"What do you think about the calls for civil disobedience?" asked Channel 14 reporter Moti Castel to Yesh Atid Chairman Yair Lapid. Castel referred to correspondence in a small group of protest leaders, as he revealed on the channel. "I didn't see it, because I don't watch Channel 14," the opposition leader replied.
Consistent torch. Less than a year ago, as prime minister, his party petitioned the High Court of Justice to mark the channel as a propaganda channel (a step that effectively means shutting it down). Even then, it was evident that the establishment of the right-wing channel dictated a new media agenda. The other channels sharpened their positions against him, some of them came out of the political closet, but mostly - it became clear that they all hold some ideology, even the "mainstream" channels. But the growing protests against the channel, along with the steady rise in viewing rates, have raised another fundamental question: Who is the mainstream?
Maggie Tabibi protesting the Yesh Atid petition // Archive photo: Channel 14
The victory of the right and the declarations about judicial reform led the state media to stand on the front line to defend its positions, which until then had been blurred under the cloak of objectivity. So when it comes to media priorities, freedom of expression is no longer in first place. Some of the media even prevented their people from being hosted on Channel 14. The wave of protests that swept Israel also exceeded the ideological wave, but the labeling of Channel 14 as illegitimate is clearly influenced by ratings considerations in a small and limited market.
Although the petition against the channel was rejected, the move did not receive significant criticism in the public discourse. Haaretz publisher Amos Schocken expressed criticism in an interview with Yaakov Bardugo on Channel 14. He spoke about the ideological DNA that he said exists in every media outlet – that is, the attitudes or values that are inherent in it and that characterize its human composition. In the case of Haaretz and Channel 14, the DNA is declared, so the interview was a moment when right and left were unanimous about the fact that a media organization should not be shut down.
The state countenance maintained by the established television channels did not last. As their involvement in the protests grew (dating back to the days of Balfour), so did the pressures and interests. These led to silence regarding issues significant to the public, such as the prison guards' affair, which received little media attention when it was first exposed on Channel 14 (then Channel 20), parts of the Netanyahu trial, violence in protests, or discussions on various aspects of selective enforcement. These were discussed extensively on Channel 14, while the "mainstream" channels covered the protests massively, serving mainly Ashkenazi-secular-liberal sentiment.
The protest broadcasts were a moral and moral statement by most of the media, which used them to demonstrate universal values. Owners, editors and journalists began looking up outside of Israel; Global economic interests have become overlapping with domestic political interests. As part of the struggle against the right, ultra-Orthodox, religious, and traditional populations were marked as an obstacle because they represent the "local" – that is, religious and national values and a non-Western identity.
From the channel's broadcasts. Changes in viewing patterns, photo: Efrat Eshel
But the existence of the "local" is essential for the state media, because it allows for moral cleansing (from the occupation and xenophobia, for example) and gives it the coveted universal validity.
Channel 14 led to a change in consciousness. For many Israelis, especially Mizrahim, watching it was the first time they identified themselves on screen – not just as reality TV stars or news items about a hotel brawl, but as anchors and commentators.
While the channel's ideological baggage is visible from the beginning and ratings are rising, channels 11, 12 and 13 are paying a price not only for their ethnic homogeneity over the years, but also for their denied political homogeneity. Many traditionalists and Mizrahim, who in the past were the bulk of mainstream channel consumerism, feel alienated. At first, press 14 on the remote control hesitantly, but as the struggle between the blocs intensifies, viewing becomes a habit, and then a necessity.
Wrong? We'll fix it! If you find a mistake in the article, please share with us