Hebrew Media

I'lam's aim in working with the Hebrew media is to support impartiality, fairness, and equity in Israeli media policy, in conformity with democratic values. Furthermore, we encourage Israeli media institutions and practitioners to adopt professional, unbiased standards in their coverage of Arab citizens of Israel.

Monitoring the Hebrew Media
Through monitoring individual cases of coverage and sending letters of reaction to journalists, editors and to the Israeli Press Council (IPC), I'lam monitors the general trend of the Israeli media. Individual and concrete cases of misinformation, bias by emphasis of one side in the story provide I'lam concrete data from which we can also point out to general policies and trends in the Hebrew media regarding Palestinian citizens.

Reactions

During the past year, I’lam’s Media-Monitoring project reported on a number of news items that contained misinformation and entailed poor media treatment of the Arab society in Israel. Typically our responses protest against unfair and biased coverage against the Palestinian society. 

Some examples of reactions sent by I’lam to journalists and editors in the Hebrew media:

In August 2007 to the journalist Dan Margalit after he verbally attacked MK Esam Makhoul for his opinion about the State of Israel’s responsibility in the killings of four Arab citizens in Shefa’amr in August 2005. Again, Mr. Makhoul was not provided the space to give further explanations.To Ynet in November 2007, for its coverage of Nizar Hassan’s case. Mr. Nizar Hassan is a Media lecturer at Sapir College. One of his students entered his class dressed in military uniform and carrying a weapon. Mr. Hassan asked him not to show up in class being dressed in such a way, and called on the student to act as a civilian instead of military personnel while in class at the College. Again, Ynet presented the case in a biased way, presenting the facts as if an Arab teacher prevented a Jewish student to attend classes. The letter of complaint sent by I’lam to Ynet has also been sent to the Israeli Press Council. The institution recognized I’lam’s request as right and fair and sent the case to a Court. The judgment is still pending.

To Reshet Bet in March 2008, for its biased coverage of a case involving Al Jazeera television. The Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs decided to boycott the Qatari station which they considered as being pro-Palestinian. It is interesting to mention that prior to this boycott development Al Jazeera’s journalists have not been protected on Israeli territory and have been subjected to attacks from Israeli civilians without any reaction from the police. Reshet Bet produced a news item on the topic, involving its correspondent in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Iran Zinger. In it, Reshet Bet employed a piece from Al-Jazeera which it inaccurately translated from Arabic to Hebrew. I’lam has sent a letter to Reshet Bet’s ombudsman who has the duty to answer as Reshet Bet is a public station. An answer is still pending.

• To Channel 2 in March 2008, concerning a newscast report on the Islamic Movement political party in Israel. For this news item, the Channel 2’s journalist used facts from the trial before the judgment was released although this is forbidden under Israeli law.

• To Yedioth Aharonot and to its military correspondent in January 2008, who asked the Israeli government to reinforce its collective punishment on the Palestinian civilians in Gaza.

Unreported Issues & Marketing Issues

This initative aims to draw attention to newsworthy issues and events that receive little or no coverage in the Hebrew media. There has been a partial response by Hebrew media outlets, and some previously ignored stories were later covered, including:

• The coverage of the memorial march held every year in August, commemorating the ‘Shefa’amr massacre’, where on August 4 2005 an IDF soldier who had deserted from the army opened fire on civilians on a bus, killing 4 Arabs citizens and wounding dozens of others.

• About Arab workers’ rights, advocated for by the NGO Sawt Il-Amel (The Laborer’s Voice) in June 2007 regarding the Wisconsin unemployment program that was setup by the Israeli Government in the cities of Nazareth, Jerusalem and other areas. This program attributes work to the unemployed, which the unemployed cannot refuse, so that the unemployed continue to receive welfare payments. Labour organizations decided to demonstrate in Nazareth in order to raise awareness on the topic and attract the media’s attention. I’lam provided them a workshop on 18 June 2007 about the way to deal with the media and how to market their event.

In February 2008 a demonstration was held by Arab citizens after the decision of the Attorney General Mazuz not to judge the Israeli police for the killing of 12 Palestinian citizens (and 1 Palestinian from Gaza) during the October 2000 demonstrations. I'lam sent a general statement to all the newspapers’ editors and TV’s general directors pointing out their lack of responsibility in the non-coverage of democratic demonstrations in which about 20,000 Palestinians in Israel took part in which they were attacked by the police and 12 of their citizens were killed, violating the right of the Israeli society to know about the pressing issues faced by their Palestinian counterparts.

