Let it be stated here unequivocally, without any "ifs" or "buts" and no sugarcoating: It is unacceptable for the Likud movement, whose leader is the prime minister, to issue a statement calling for a journalist to be sent to prison for conducting a journalistic investigation. This is in reference to the Likud's statement that Channel 13 reporter Raviv Druker "would be in prison in a proper world." Where is the upstanding and talented speaker who eloquently presents Israel in a positive light – and where is this failure of a statement, which is quite detrimental to Netanyahu.
Some long for yesteryear, prior to the inception of commercial radio and television stations, when the Prime Minister's Office controlled the news cycle. I experienced, back in the day, how senior politicians from the Labor party worked to torpedo my appointment to run "Mabat," the only evening news channel around at the time. The pressure failed. The leaders of the liberal nationalist camp will be committing a sin if they try following this path.
Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter
Netanyahu has already disavowed the Likud's statement, saying he is not a proponent of throwing journalists in jail. This is a denunciation, flimsy as it may be, of the wording of the statement's wording. With that, it is also unacceptable for journalists to engage in witness tampering; they are not about the law. We already have pundits in our midst who want to see Netanyahu behind bars, even before the court has had the chance to thoroughly examine his indictment. He has already been convicted in the media's kangaroo court. Some members of the press have already exhausted their entire arsenal of denigrations against him. Even the Israel Press Council hasn't uttered one peep of criticism about Netanyahu being sentenced before his trial has even begun. This goes beyond violating a well-established legal rule: It violates a clear, fundamental ethical rule, which is supposed to apply to the field of journalism. Prof. Ruth Gavison has already spoken out against this. It is no coincidence that her position on the matter has been silenced.
The ethical rule is broken day after day, page after page, but it's interesting, this defamation campaign against Netanyahu does not influence a huge portion of the population, to which public opinion polls attest. Have any of the notable captains of media, editors or columnists weighed in on this statistic? It's quite possible they are frustrated over this phenomenon of contrarianism, whereby the more Netanyahu is disparaged the more the public supports him, at least according to the polls. Perhaps a modicum of restraint and self-censorship would help restore the public's eroded faith in the media.
Perhaps it's time for someone to conclude from all this that it would behoove them to curb or censor the criticism of the government, not in substance, but in style, so they at least sound credible.
Indeed, this is a wish with very little chance of coming true, but from the prime minister, and his movement, we should expect restraint – despite the hardships inflicted on him and his family. Netanyahu is showing restraint on matters far more important than unbridled rhetoric or unsuccessful statements. On the dilemma of going to war or ordering a limited operation in Gaza, we all know Netanyahu opted for the latter. And this moderation isn't only good for Netanyahu; it is incumbent upon him to promote this mindset, and the principle of freedom of the press, among the entire public.
Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!
