But in the safari: the rhinoceros Ruby is dead (singing by Inbar Danin)
Ramat Gan as a concoction.
Not one, but two investigations aired this weekend about what's going on at Safari.
In the same minutes that Keshet 12's Friday studio aired an investigation that made serious allegations against the Ramat Gan Municipality and the CEO of Safari Oren Ben-Yosef, in Kan 11 another investigation was broadcast that focused on complaints about sexual harassment and a problematic organizational culture, also at Safari in Ramat Gan. Only the reports did not On the contrary, they create completely contradictory images, as if a portal to a parallel universe had opened somewhere between the entrance gate and the bear yard.
What does everyone agree on anyway?
First, that sexual assaults and harassment are wrong that require a thorough investigation and taking actions according to its results.
Moreover, it is clear to all parties that the safari in Ramat Gan is a non-standard workplace where the work feels like a mission and most of the professionals stay there for many years, out of love and commitment to the animals whose health and well-being they guarantee.
In both articles there is also a clear factor that started the chain of events in question - the beginning of Ben-Yosef's work as CEO of the Safari in 2019, which triggered a number of deep processes and long-term changes. Here more or less ends the launch point and the timeline begins to split. The same people who are presented in one investigation as Victims are the villains in the second, with each side claiming to be the one seeking to protect the safety of the workers on the scene.
Yigal and Sagit Horowitz (photo: screenshot, Keshet 12)
If Shai Gal's article in Studio Shishi is to be believed, the Safari is under a reign of terror led by the new CEO, including quotes that describe "unbearable moral decay" and a place that has become "not protected at all for women." The main interviewees are Dr. Yigal and Sagit Horowitz, former employees The safari management who served as the chief vet and spokeswoman, but left the job in great pain this year.
The picture that emerges from their testimony, along with those of other interviewees, is so unflattering that one can expect that in a moment George the veterinarian from "Parliament" will also appear and tell how he was forced to lose a monkey in a poker game.
The investigation presents a chain of events according to which the CEO sought to fire Dr. Horowitz for being too opinionated.
The means that allowed him to do this, apparently, were accusations of sexual harassment, which were collected against him by the Safari and an outside company that was hired to investigate the matter, but did so unprofessionally and without sufficient evidence.
If that's not enough,
Research here 11:
In Yifat Glick's investigation in Khan 11, on the other hand, we see a different kind of colleague, and also a slightly different workplace from the exciting story about "a workplace that is a home" presented by Sagit Horowitz.
Gal's investigation mentioned the evidence of sexual harassment without detailing its content, while Glick presented details of serial and continuous behavior on the part of Horowitz - including unwanted touches and massages, surprise outside the shower or verbal harassment.
One complainant openly told about a sleepless night at work that led her to escape the head veterinarian's touches on her and another employee.
Another stated that she was afraid to enter his office alone and brought companions with her.
On the Shabbat news broadcast the day after the investigation, Glick updated that no fewer than 11 employees had left or been fired following complaints of sexual harassment in the past two years.
CEO Ben Yosef and Human Resources Director at Safari, Or Brenner, also spoke of years of neglect that allowed for a clearly inappropriate organizational culture. Not one rotten fruit, but an entire phenomenon.
The director of the Savannah who complained against Horowitz for harassment (photo: screenshot, Keshet 12)
And on the other hand, in Keshet 12's investigation claims are made that the problematic situation was not resolved during Ben Yosef's time, on the contrary.
According to him, the external inspection company insisted on complaints against Dr. Horowitz, including testimonies from former employees such as "They made me admit to things that did not exist and did not happen" or "They specifically pressured me to tell them something about Yigal". By the way, even in these testimonies was heard A statement about a "very acceptable" culture that allowed harassment, which was not handled properly, which raises the question of what the claim is actually here - that the allegations were fabricated and forced, or that the investigation was not thorough enough and in fact the phenomenon is even greater than the one that was actually handled? In short, one big mess
, And we haven't even talked about the surprising guest appearance of Avery Gilad, who suddenly appears in Kaan 11's investigation to talk about his confrontation with Carmel Shama HaCohen and his deputy Roi Barzilai regarding the affair, a confrontation that has meanwhile moved to Facebook with posts on the subject published by all three over the weekend.
More in Walla!
Jack Nicholson is seen for the first time in a year and a half.
watch
To the full article
Horowitz (photo: screenshot, Keshet 12)
But in the midst of all this mess, the question arises as to whether it is even possible to talk at the same time about so many different and contradictory claims, and whether it is at all fair to deal with such a broad phenomenon of sexual harassment in the same breath as other issues related to the management of the safari.
Here 11's investigation focused on one clear issue and that is the phenomenon of sexual harassment in the place, which as mentioned, even in the article of the competing channel a statement was heard that confirms its existence to some extent.
Does this mean that the entire investigation is the truth?
There is no way to know, of course, but at least the picture he presents is specific and coherent.
In the sixth studio we aimed much higher, and the result is a multiple catch you didn't catch.
The investigation claims that the safari is "disintegrating from within", knowingly and deliberately, with cornering in matters of construction licensing, crooked and fraudulent investigations of complaints against employees, poor treatment of the animals and all for the same reason - foreign interests of the Ramat Gan municipality to reduce the safari areas.
The apparent motive emerges only at the last moment and is mentioned in a few sentences, despite its importance to the story.
In general, each section here warrants a complete investigation, but in practice everything was somehow squeezed into about 22 minutes, a significant part of which was devoted to the defense letter of the former chief veterinarian.
And when on another channel clear complaints are heard against him, the evidence of the complaints collected by force from facts that were not harmed at all is no longer enough to present him as a victim of the system.
Let's not forget that after all these stories there are also the animals, who according to Olpan Shishi are themselves paying a price for the internal war between the management and the workers.
About 70 antelopes, we learn, were killed last year on safari by jackals.
Other animals suffered poor treatment due to the change of roles in the team.
But the reference to the condition of the animals appears so casually that it creates an unfair equation, as if those complaining about sexual harassment that led to the departure of staff members are responsible for harming the animals.
It is almost certain that neither the interviewees nor the investigative editors intended to imply this, but when you move so quickly between the stories, you can get the feeling that this is the case.
It is quite clear that both editions and the interviewees on both sides had only good intentions, but the result is an investigation at the end of which the viewer is asked more questions than he had before watching.
culture
TV
TV review
Tags
Ramat Gan Safari