• On 8 March 2008, Women’s Day, I’lam organized and marketed to Hebrew and Arabic media a conference for the Palestinian Women’s Union, in order to raise awareness on the creation of an Arab women’s trade union and the status of women workers.

Tours for Journalists & Editors

Tours are still an excellent tool for I’lam to provide journalists with alternative positions, attitudes, information, as well as to provide opportunities for Hebrew journalists to gain primary sources and contacts in areas and among communities with which they are unfamiliar and/or may struggle to access. Exposing Hebrew media journalists to places and problems often overlooked in Israeli media is a very effective hands-on way of introducing the subjects raised into the Israeli media discourse. As a result of tours held in 2007, there has been publication of an average of five articles/ electronic media reports on the subject matter of the tour per tour.

These tours proved to have added value in that they promote discussions between Arab and Jewish journalists. We plan to organize approximately 3-4 tours per year in 2009-2011, focusing on different topics deemed as particularly relevant to social and political developments by I’lam or according to requests of communities and journalists.

Over 2006-2008, I'lam followed up on the tendency towards a more paternalistic attitude from the side of some popular Hebrew media channels, which was also accompanied by a clear trend of censorship and control over the Arabic media and journalists.

I’lam documented and dealt with a series of cases of censorship, which can be a strong indication of the tolerance limits of the Israeli-Zionist consensus towards the anti-Zionist convictions and political views of Palestinian citizens:

1. Exertion of control and censorship over the only two semi-independent Arabic media stations: Radio Eshams and the local cable TV in Arabic. Six different cases were known and documented in less than one year, indicating a clear attempt to reduce the freedom of expression of the only Arab electronic media under private ownership: Radio Eshams. Simultaneously it indicates a clear trend of politicization of media policies and an intolerant Zionist consensus has been shown. Related to this relatively new policy, we witnessed a new attempt of controlling the only local cable Arabic newscast from a semi-independent producer to the more official control of the IBA (the Israeli Broadcasting Authority). This process of ownership transfer was accompanied by a lot of correspondence between I’lam and the IBA, and an investigative coverage from the side of the Arabic newspapers. (See the section below: Controlling the Arabic electronic media institutions).

2. The recent year witnessed also more violations of the rights of Arab journalists from the side of Israeli authorities. 3 violations were reported in 2007, while this number increased to 7 by June 2008. Still, we don’t know if I’lam’s work on documenting these violations was an outcome of more awareness from the side of the Arab journalists who decided to raise these issues of violations or from a growing unwillingness from the side of some officials or ministries to deliver to Arab journalists the information they request.  (See the section: Defending the rights of Arab journalists).

3. The boycott of Al Jazeera on account of the Israeli Minister for Foreign Affairs (See section above).
  
Controlling the Arabic media institutions 
A. First Case: Challenging the Axing of the Arabic Local Newscast by HOT Network

In light of reports that the only Arabic news bulletin broadcast in Israel by the local cable company HOT, which employs a majority of Arab staffers was slated to be axed, in October 2006 I’lam began to closely monitor related developments. In our opinion, we believe that our efforts helped to sway several MKs to vote for the continuation of the bulletin for an additional year.

Another major development occurred in October 2007, when Israel’s HOT TV cable company decided to approach the IBA with the aim of making it accept responsibility for producing the Arabic newscast. I’lam was deeply concerned about this development, as the newscast and the Arab staff responsible for content production had enjoyed relative freedom and autonomy, which contrasts sharply with the Zionist ideology that dominates the IBA. I’lam immediately approached the IBA, questioning its internal procedures governing the appointment of staff, and asking whether they intended to use the existing staff of the IBA or to appoint a new Arab editor. We further asked whether the Arabic newscast would enjoy the same relative freedom that it had enjoyed previously. We also approached MK Sarsoor to send an application to ask a question in the Knesset, and MK Hanna Sweid, asking him to initiate a discussion on this matter within the Knesset’s economic committee. We raised the issue before the economic committee, and the issue was covered by a number of Arab and Hebrew news websites. As a result of I’lam’s intensive work in this case, the IBA decided to appoint an Arab editor to the newscast and some Arab staff members from outside the IBA.

