The wrath of Kan

It’s difficult to think of any word other than meta to describe the battle taking place in Israel’s Hebrew press between pro-Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu elements at Israel Hayom and anti-Netanyahu elements in Yedioth Ahronoth over the future of the media. Except maybe sordid.

The fight over whether Netanyahu will get his wish to gut a new public broadcasting corporation that was meant to replace an aging outfit — which he will instead rehabilitate to Finance Minister Moshe Kahlon’s chagrin — came to a head as the Knesset kicked off business for the winter Monday, and both papers tell the same story but from two very different angles.

(Haaretz, playing the role of gray lady, dutifully reports both points of view in its lead story without seeming to take a side, the paper apparently more concerned with a law that would crackdown on pornography)

Kahlon’s zinger of “ad kan” which roughly translates to “this is the limit” and is a play on words of Kan, the name of the new public broadcaster that is being squabbled over, is zesty enough to make the top headline of Yedioth Ahronoth, where the story – inside baseball to your average Israeli — takes up nearly the whole front page.

The paper reports that “the confrontation between the Kulanu head and Netanyahu stepped up a notch when Kahlon got in front of the microphone and announced his categorical opposition to Netanyahu’s plan to cancel the formation of the public broadcaster.”

On the other side of the ideological gap, Israel Hayom pushes the story all the way back to pages 6 and 7 and gives Netanyahu’s point of view, saying his plan is actually to save the current broadcaster and some coin while he’s at it.

The paper reports that Kahlon’s decision to “boycott” the Knesset’s opening session “broke a new record in the crisis” over the broadcaster and quotes Netanyahu saying that “we will reform the broadcaster and do it with fiscal responsibility.”

But while the leaders bicker from the Knesset, a proxy fight is plain for all to see in the pages of the papers.

Beyond its main news story, Israel Hayom, long regarded as a Netanyahu mouthpiece, also reprints verbatim part of the prime minister’s speech in which he attacks the press for “living in an alternate reality.” (It also gives MK Yoav Kisch, who is heading up the effort to reform the existing broadcaster at Netanyahu’s behest, more column inches of news coverage than he has enjoyed since spearheading an effort against supposed “foreign agents” working for human rights groups in Israel.)

Yedioth, meanwhile, devotes two whole pages, including two columns and a news story, to questioning Netanyahu’s contention that dismantling the new corporation and rehabbing the old one will save money and hinting at whether he is actually doing so to consolidate power over the media, as many suspect.

The paper reports that while the Finance Ministry says Netanyahu’s plan will cost taxpayers an estimated NIS 2.25 billion, Likud MK David Biton, who has become Netanyahu’s surrogate on the matter, says it will actually save NIS 2.1 billion. “There’s almost no connection between the calculations of the Finance Ministry and the calculations of Netanyahu associate Biton, even though they are talking about the same figures,” the paper writes.

Columnist Raz Shechnik, meanwhile, contends that if you are arguing about money, you are missing the point.

“In the name of defending the public coffers, the prime minister and his associates are trying to sell us an absurd theory that claims the old broadcasting corporation will cost less than the new one,” he writes. “That is obviously a huge lie … but the spin is working for Netanyahu again: Instead of talking about substance, freedom of speech, the contents, everyone has switched over to cold mathematical analysis. Even Minister Moshe Kahlon.”

Another thing people have forgotten about with all the cold calculating and political fighting going on is the fate of the people who have already been hired to work at the broadcaster that’s on the chopping block. In Haaretz’s op-ed page, former media consultant Emilie Moatti writes that while those peoples’ fates hang in the balance, they’ve also become victims of a political and media climate unwelcoming to those in the left-wing.

“One can’t know if tomorrow coalition whip David Bitan or Likud MK Anat Berko will decide that you aren’t legitimate, after which potential employers might think twice. They wouldn’t want to step on anybody’s toes either; a lot of livelihoods rely on what happens in the following days,” she writes. “You have to behave properly and think 20 times before blurting something on air because somebody like power broker Nathan Eshel will inevitably leap up, make calls up the ladder to the person above the person ostensibly making the decision, and then the trouble will start.”

Axe-rated

Judging from its cartoon and lead editorial, though, the paper seems more concerned with onanism — or at least the type of media that leads to mixed dancing — than McCarthyism.

The cartoon shows a teenage boy in his room eating pizza and looking at a topless woman on his computer when MK Shuli Moalem-Refaeli bursts in with a cop to asking if that’s how he is preparing for his bar mitzvah, a reference to a bill by Moalem-Refaeli to have internet providers force users to opt in and register if they want to access pornography.

Just as unfunny is the editorial, which praises the Communications Ministry for tossing the bill out like a used tissue.

“This bill constituted a serious offense against freedom of expression and paved the way for government control of the web. In 2004, in allowing the broadcast of the Playboy Channel in Israel, the Supreme Court ruled that pornographic expression was also covered within freedom of expression, adding that the porn industry even enjoys the constitutional protection of the Basic Law on Freedom of Occupation,” the editorial reads.

Israel Hayom leads its paper with a story just as icky – the upcoming US election, which has become more wrapped up in shameful affairs of dick pics sent to minors, “pussy-grabbing” and other sexual misconduct and mixed dancing than any election since William Harrison beat Martin Van Buren in 1840.

The papers main headline does little more than correctly identify how many days until the election (7), and the paper’s US correspondent does little more than remind readers that FBI head James Comey’s announcement that Hillary Clinton’s emails are being looked at means “that the race has opened up again.”

It may be wishful thinking by reporter Yoni Hirsch, though, as he later undermines himself by reporting on a poll showing Anthony Weiner may not win the day for Donald Trump after all.

“It’s still early to say how much Comey’s decision will really affect the race. A new poll from Politco published yesterday showed Clinton continues to lead by a small margin of 3 percent with 46% to Trump’s 43%,” he writes. “Thirty-nine percent said the decision would not affect their vote and another 33% of respondents said it had lowered the chances they would vote for Clinton. Given that, most of the voters who said they might not vote for the Democratic candidate are already aligned with Trump.”