Netanyahu’s other war: against Israeli media

In mid-August, in the midst of the war in Gaza and threats from Hezbollah and Iran, the Knesset came out of recess for a late-night vote.  But it was not the military situation in the south and the north, nor the hostages, nor settler violence in the West Bank, nor the deteriorating economy – nor any of the other issues pressing on Israeli society – that brought the parliamentarians back from their summer vacations.

They convened in order to pass legislation to benefit television Channel 14, Israel’s Fox News-alike that uncritically supports Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

This law is known popularly as the little bribery law. The “big bribery law” was passed weeks earlier.  Taken together, these two laws provide legal exemptions and other advantages totalling millions of shekels, including free distribution, wiping out debts, and exemptions from regulatory limitations that other channels must obey.

These laws are the latest in a series of attacks on Israeli media outlets since October 7, by Netanyahu, his ministers and his family, that aim to stifle public criticism and undermine free speech. They have also targeted international media organisations with attacks so brazen they have drawn public rebukes from the US president, among others.

Reporters Without Borders, a non-profit freedom of the press advocacy group, has ranked Israel 101 out of 180 in terms of freedom of the press in 2024, down from 97 the previous year, citing a long list of limitations, including military censorship. And Freedom House, also a non-profit pro-democracy advocacy group, contends Netanyahu is largely responsible for the ongoing deterioration of media freedom in Israel. 

“Netanyahu’s efforts to undermine the independence of Israel’s national broadcaster Kan11 and financially weaken commercial television channels have had a chilling effect on the desire of these media outlets to investigate misconduct or corruption allegations implicating influential politicians,” writes Freedom House in its recently-released report. “Netanyahu’s tenure as prime minister negatively affected the public’s trust in the media, which Netanyahu and his allies portrayed as traitors seeking to unseat him.”

In 1989, when he returned to Israel after his stint as Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations and joined the political fray, Netanyahu branded himself as a communications wizard who could present Israel’s case abroad in perfect English.

Over the years, however, it has become clear Netanyahu is obsessed with his and his family’s media coverage and attempts to suppress any criticism of his actions and policies. Indeed, he is currently on trial for bribery, fraud and breach of trust in three corruption cases, triggered in large part by his attempts to control the press.

Since the current government was formed in January 2023, much attention in Israel and abroad has been focused on its attempts at judicial overhaul, which have continued even since October 7.  Less attention, however, has been paid to Netanyahu’s multi-tiered attack to take over the free media and undermine free speech, especially at this time.

As the “big and little bribery laws” reveal, encouraging and providing perks for media outlets that support the government and punishment for those who do not toe the line, especially through economic sanctions, play an important role in his strategy.

Since Hebrew-language programming and news reporting appeal to a small commercial market, broadcasts, television companies, and print and internet media are under financial strain, which exposes them to the possibility of political influence and interference. 

And the public broadcasting stations are under pressure, since the government regulates their activities and sets their budgets. Recently, for example, the government proposed sanctions on the liberal daily, Haaretz, whose editorial policies have long been critical of the Netanyahu governments.

Minister of Communications Shlomo Karhi, a member of the Likud and Netanyahu stalwart, accused Haaretz of ““sabotaging Israel in wartime” and serving as an “inflammatory mouthpiece for Israel’s enemies”. In response, he proposed that the government stop publishing government notices in the paper and cancel all government-paid subscriptions.

A few months ago, the Knesset passed legislation according to which, if the prime minister becomes convinced that content broadcast by a foreign media outlet “harms in a real way the national security,” the government can block that media’s activities in Israel, shut down its offices, seize equipment used for its broadcasts, and block its website. 

A preliminary version of this law, implemented as an executive order, was used to close down Al Jazeera's broadcasts in Israel. The law was similarly used to confiscated the equipment of US news agency Associated Press, but this was later reversed after a pointed rebuke from US President Joe Biden.

MK Tzvi Sukkot, from the far-right Religious Zionism party, has even tabled an amendment to this law that will allow the Communications Minister to imprison for six months anyone, Israelis or foreigners, who works in such a foreign station deemed to be harmful – including Israelis and foreigners, journalists and interviewees – without any corroboration from any security forces.

Netanyahu and his supporters have also made numerous political appointments to central positions in the public and commercial media.  In June, Len Blavatnik, the owner of Channel 13, one of Israel’s two leading television stations, appointed Yulia Shamalov Berkovich, a former MK allied with Netanyahu, as the next head of the channel’s news department.

