Israel media review

Drama king: 7 things to know for January 8

Netanyahu may have tricked the media but he got his prime time coverage — and while there is some hand-wringing, there’s no guarantee journalists won’t be fooled again

By Joshua Davidovich 8 January 2019, 3:54 pm Edit

Joshua Davidovich is The Times of Israel's Deputy Editor

In this photo taken with a red television camera control light in the foreground, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attends a news conference with German Chancellor Angela Merkel during a meeting at the chancellery in Berlin, October 21, 2015. (AP/Markus Schreiber)
In this photo taken with a red television camera control light in the foreground, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attends a news conference with German Chancellor Angela Merkel during a meeting at the chancellery in Berlin, October 21, 2015. (AP/Markus Schreiber)

1. The drama that wasn’t: When US President Donald Trump announced he would deliver a prime time statement on his Mexico border wall Tuesday, it set off a lively debate over whether news channels should give him an unfettered live feed, whether they should fact check his statement as he gave it, or whether they should ignore the statement unless it produced actual news.

  • In Israel, when Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced he would give a “dramatic” prime time address, it set off a lively debate in Israel, but only what the drama could be. The consensus was that the prime minister would never say something is dramatic if it’s not dramatic.
  • Thus it was that the Israeli media was so easily burned Monday when the statement turned out to have almost no drama at all, instead being just another instance of Netanyahu lashing out over what he says are improper investigations into his dealings. He asked for a meeting to confront his accusers and was turned down, he claimed. That was it.
  • As the Washington Post sums it up, the “address fell decidedly flat.”
  • Yet the surprise at the lack of surprise was so great that most news channels kept broadcasting even when it became clear there was nothing new there, save Channel 10 news, which won kudos for cutting off its broadcast midway through the seven-minute diatribe.

2. Won’t be fooled again: The instance was just another display of how much Netanyahu owns the media, not through bribes but rather showmanship. He may complain that the media hates him (and to a large degree there is little love lost in that relationship) but for three hours Monday he showed he still knows how to manipulate it as well as anyone.

  • Some are claiming that Netanyahu has now lost points with the media by overplaying his hand: “This time Netanyahu managed to pique curiosity, but his terrible execution cut into the amount of credit he has in his account. Next time they’ll laugh heartily at his attempts to recruit them,” Amir Oren writes on the Walla news site.
  • “The next time the prime minister-who-cried-wolf wants to address the nation to announce a mysterious matter of purported national urgency, fewer people may pay attention,” ToI’s Raphael Ahren writes.

3. Even when he loses, he wins: But even after the media knew it was taken in, it still gave the speech wide play. The undramatic drama was all over the news Monday night, radio commentators making jokes about it and pundits complaining about it. On Tuesday morning, Netanyahu’s visage is on every front page. Some, like Israel Hayom, play it larger and earnestly, while some like Haaretz, see it as another vector for criticism, but no matter how many ways one slices it, it is still there. (And here I am writing about it.)

  • The fact is, Netanyahu lost the media a long time ago, and he knows it, and meanwhile Yossi Q. Israeli, who doesn’t care that Netanyahu’s statement wasn’t as dramatic as he said it would be, still sees the prime minister’s claims everywhere he looks. Not as a quirky side story, but as the main event.
  • From Netanyahu’s point of view, the prime time statement had no downside, unless one counts reporters being slightly more wary next time he makes such an announcement. Because the media in Israel acts as a form of the prisoner’s dilemma (boycotting a statement or press conference only works if everyone does it) he knows the chances of any media outlet ignoring him and risking a scoop is slim. Even his Facebook videos will continue to get play.
  • (This, by the way, is the same reason Israeli defense bodies can continue to plant stories with military journalists with unscrupulous sourcing — like telling reporters to source info that came from the Defense Ministry to “Palestinian media,” since they know they’d rather play along than lose access.)

