On video: Yair Lapid and David Grossman at a demonstration in Tel Aviv (Photo: Avi Rokah, Danny Shechtman, Satview)
New Knesset member Boaz Bismut (Likud) recently submitted his first bill.
It was expected from a veteran and experienced media person, who edited "Israel Hayom" and sat on the panel of "Olan Shishi" that he would know and understand closely the problems of the State of Israel and perhaps also come up with some solutions to change the situation.
But no, Member of Knesset Bismuth decided that his first bill would prohibit public publication of a recording that includes "sensitive information" as defined in the Privacy Protection Law.
Just to clarify, sensitive information, according to the law, includes "data about a person's personality... his opinions and beliefs."
That is, any opinion of a person that was recorded in a conversation is prohibited from publication.
In his proposal, an amendment to the Privacy Protection Law 1981-1981 submitted to the Knesset table about two weeks ago, Bismuth requests that under the definition of what constitutes an invasion of privacy, the act of publishing a recording of a person without his consent, which includes sensitive information about him, will also be included.
In the explanatory notes to Bismuth's law it is written: "The Privacy Protection Law 1981 - Section 2 of the law determines what constitutes an invasion of privacy.
According to the section, violation of privacy includes a wide variety of acts including: spying, eavesdropping prohibited by law, photographing a person with the individual's permission, publishing a person's photograph in public under circumstances that the publication may humiliate him, violation of a duty of confidentiality established by law or in an agreement, publications concerning the modesty of the personal life of A person and the use of information about a person's private affairs other than the purpose for which it was provided.
Section 4 of the law states that violation of privacy constitutes a civil wrong, and Section 5 states that some of the acts that constitute violation of privacy also constitute a criminal offense.
What they don't want you to know - you really won't know
Roni Hersh (Photo: Einat Tzmari Shavit)
Take a minute to understand what dramatic weapon will now be taken from the media.
Consider how many significant recordings have been published in the media recently and you will understand how problematic this is - from the "liar who is a liar" that Smotrich said about Netanyahu during the last election campaign and caused a stir and coverage in all media, through the recording of Yair Netanyahu during his visit to "Posikt", and how can you forget the Sarah's screams about the cleaning job at the Prime Minister's house.
These recordings are the distilled truth of those people, net, without the shell of publicists, speakers and the multitude of staff members who surround them and help them pass every interview and every question without a problem. When those people come to the media to be interviewed, they already know what to answer even before the question is asked. Therefore, it is so important that this tool, this tie-breaker - remains.
For the avoidance of doubt, if the recording itself is a crime, the place of publication is only a platform, so there is no difference between media and news organizations and recordings that will be published on Facebook, Tiktok or any other platform.
Today it's the press - tomorrow it's you.
Censorship as a tool in the hands of politics
Recordings are not just for knowing what the politicians really think.
So far, citizens and journalists have used the recordings as a tool that helps them fight the various injustices that come their way.
Think of Adva Dadon's program "The Scammers", without a hidden camera - the program has no value, and what about various recordings that were broadcast on the "Ovda" program?
Or "the source"?
"Exited righteous"?
These programs will completely lose their value if from now on they have to ask for permission for every recording.
You have to understand, nowadays recording conversations in Israel is legal.
Any person who recorded a telephone conversation or a meeting in which he is present as one of the parties to the conversation - performs a legal action, which means that it is permissible to record a person even without his knowledge.
Publishing a recording by a person who was not present in the conversation - is considered wiretapping.
Currently, Bismuth's bill is formulated in only one line, very general and does not explain which cases of privacy violation are involved.
In his amendment to the law, he seeks to add to the definition of "violation of privacy" the act of publishing a recording of a person in public that relates to sensitive information as defined in Chapter B of the law, and without the person's consent.
Accordingly, he proposes to establish that the very recording of a person without his consent will constitute a civil wrong and a criminal offense.
With the passing of such a law, a citizen will no longer be able to record a wrongdoing and bring the recording to the police or the media so they can start checking and investigating.
Think how many abusive kindergartners have been caught in recent years thanks to the suspicion of parents who took matters into their own hands?
There are more and more examples, the media will not be interested in all of them, but the police will be.
And it was taken from us.
In the days when they are trying to undermine the position of the media, eliminate the public broadcasting corporation, and accuse them of persecution in one way or another, these recordings bring the distilled truth, the one that cannot be faked with catchy sentences, slogans and sticking to message pages.
Here we get the truth, and that's what they want to take away from us.
Why?
Who are they trying to protect here?
In addition, when trust in the police decreases and the authority of the courts is in danger, many citizens turn to the media to raise the agenda of various injustices.
The media, in many cases, also respond and publish stories that reach them "from the field" in order to change reality.
How many times have you been exposed to a story that included video or voice recordings?
Such recordings contribute to the credibility of media reports and are an important element in the transmission of information to the public.
Therefore, not only the media should stand on the back foot and oppose this bill, but also the common citizen who cares about getting down to researching the truth.
If this tool is also taken away from him, what will he have left?
Roni Hersh is a communication and crisis consultant "Hersh Communication and Strategy".
Marketing and digital
in the headlines
Tags
Boaz Bismuth
Bills
privacy
Wiretapping
recordings