B. Second case: ‘Politicization’ of Media Freedom

The second case stresses the deterioration of the right to freedom of expression for Arabic institutions, and the ‘politization’ of media freedom, illustrated by an attack by Moti Sheklar, the new director of IBA, on Radio Eshams, because of its hypothetical ‘support’ for Hizbullah during the War on Lebanon. Sheklar apparently wants to impose the biased, unprofessional and unquestioningly ‘patriotic’ model of the Israeli media upon the Arabic media in Israel. Clearly, Sheklar addressed the issue of ‘biased media’ in a very partial way. For him, merely covering the Lebanese causalities, child fatalities, destruction of infrastructure, and targeting of civilians attempting to flee – views and scenes which the Israeli media did not broadcast and strove to hide from the Israeli public – constitutes ‘support’ for Hizbullah.

I’lam sent a very direct letter to Sheklar, emphasizing that reporting on reality is the very justification for the existence of the media, especially with regard to information that authorities would like to cover up, and that his statements are a clear and damning indictment of the Israeli media’s own coverage of the War on Lebanon. We demanded that he refrain from abusing his position to advance his own political views, and asked him not to involve his personal political beliefs, and to apologize for the attack. I’lam also sent this letter to the IPC, several MKs, and members of the IBA’s board of directors and various committees.

C. Third Case: Prevailing Anti-Democratic Culture in the IBA

An article which was published on the Israeli ICE website (a website dedicated to media news) revealed that the IBA’s staff had refused to appoint an Arab director for Arab programming in the IBA. This refusal is a clear indication not only of formal anti-democratic policies, but also of the personal anti-democratic ethics in the IBA. I’lam wrote to Moti Sheklar, copying several MKs, IBA Minister Eitan Kabel, and the IPC, asking him to investigate the case and to schedule an urgent meeting of the IBA’s general assembly to discuss this anti-democratic mindset, which is contrary to the very purpose of the public sphere. Mr. Sheklar responded to I’lam, expressing his own reservations regarding the declarations, made by a group of IBA’s employees. Following I’lam’s letter, two MKs, Raed Sarsour and Haim Oron, sent a letter to Sheklar, mentioning I’lam’s letter and asking him for an explanation. We expressed our dissatisfaction with Sheklar's response, but unfortunately MK Oron didn’t share our wish for the case to be investigated, and was satisfied with the answer given by Mr. Shekler. In our meeting with Mr. Sheklar and former Justice Dorner we intend to raise this issue once more, and to try again to arrange a discussion in the general assembly of the IBA or the IPC.

D. Fourth case: Prevailing Zionist Ideology in the IBA

This case indicates not only the anti-democratic culture in the IBA, but also exposes the prevailing Zionist ideology, which has usurped any professional or ethical considerations.
In this case the IBA decided to censor two advertisements, one relating to the rights of the unrecognized villages to be recognized (issued by Bimkom – Planners for Planning Rights and the Arab Center for Alternative Planning - ACAP), and the second to Israel’s obligations under international law to return East Jerusalem to the Palestinians. The two adverts were censored, on the ground that they were ideologically controversial according to the IBA’s internal rules. 

Significantly, at the same time an advert calling for Jerusalem not to be divided was launched by a right wing Jewish organization and was allowed to be broadcasted. I’lam sent another objection to Moti Sheklar, to several MKs, Minister Kabel, and the IPC. Bimkom and ACAP also sent an objection to the IBA, and as a result a hearing is supposed to be scheduled for them before the IBA’s appeals committee.

E. The fifth case: Attempting to Limit the Freedom of Expression of the Higher Follow-Up Committee for Arab Citizens

In February 2008, Israeli actions in Gaza killed about 125 civilians. The Higher Follow-Up Committee for Arab Citizens, in an attempt to show support to Palestinian brothers in Gaza, organized a solidarity demonstration in Nazareth. To invite people to join its action the Follow-Up Committee released an ad on the Arab radio Eshams. The Second Broadcasting Authority interpreted the ad and portrayed it as Arab party propaganda. I’lam sent a complaining letter to the SBA regarding its biased coverage and their answer is still pending.

F. The sixth case: Shabak Investigations of Arab Journalists

The Shabak investigations of journalists, which took place over 2007, continued in the summer of 2008, during which time the Shabak conducted investigations of three Arab journalists. The aim of the investigations is to gather personal information on the journalists so as to build an atmosphere of fear in them. These investigations with journalists are part of a larger project of increased investigations being conducted on dozens of Palestinian Arab activists and ordinary citizens in the past six months. As a result, in August 2008, I’lam released a two page legal directive to Arab journalists on how to deal with the Shabak (Israel’s General Security Services or Shin Bet) investigations. See more details on these directives below in ‘Defending the rights of Palestinian Journalists’.