According to The Guardian, Blavatnik is a dual American-British citizen, who received a knighthood in recognition of his donations to British institutions and controls a wide range of businesses. In a police investigation that helped lead to Netanyahu’s indictments, Blavatnik admitted he acquired Channel 13 after a request from Netanyahu, who contended that the channel leaned too much to the left.

Journalists across the political spectrum objected to Shamalov Berkovich’s appointment because of her known misogynist views of women’s rights and sexual harassment and disregard for journalists. In one of her first decisions, Shamalov Berkovich cancelled a popular news magazine headed by Raviv Drucker. 

Drucker, a veteran political correspondent, has long been a thorn in the side of Netanyahu and other politicians, and his thorough investigations of politicians’ corruption and wrongdoing have led to numerous police investigations. 

Channel 13 journalists and several advocacy organisations petitioned the Supreme Court, claiming that Shamalov Berkovich was unsuited for the position. Possibly fearing that the appointment and decision to cancel Drucker’s program were too transparently in the service of Netanyahu, and in an obvious attempt to pre-empt a court ruling, she quit after only a few weeks on the job.

But Netanyahu and his ministers have other appointments in their sights. As part of the judicial reform, they have made it clear that they view the role of the legal advisers of ministries, offices, and regulatory boards to support government decisions and represent them to the courts, and have already proposed to fire several of them.

The public broadcasting organisation regulator board was established in a way intended to maintain separation between it and the political establishment. But in 2016, then-Culture and Sports Minister Miri Regev questioned the point of establishing a new public broadcasting corporation if it would not be controlled by the government. “It’s inconceivable that we’ll establish a corporation that we won’t control,” Regev declared during a cabinet meeting.

Apparently, the current government doesn’t seem to see the point, either.  Karhi has proposed to transfer authority for regulating, licensing, and collecting viewer data to a new, ministry-appointed, politicised authority. According to the Israel Democracy Institute, a non-partisan think tank, the components of the reforms, alongside the context in which they are being proposed, make clear that their objective is a politicisation and government control of regulatory bodies.

Netanyahu controls his messages by almost completely avoiding interviews with Israeli news outlets, with the exception of the supportive Channel 14,  and either releases pre-recorded video messages on his social media accounts or holds brief press conferences in which a pre-selected, limited number of journalists are allowed to ask questions.

Reporting on security issues in Israel requires prior approval by the censor. Furthermore, under Israeli defamation laws, journalists are particularly vulnerable to civil and criminal defamation suits, including “insulting a public official.”  Under Israeli military censorship, reporting on various security issues requires prior approval by the authorities. In addition to the possibility of civil defamation suits, journalists can also be charged with criminal defamation and “insulting a public official”.

In 2023, Parliament passed an amendment to the anti-terrorism law that punishes those who “systematically and continuously consume terrorist publications” or who broadcast “a direct call to commit an act of terrorism.” If interpreted broadly, as Netanyahu and Karhi have shown they intend to do, it does not bode well for press freedom, especially in the context of the current war.

Israeli journalists are increasingly subject to political harassment, online trolling, and pressure from owners to compromise out of commercial interest. Much of this work done is accomplished by his son, Yair Netanyahu, who is known for his incendiary rhetoric and described by critics as an internet troll. He was recently fined 400,000 shekels (A$160,000) for libelling a journalist at the Walla news site and has called for prosecutors and police who investigated his father to be tried for treason — forcing even  his father, the prime minister, to repudiate his comments. “

All this leaves Israeli journalists in a particularly sensitive position,” explains a senior broadcast journalist, who spoke on condition on anonymity. 

“We are journalists, professionally and ethically committed to reporting the truth, no matter what the consequences.  But when we are critical of the government, Netanyahu and his supporters respond by claiming we are traitors who are undermining the war effort.  That hurts and it’s also scary – journalists have been physically attacked by right-wing extremists.

“And we are also Israelis and many of us have children serving in the army; many of us have lost friends and relatives, on October 7^th, or in the fighting.  Some of us have relatives who are hostages.

“I wish I could say that I have never self-censored myself.  But like all Israelis, we, too, are traumatised by the past ten months, and I know that I have less capacity to do my job and to fight against the government’s efforts against us.”

RELATED STORY

‘Don’t you dare’: Herzog warns against reviving judicial overhaul, pleads for unity (Times of Israel)
In speech to Israel Bar Association, president warns against fractures in society that weaken country’s resolve