Republican pollster and strategist Frank Luntz has taught two January Terms and one summer course at NYU Abu Dhabi – with a fourth planned for spring of this year. In a statement to The Gazelle, Luntz expressed his admiration for the student body, writing “there are no students I'd rather teach."

Given the engaged nature of NYUAD students and Luntz’s political history, he is a controversial figure on campus. Students have voiced concerns over Luntz’s conduct on campus, as well as his controversies. Among these include his political messaging, which some say whitewashed Palestinian civilian deaths in the Gaza Strip, occupied by the militant Hamas. As well as leaked documents showing his work to reduce public concern for global warming.

“Yes he’s smart, yes he’s powerful, but if you support him, you’re supporting a man who has dedicated his career to misguiding the public and has helped to cause my Jordanian community harm,” said Lina Amjad Elmusa, Class of 2019.

Luntz’s accomplishments include frequent Fox News commentator and analyst, best-selling author and advisor to influential Republicans including U.S. President George W. Bush and Newt Gingrich. Most recently, Luntz taught the NYUAD 2019 course The Language of Business, described as an opportunity to “teach students how to identify and apply the most effective language and communication techniques in real-world settings.”

Luntz has been recognized for his impressive ability to spin wording and rhetoric. The Atlantic cast him as “America's top political wordsmith.” He is also known to have mastered the craft of reframing issues and conflicts in a manner designed to be viewed positively by the largest number of people possible.

“From the moment the students wake up in the morning until the moment they collapse at night, they are bombarded with facts, information and knowledge from all sides and at all times. I don’t apologize for this. I embrace it," writes Luntz.

The controversy perhaps most central to his role at NYUAD stems from a leaked 2007 report. The document shows Luntz’s work with Israeli spokespeople in the wake of a blockade of the territory of Gaza, orchestrated by Israel after the Islamic fundamentalist group Hamas, took control of the strip that same year.

The blockade was officially imposed to prevent the infiltration of terrorists, including suicide bombers into Israel. The 1,387 casualties mostly comprised of civilians however, who were equally denied access to water, electricity, medicine and other urgent medical care, previously received from Israel.

The memo shows Luntz's instructions on how to portray the civilian deaths in a less negative light. This includes directions to use the phrase "mass Palestinian immigration" into Israel. Luntz continues by explaining that spokespeople should say Palestinian co-existence would "derail the effort to achieve peace."

Although many have condemned his history, others have spoken in his defense.

Warda Malik, Class of 2019, who attended his U.S. in Conflict course last summer, described him as a "remarkable" educator. To her, Luntz works from an apolitical standpoint, with the intention of challenging the thinking of all students.

“A lot of people have said if you engage with him he’s going to brainwash you or use you as a research participant or something, but it’s not like taking a class with Frank Luntz has changed my political opinions… what it has done has made me a lot more open to understanding how people across the political spectrum think about many of the issues I find important.”

Others have starkly different opinions about his role. The contrast stems both from his controversial record, but also his interactions with students that some describe as exploitative.

Multiple students claim that Luntz conducts ethnically and regionally segregated group outings with nefarious intentions. In such meetings, students are allegedly used to test out arguments against representatives of his political opponents. Some also say he purchased adult beverages for of-age students on at least one occasion. This was alleged to have been done to encourage more honestly controversial answers when speaking on foreign policy. Luntz declined to comment when questioned on the claim.

Elmusa highlighted this behavior, describing participants as “unknowing lab rats.” She explained her refusal to participate when extended an invitation to one meeting.

“Part of his work is to hold focus groups to learn which arguments are most convincing, he wants to know what we're thinking and how best to combat it. He has pushed language on policy that has caused serious harm in the U.S. and abroad, and I stand against anyone assisting in his ability to do that."

These informal meetings are often a point of contention, but Luntz argues that their purpose is merely education and conversation.

“If I want to understand the Indian-Pakistan dispute or the Russian-Ukrainian conflict or the challenges facing Asia or Africa or why the U.S. is wrong to intervene in Central or South America, I want to ask the people who know,” wrote Luntz to The Gazelle.

The president of the NYUAD Student Interest Group, Students for Justice in Palestine, Tala Nassar, echoed Elmusa’s description. His conduct and record are at odds with NYUAD’s values, she says.

“We were supposed to meet with him, but [we] Jordanians refused. He’s talked about how you need to target liberal college-age women… that these are the people that need to be changed… he works to appeal his views to students… and it's been working,” referring to a statement made by Luntz while speaking to Pro-Israel activists at a UN conference in 2016 wherein Luntz described the need to target communications to “the left” and “the women” to generate support for the Israeli government.

“One student told me how nice of a person this guy is and how smart he is. It’s not easy to look at these very charismatic people that are very sweet and smart, but all of these things don’t make him a good person for us to listen to,” Nassar added.

In his statement to The Gazelle, Luntz said his current position is focused on equality. “I support and want to work for a Palestinian nation that lives side-by-side in peace with Israel, and I will eagerly work side-by-side with anyone to protect the human rights of everyone,” he said.

A further source of controversy includes a leaked 2003 document from his time as an advisor to the Bush administration. The memo expresses Luntz’s worry over scientific information derailing climate denialism. "The scientific debate is closing [against us] but not yet closed. There is still a window of opportunity to challenge the science," he explained.

Luntz’s memo continues by stating that since the phrase "global warming" elicits concern from the public, Bush and other Republicans pushing legislation should opt to use the phrase "climate change", as a less suspicion-raising alternative. His work on reframing "global warming" was the topic of one talk he gave at NYUAD last semester.

Taking another perspective, Hayden Mountcastle, Class of 2019, sees some descriptions as overblown.

“Honestly it’s a bit conspiratorial if you ask me… being with us, he’s just getting information, it’s not really data extraction, and I think banning someone from campus, especially when debates about certain topics are so one-sided here, is ridiculous and it goes against our NYU values. He’s a great resource to have.”

Mountcastle went on to describe how Luntz’s conservative perspective adds value to students in the mostly left-leaning environment at NYUAD.

“I think a lot of time conservatives are painted from liberal circles as these hysterical, gun-wielding, crazy people and I don’t think that’s true,” Mountcastle observed.

In the face of the controversy, Luntz defends his role and implores young learners to have their ideas and mindsets challenged.

“We need more ‘free speech,’ not less. We need more diversity of opinions, not less – no matter how offensive they are to you. As your professor, I have not only the right but also the responsibility to expose you to ideas different from your own. And you, as students, have every right to reject them.”

The disagreement surrounding Frank Luntz enables a difficult and important conversation involving the need to hear conflicting perspectives. NYUAD as an institution should consider all opinions before deciding his role on campus. The beliefs held on both sides of the debate are not likely to simmer down any time soon.