Auckland Museum told lighting for Israel was an 'excellent way to get cancelled by millennials and Gen Z'

Friday, 8 December 2023

Auckland Museum sparked a pro-palestine protest after it lit up blue for Israel in October.

Auckland Museum was told lighting up in support of Israel was an “excellent way to get cancelled by millennials and Gen Z’s”.

The museum made a public apology after it lit up in blue and white in support of Israel in October, which led to a pro-Palestine protest outside the building.

David Reeves, chief executive of Auckland War Memorial Museum, said he wanted the light display to be a show of hope but admitted their approach was “wrong”.

Documents released to Stuff, under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act (LGOIMA), have shown the museum approached a number of other organisations at the time asking whether they would light up too – but all declined.

The museum was first asked if they would light up in support of Israel two days after Hamas launched a surprise attack, killing more than 1000 Israelis.

The query was from an unnamed community group and managers at the museum said they wouldn’t do a light display as there’d been no request from the Government, and they worried about “political implications”.

Three days later, an email from Deputy Mayor Desley Simpson was forwarded by her office to the museum asking if the museum and SkyCity were planning to light up.

Again, the museum declined and said they wouldn’t normally do it for “political or conflict matters” without a request from Auckland Council or the Government.

Auckland Museum's social media posts in support of Israel in October.

However, an employee, identified only as “manager 1”, emailed Reeves and other staff asking the museum to “take a stand” and “light it”.

“New Zealand has been noticeably absent in showing solidarity,” the email read, “if it was the Me Too movement, pride, dawn raids, Ukraine bombing, we’d do it.”

“A terrorist attack against a nation whose community has contributed significantly to the museum deserves acknowledgement. We’d be happy to take money from Jewish trusts and people, but can’t bring ourselves to show support?

“More Jewish people were beheaded, shot and murdered in one day than any since the Holocaust, for which we have a gallery.”

Manger 2 noted if they turned the lights on they needed to be ready for “intense pressure”.

The next morning, manager 2 emailed Simpson’s office and said they’d reconsidered and planned to light that night.

The office responded and said Simpson hadn’t been asking them to light up and noted SkyCity had declined due to the “political risk”, but might reconsider if other organisations were involved.

Simpson said she would support the decision to light up by providing a quote and promoting it on Facebook.

She later confirmed she asked her office to get in touch with the museum and SkyCity to see if they would light up, as residents in her ward had asked her.

Manager 1 emailed a range of organisations including Vector Lights, SkyCity, Precinct properties and Heart of the City and asked them if they could confirm “asap” whether they could also light up.

All declined, with one organisation stating it was a “hard no”, as aligning with Israel sounded like “an excellent way to get cancelled by millennials and Gen Z on social media”, adding that it sounded like a “PR disaster”.

Auckland Museum chief executive, David Reeves.

Staff members within the museum raised concerns over the decision, with one unnamed staffer stating “we seem to be picking and choosing our battles based on executive preference”.

After a post about the museum lighting up was live on the museum’s social media accounts, Reeves was called by the Head of Department expressing concern, while other staff also raised concerns.

By this stage, one staffer contacted another to flag some of the negative feedback the museum was getting on its social media post. Reeves decided the wording needed to be amended. When it was discovered the post couldn't be edited and a new post would need to be made, some staff feared this would make the anger worse.

Documents show Reeves then called Manager 1 and told them about his concern and then called the Museum Board chairperson, who said it was the first they knew about “the the situation”.

The chairperson provided “strong advice” that the lights should be stopped, while Manager 1 told Reeves the communications advice was to “stick with the lights”.

During this time, work messages between museum employees noted they “felt sick” about the situation and “wished” an apology had been made when the impression the lights made was clear.

“The whole thing is a bit emotionally charged, and I’m trying to disconnect myself from it,” a staff member said.

Reeves said the museum prided itself on being a place where “anyone and everyone” could gather and be welcomed.

“I made the decision to light the Museum in the context of a complex range of views on the issue.

“The experiences of the last few weeks have provided some important opportunities to reflect and learn, and we are improving our internal processes to make sure we continue to be a place that people value and trust.

CORRECTION: Documents were released to Stuff under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act (LGOIMA). An earlier version of this story incorrectly stated the documents were released to Stuff under the Official Information Act.