Three days to summarize Nir Hefetz's testimony, and it can be announced: Someone is not delivering the goods.
And I mean the two legal reporters, Aviad Glickman and Guy Peleg, who have long since become subjects of coverage themselves, with each of their reports scrutinized.
It can be bet that Netanyahu's portfolios will be the culmination of the two's careers.
They made them the familiar TV stars in every home, both recruiting the serious facial expressions and monotony required to stand by the State Attorney's Office in most cases, in a campaign to turn Benjamin Netanyahu from a defendant to a culprit.
For years they occasionally pop up, sometimes opening editions in bombastic headlines, sometimes just updating on developments or coordinating with the viewer the important schedules and "picks". The fact that they have the responsibility to produce news and interpretations in the field of justice does not prevent them both from producing the impression that they took a real side in the most significant political trial that television viewers in Israel knew. , If we only get to it before you sign a plea deal.
Since each current affairs program received coverage of the two, we will focus on two examples brought to viewers, which tell, if you will, the biased coverage story: the item yesterday in the news edition of News 12, opened by Guy Peleg in the legal drama "Nir Hefetz cried today in the hall" - and we could already feel Where the spirit and empathy blow to them. It is important to understand that if the former CEO of Walla, Ilan Yeshua, was called a "key witness", Nir Hefetz was supposed to be the master key that opens before us hours of recordings and evidence that flows from them - and after his three days on the podium, a headline could be issued Criminal evidence against the accused, and not in this or that moisture of the witness.
Later, Guy Peleg emphasized that Hefetz wanted to take into account that "he has feelings, and he asks that he not be harmed under the belt." And for those who have not had enough of the framing of who is the good, the bad and the poor in the story - the item ends with the coverage of the threats against the state witness Hefetz from Netanyahu's supporters. From all the drama in court that day, and the clear picture that the state witness does not hold a single piece of evidence against Netanyahu - Guy Peleg chose to focus on Hefetz's tears. Since there are no materials from the courtroom, it is worth noting that according to evidence from the courtroom it was reported that this was not a sobbing man, but a slight excitement of the state witness. And what about mentioning that the witness was moved by his actions, or that he decided to destroy evidence without Netanyahu's knowledge? For the faction it was less important to bring the context, and more the tears.
Let’s move on to Glickman: While Guy Peleg has an expressionless expression, Glickman is more emotional and easier to “read”. Since the beginning of Netanyahu's cases, he has taken a position very close to the position of the State Attorney's Office, and even fought for it.
As if to balance the sad part with Peleg, with Aviad Glickman we got an atmosphere of laughter. In a report on Sharon Gal's program, Glickman focused on the narrative "Netanyahu controlled the Walla website", while showing smiles everywhere in front of the presenter, who tried to confront him with the facts and other amazing revelations from that day: And the son Yair - who do not stand trial.
Since the television cameras could not be inserted in the middle of the testimony days, two small moments connected together created a viral video that ran on the networks.
Glickman turns to Hefetz and asks, "How many words, Nir?"
So what's the wonder they get excited afterwards when he cries?
Were we wrong?
Fixed!
If you find an error in the article, we will be happy for you to share it with us and we will correct it
