Can’t Beat the Real Thing vs. The Choice of a New Generation

Do you remember the “Cola Wars” in the 1980’s? Coke was dominating the market, so Pepsi decided to take it to the people and introduced the “Pepsi Challenge.” They went inside malls around the country and invited people to do a blind taste test between Coke and Pepsi. People chose Pepsi over Coke significantly. Pepsi capitalized on this advantage by launching their "Choice of a New Generation" campaign in 1984 featuring mega-celebrities like Michael Jackson.

Coke started getting nervous. At first, they pushed back against the Pepsi Challenge results, but that just made them appear like sore losers. So, they decided to try something new – New Coke. On April 23, 1985, The Coca-Cola Company announced that it was changing the Coke formula for the first time in 99 years. It was a disaster.

While consumers actually preferred New Coke over Pepsi and the original Coke in blind taste tests,  they had a sentimental attachment to their beloved and familiar brand and reacted very negatively to New Coke. The company was flooded thousands of complaints each day and quickly brought back the original formula. On July 11, 1985, 79 days after the release of New Coke, Coke’s original formula returned to market, rebranded as Coca-Cola Classic. As Coke had been saying with different advertising slogans all along, “Can’t beat the real thing.”

There is often a tension between the rise of a new generation, tradition, progress, change, and authenticity.

Every era has a generation gap - the feeling of dissonance, distance, and disconnect that exists between children and their parents. Generation gaps can be caused by historical events, social and cultural changes, as well as technological advancement.

This week, we encounter the first Jewish generation gap. After the sin of the spies, the generation of the Exodus are condemned to die in the desert. It will be a completely new generation that will enter Israel and carry Judaism forward.

In the text, it happens in an instant. In Bamidbar Chapter 19, the Torah is addressing the original generation. In Chapter 20, it’s 38 years later, and Moshe is facing an entirely different audience.

“The people gathered before Moshe and Aharon, and they fought with Moshe saying it would have been better to die than suffer from thirst.” (Bamidbar 20:2)

What has changed? How can we best understand and bridge the generation gap that exists between those who left Egypt and those who would be entering Eretz Yisrael? It is a matter of communication.

There are two primary methods of communication. There is the transmission method of communication and the exchange method of communication. Traditionally, teachers, executives, and those wishing to deliver a message would use the transmission method of communication, where they speak to the audience and expect everyone to listen. This is the method used when a CEO lectures his employees to convey information that the audience must absorb as presented.

In recent years institutes that specialize in leadership training have found that the transmission method of communication is not as effective. Today, the preferred method of communication is generally through exchange, where instead of speaking to the people, the presenter speaks with the people. Conversations and brainstorming sessions are far more effective than lectures.

The generation gap between those who left Egypt and those about to enter Israel expressed itself in each one’s preferred method of communication. The people who left Egypt had been slaves. They were used to having other people make decisions for them and being told what to do. It is therefore not surprising that they obediently followed God’s commands and Moshe’s leadership. Time and again, we read how these Jews acted “ka’asher tzivah Hashem et Moshe - as God had commanded Moses.” This generation excelled in obedience. Tell them what to do and they would do it.                     

In contrast, the new generation of Jews was more compatible with an exchange method of communication. No longer did they depend exclusively on Moshe. When they were thirsty, they did not ask Moshe to give them water. Rather, “Vayikahalu - the Jews gathered.” They invited Moshe to a meeting at which they presented their claims and demanded answers. They had to be part of the process, and they made it clear that they would no longer be dictated to. They had become active participants in their destiny and wanted to be treated as such.

These two means of communication – transmission and exchange – are very much a part of how we look to transmit Judaism from generation to generation. We teach our children at home and in school the content of Judaism. We transmit the mesorah, the sacred tradition. Telling young people that non-conformance is wrong will sometimes suffice to ensure compliance.

Sometimes, though, the next generation needs something different. Just like the new generation in the desert, we must involve our children in the conversation so that they feel a sense of ownership of Judaism. In addition to speaking to them, we need to find ways to make them feel invested in the tradition by engaging with them.

Living as committed Jews in the modern world will sometimes feel like a competition between “Can’t Beat the Real Thing” versus “The Choice of a New Generation.” Whether it is Shabbat or Kosher or prayer or lashon hara or tzedakah, Judaism is about making informed choices. Each generation gap presents the same challenge applied to different circumstances. We must convey the immutable laws of Torah while engaging in conversation to make the laws relevant and guide the next generation to take their Judaism seriously.

I believe Rav Kook had the perfect marketing campaign for modern Judaism: “Hayashan yitchadesh, v’hachadash yitkadesh - The old will become new, and the new will become holy.” It’s our mission to make sure that the choice of the new generation is the real thing.