The Limited Times

Now you can see non-English news...

Manipulative, insolent and at best unaware: the things that Kalman Libeskind "forgot" to write - voila! culture


Highlights: "Kalman Libeskind is not a mouthpiece for any politician, and among the publicists of the right today, he is the most eloquent of them all," writes Yossi Ben-Ghiat. "He is not an idiot. The column is written at a high level, as usual, and it is not idiotic at all - it is indeed manipulative, rude and unaware at best, or terribly hypocritical at worst," he adds. "Kalman's claims in the column are directed at two programs in Khan 11 that do not bode well for him," he writes. "For him, that is a different treatment that deserves a different system"

It's amazing that it has to be explained in 2024 that satire shows are supposed to deal with the government and people who change destinies and it's amazing that it has to be explained that public money isn't supposed to always satisfy everyone

This is the one they sing to Kfir Bibs Likinton Chorus/Kan 11

It is important to observe traffic laws, they save lives.

Still, there are few drivers who will not receive a speeding report at least once in their lives. Few drivers will not be forced to have a conversation with a police officer in uniform and beg him to waive the report. This is a tactical error, of course. The right thing to do in front of a traffic police officer is to show some backbone, and say To his face: "Hey, I pay your salary.

You are a public servant and I do not feel that you are not serving me properly.

Go make me tea with mint!". This, in a nutshell, is the Kalman Libeskind doctrine, as expressed in his column against the Public Broadcasting Corporation last weekend. I

'll start with a full disclosure: Kalman's column was published in the media group where I work and publishes the column you're reading right now. And every However, I have never met Kalman, and except once or twice when I went on his radio show over the phone, I have never spoken to him personally. I have great respect for his days as a whistleblower, and even if I don't agree with most of his tories, I enjoy reading them because they are often written in a manner Impartial and reasoned. Kalman is not a mouthpiece for any politician, and among the publicists of the right today, he is the most eloquent of them all. In many ways, he follows in the footsteps of Uri Orbach, whom I admired. I

never thought that I would sit down and write a response column to Kalman precisely for the reason already mentioned: our articles are published On the same site and I am against shooting at an APC, during war and in general.

But one cannot argue with the fact that Kalman "started" the shooting, with a long and reasoned column that is simply sent (albeit politely) to the Public Broadcasting Corporation, the same corporation that pays his salary, from all of our tax money.

Kalman Libeskind/screenshot, here 11

Kalman clarifies that he is not writing the article in the hat of a corporate employee, but of a corporate consumer.

Literally Dr. Kalman and Mr. Libeskind.

One can be a senior talent in public broadcasting, expressing his right-wing views that are echoed by the Ecclesiastical Forum and ministers from the extreme right such as Itamar Ben Gabir - the other can whine about being forced to be exposed to left-wing content on the same channel.

All this, in the same person.


While I was debating whether to write this column, I turned to the editor and asked him if he thought it was legitimate for me to publish "a response to Kalman's idiotic column".

He responded to me politely: "There is no problem for you to write, provided you don't use the word 'idiotic' in the column."

I promised that I would not do so, and upon further reading of the column I realized that he is also really far from being an idiot, mainly because you can say a lot of things about Kalman Libeskind, but he is absolutely not an idiot.

The column is written at a high level, as usual, and it is not idiotic at all - it is indeed manipulative, rude and unaware at best, or terribly hypocritical at worst.

Kalman's claims in the column are directed at two programs in Khan 11 that do not bode well for him.

The satirical "This Is It", and the investigative program "The Rolnik Report".

Both programs, according to him, incite (!) against entire communities in the country.

This is his opinion, and he justifies it with examples that you may or may not agree with.

He has the right to express it, even if it is a bit strange and very unusual to attack the programs of the channel that pays your salary.

But Kalman is an ideologue!

He will put aside minor values ​​such as collegiality and loyalty to the system in order to protect the battered right-wing camp, the one that established the right-wing government in full force and led us to great achievements in the social and security fields.

Kalman is not content only with television criticism from a sectoral point of view.

For him, "Zah Zah", one of Israel's favorite and oldest programs, which aired when Kalman himself was 8 years old, is a program that deserves a different treatment because it is financed by public funds.

According to him, he sat and watched all 29 programs - not funny, according to him - of "This Is It", and did not tell a single joke about Yair Lapid.

Imagine being so loyal to a certain ideology that you watch 29 TV shows of a series you just can't stand.

Even the series I like I don't watch enough.

More in Walla!

The leading health fund presents: the services that will make your life easier

in collaboration with Kalit

Watched it all?!

This is it/screenshot, here 11

Well, let's start from the end.

It's amazing that this still needs to be explained in 2024, but satire programs are supposed to deal with the government and people who change destinies, and not in an imaginary world where Yair Lapid has some kind of influence on the place where we live.

Humor only works when it hits up, not down.

There is not a single forward-looking survey that takes seriously Yair Lapid as the next leader of the country.

Who is in these polls?

Benny Gantz, who is of course mocked by Muni Moshunov, as the Hessen leader who cannot make a decision whether to stay in Netanyahu's coalition or leave.

