitic actors, people would not feel as comfortable expressing this level of hatred.

At a fundamental level, we have lost a number of our young people to the anti-Zionist hate movement. I am hopeful that children like mine, I have teenagers, are waking up and will not enter into that anti-Zionist movement.

Alan Mindel:
We have to teach them the world. We have to teach them to think critically. We have to teach them to understand the news and the difference between news and opinion. They have to be media savvy.

If we do not do it, the world they inherit will not be the world we want them to inherit.

I want to thank you so much for your time today. These have been great sessions. Thank you for joining us on Influential Origins. Let’s hope for better days.