Don’t call me brother: the second authority and the corporation rejected a campaign calling for dialogue

Don’t call me brother: the second authority and the corporation rejected a campaign calling for dialogue

This article is open to the public free of charge – only thanks to the supporters of the place.
Support now regularly so we can bring quality and free journalism to all

A campaign by a non-profit institute that called for dialogue among the people and the prevention of fratricidal war, was disqualified for broadcast by the Second Authority for Television and Radio (which supervises the commercial channels) and by the Israel Broadcasting Corporation. The two bodies that the new Minister of Communications, Shlomo Karai, has stated that he wants to eliminate and transfer from the world.

The corporation explained the disqualification by saying that the slogan in the video, “It’s either war – or brothers”, is “politically controversial”. In the second authority, they are so afraid that they did not dare to say what the reason for the disqualification was. The advertising body itself was informed that the video contains obscene content. The director general of the second authority, Michelle Kramerman, did not agree to answer the “Seventh Eye” questions on the matter. The authority’s spokesperson, from the public relations office Amir Dan-Einat Oren, heard the question and disappeared.

The video that spooked our much-maligned media regulators was produced by the Jewish People’s Policy Institute, a non-profit body set up by the Jewish Agency that distributes policy papers and keeps a fairly low profile. Against the background of the heated controversy in the nation surrounding our Prime Minister’s war on the judicial system, the institute launched a campaign with a dairy message.

Under the slogan “No to coercion and violence, yes to dialogue”, the institute, led by Prof. Yedidia Stern (former vice president of the Israel Democracy Institute), suggests avoiding a fratricidal war in Israel: “The discussion around legal reform may go beyond the limits of legitimate discourse, and there is a fear that it will deteriorate the State of Israel For a fratricidal war, God forbid. The Jewish People’s Policy Institute calls on the leaders of both sides to sit down and talk.”

The campaign is led by a 31-second video, showing photographs from three events: the shooting of Altalana, Rabin’s murder and the secession, and ends with the messages “It’s either war or brothers” and “No to coercion and violence. Yes to dialogue.” While the first slogan is indeed worded in a vulgar way, and one can somehow understand how the corporation thought it could be controversial, it is more difficult to understand why the Authority disapproved it on the general grounds of “obscenity”, a video whose message is a call to resolve disputes peacefully and through negotiation. It is possible to criticize and say that the message of the campaign is hollow, that it contains the normalization of an undemocratic revolution or a hint that Netanyahu’s opponents are violent, but it is difficult to understand how it can be called “blatant”.

“We are sorry that in the days of tension and danger of fratricidal war, the second authority does not allow non-political voices calling for reconciliation and dialogue to be heard,” said the Jewish People’s Policy Institute. The second authority, as mentioned, and not for the first time, forgets that it is a public authority whose duty is to be accountable to the public, and did not bother to explain itself.

The corporation provided the following response: “The script includes, among other things, the sentence ‘It’s either war – or brothers’ – presenting things in this way, as if approving the changes in the legal system will lead to war, while negotiations will prevent it – is politically controversial, and is at the heart of the public political debate These days. According to the publication rules of the corporation’s public broadcasting – no broadcast will be broadcast that includes a subject that is subject to political controversy, and therefore the current version of the broadcast is not approved. As long as another version of the things is presented to us, which will be in line with the rules – we will be published.”


Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Recent News

Editor's Pick