Could it be that Kalman missed this imitation, or it simply does not fit the thesis and therefore does not enter the monumental column?

Kalman testifies to himself that he has a sense of humor (maybe, as mentioned, he doesn't know personally), so what bothers him is not the level of the jokes but their object.

More precisely, it bothers him that the show is not about Yair Lapid, Merav Michaeli (who!?) or Avigdor Lieberman.

"Listen to me," he writes emphatically, "if you are not a Likud member or a settler, you are a protected flower. This is a production that from beginning to end was set up to go over the heads of its political opponents."

So after I heard him, I decided to do the shortest search in Google history and found out that there were many mocking imitations of Yair Lapid (Avi Kushnir), Avigdor Lieberman (Dval' Glickman) and Merav Michaeli (Shoub Kushnir) on the show.

When did this happen?

When they were in power, and naturally the satire was directed at them.

To say that the production of "Zhu Zah" was established to go after the heads of its political opponents is not only a lie that can be proven in three seconds on YouTube, but simply hypocrisy, in light of the fact that on the same channel there is indeed such a program called "Seven with Ila Hasson".

According to a publication by David Wertheim in Walla!

Barangay, Hesson is the highest salary on the channel with a handsome NIS 49,488 gross per month.

The salary, as you remember, is financed from public funds.

Unlike "This Is It", Hasson's program is not defined as "satire" and does not open with a clarification slide and an apology in advance in case someone is offended by the content.

Hasson broadcasts a current affairs program that, to paraphrase Libeskind's words, can be defined as a propaganda, one-sided, hateful enterprise, whose bottom line is similar to that of Channel 14. By the way, Kalman casually throws in a column that he only watches current affairs programs on Channel 14, which is a bit As he will write in his column in "Maariv" that he only consumes news in "Yediot Ahronoth".

Rolnik/screenshot, here 11

The second part of Kalman's tour refers to the "Rolnik Report" program.

If for the guys of "This is it" Kalman retains some youthful grace, he doesn't even try to hide his dislike of Guy Rolnik.

In his eyes, the very broadcasting of his program is "relegating public broadcasting to prostitution", no less.

Kalman's complaints about the quality of television that Rolnick makes are legitimized.

Personally, I also agree with some of them.

However, it is hard to believe that even if the program was at the highest level, it would have changed Kalman's opinion about it.

It's not the TV, it's the principle.

Why are they giving someone who spoke at the demonstrations in Kaplan a TV show?

As if speaking at demonstrations against the coup (or at any other demonstration for that matter) is an illegal act.

In fact, already the previous August, when we were deep in the internal debate about the "reform" of Yariv Levin, Kalman published a column against the publication of Rolnik's program - even before he watched one frame of the program.

In the same column, Kalman addressed the management of the corporation (remember, his employers) and implored them not to give Rolnik a platform.

The reasoning was that Rolnik became an activist in the protest and therefore he cannot do an investigation that deals with the Ecclesiastical Forum.

Now, after the show was aired in a war-adjusted version, Kalman is already accusing him of being pickpocketed and using his money to make a show that, by and large, he just didn't like.

It's hard to believe that an intelligent person like Kalman Libeskind believes in this childish nonsense of "it's a product that is financed with public money, so the whole public should love it", but nevertheless I made him a short list of things that the majority of the public in Israel does not like to finance with their money: a separate education system without LIB studies" For the ultra-Orthodox, security for illegal settlements, 1.35 billion shekels (1,350,000,000 for those who need to see it in numbers) for "strengthening the Jewish identity for the secular" in addition to the Ministry of Heritage and the Ministry of Tradition and the Ministry of Settlement. As far as most of the taxpayers in Israel are concerned, all these offices could be closed yesterday.

Kalman Libeskind/screenshot, screenshot

It is possible that if a referendum is held tomorrow on the closure of the Public Broadcasting Corporation, the majority of Israelis will vote in favor of its closure - thanks in large part to the negative propaganda of the Israeli right, led by pawns like Communications Minister Shlomo Karai and with the help of media whistleblowers.

It's a shame that Calman Libeskind, who is far from being a useful idiot, participates in this cannibalization celebration against public broadcasting, from which he makes his own living.

It's a shame, especially because apart from Ayla Hasson and "Zah Zah", Kalman's channel has the highest quality original television content in Israel, with almost no competitors.

It's not all politics and news.

"Manaich" is considered the best series in Israel in the eyes of many, "What You Say" is one of the funniest shows here, "Excuse me for the question" makes anyone with a good heart beat and all this before we even talked about the children's content, which offers millions of Israelis quality content that does not offend The intelligence of Generation Z.

Damage to the corporation, because of petty politics, will be a net loss for the citizens of Israel - regardless of their political opinion.

  • More on the same topic:

  • Kalman Libeskind

  • that's it

  • Here is 11

Source: walla

All tech articles on 2024-02-25

You may like

Trends 24h


© Communities 2019 - Privacy

The information on this site is from external sources that are not under our control.
The inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation or endorse the views expressed within them.