4. Hate the player, not the game: Unsurprisingly, there was little soul-searching from most of the media, though, which slobbered over itself to guess what the dramatic announcement was, and then gave Netanyahu free air time on prime time. Instead, the ire is blasted full force at the prime minister for having misled the poor, naive reporters, as well as ridicule for how undramatic the announcement was. (Full disclosure: I am guilty on all counts.)

  • “In a cynical and thuggish move that in criminal terms would be included in charges of misrepresentation and fraud, the suspect from Balfour Street seized the air time of the major news broadcasts Monday night for his political needs. It was a disaster for truth, statesmanship and proper governance, which the Netanyahu era has trampled on,” Haaretz’s Yossi Verter writes, as if the news channels had been forced to cover him.
  • “This wasn’t drama, this was chutzpah on live TV,” Channel 10 reporter Barak Ravid complained on Twitter.
  • “This is drama. Racism. This is what should be talked about. Everything else is just additives,” Kan ombudsman Dedy Markovich writes on Twitter, linking to an article about a black firefighter in Rehovot who was subjected to racist abuse at work.
  • Ben Caspit, whose Maariv newspaper still devotes its whole front page to Netanyahu, accuses the prime minister of being a “crybaby.”

5. Stop dancing to Netanyahu’s tune: That’s not to say there wasn’t any media hand-wringing about how it should handle things like this.

  • “The media is dancing to Netanyahu’s tune because statements from the prime minister are considered important,” Uzi Benziman, a founder and former editor of the Seventh Eye media analysis site writes. “This needs to be rethought: Netanyahu uses the media for personal and political gain. He abuses his official position, from which he gets the respect that the media follows in covering the words of the prime minister. The time has come to stop cooperating with this.”
  • Despite his channel having broadcast the speech in full, Hadashot news media critic Niv Shtendel writes that it had no business being broadcast live.
  • “The time has come for the media to recognize the value there is in coverage and not to pounce on Netanyahu’s exploitative traps,” he writes.
  • “Dear media, please stop taking these false statements seriously, leaving prime time in his hands and broadcasting spin bordering on campaign propaganda, dressed up as dramatic announcements,” radio producer Li-At Steinitz writes on Twitter. “We’d also be happy if you’d stop spreading the Facebook videos in which he puts down anyone who doesn’t think like him, jeers at the investigations and attacks the law-keepers and yourselves. This is not news!”
  • ToI’s Raoul Wootliff, who was among those who took part in the circus, offers this to his readers:
  • I too got caught in the wild and unnecessary flurry of speculation and coverage surrounding Netanyahu’s announcement, both on social media and in making editorial decisions for ToI that made it into more a mouthpiece than the journalistic outfit our readers deserve, and for that I too apologize.

6. Small claims court: Netanyahu’s claims, which are worthy of some coverage, get wide play in Israel Hayom, which is actually seen as a mouthpiece for the prime minister.

  • In it, columnist Haim Shine claims the statement was in fact “dramatic.”
  • “It was an expression of the bad feelings among many Israelis, who feel that this is a political witch hunt,” he writes.
  • The Justice Ministry quickly put out a statement defending its position and legal analysts noted that Netanyahu had no right to a confrontation with state’s witnesses, which is a police tactic.
  • Yedioth quotes a judicial source saying that Netanyahu’s claim is totally out of whack with reality: “Netanyahu is trying to give the impression that he wasn’t treated fairly. He’s forgotten that most of the the reason the case has dragged on is because of him. He has been investigated at a pace and with kid gloves that few suspects are treated to.”
  • ToI’s David Horovitz notes that if Netanyahu does think he wasn’t treated fairly, then going on TV was not the way to convince the one man who needs to be convinced: Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit.
  • “The prime minister’s broadcast to the nation, delivered with calculation, aplomb and a whiff of desperation, was widely watched and was likely keenly debated among Israelis voters. It might prove to help or hinder his re-election campaign,” he writes. “But it won’t move Avichai Mandelblit. He won’t be affected by Netanyahu’s faintly absurd effort to pressure him into doing his job differently. And, ultimately, he’s the only one who matters.”

7. Netanyahu’s non-drama wasn’t the only the only thing in the news.

Most Popular
read more: