Let’s talk politics: In recent years, Israeli artists have divided into two groups – those who spoke about politics, and those who firmly refused – but with the progress of the legal reform, it seems that more and more actors and musicians have decided that they are not ready to remain silent.
The careers of quite a few actors and creators were damaged after political statements. Orna Banai lost a campaign because of her words about the army (“Let the IDF win? I can’t say such a thing”), Tiki Dayan was hurt by the “mob” speech and Meir Ariel came under fire because of his anti-LGBT statements. In contrast, many young artists maintained an apolitical line, and thus, Israel’s representative in the Eurovision Song Contest, Noa Kirel, made sure to say that she “does not get into these issues” in any question with a political tone.
In recent weeks, Shlomo Artzi announced that he refuses to accept the Israel Prize because of the planned legal reform, Ran Dankar came out strongly against the Netanyahu government and Alona Sa’ar participated in a demonstration and was even interviewed against the government’s legislation and declared: “I don’t want us to become a dictatorship, I don’t want to live in Iran.”
Even in view of Netanyahu’s decision to delay the legislation, it seems that the storm is not behind us. The question arises, is this a change of trend in the world of culture and now more artists will express their positions? Is it even the job of actors and singers to say what they think about the political system? Is there any truth in the claim that those who express themselves politically lose half of the people?
“In the 1990s, basketball icon Michael Jordan said his famous sentence, ‘Republicans also buy sneakers,'” says Dr. Tzachi Hait, head of the marketing specialization and vice dean at the Sami Ofer School of Communication, Reichman University. “He said this after being asked why he did not support the Democratic candidate running for the Senate in North Carolina, the state where Jordan was born and raised. It doesn’t matter that Jordan later claimed that it was a joke, the idea that emerges from this statement is that from a marketing business point of view it is more correct to appeal to broad audiences, and not explicitly label yourself as belonging to a certain political camp.”
“Today it seems so far away, and irrelevant,” Hayat continues. “We are in a period of deep social polarization, on almost every level. This polarization is also largely due to the fact that on social media we mainly see and hear how right we are, and how wrong the other camp is. Even trying to understand the other side, without agreeing with them, can lead to criticism. Studies in the US, and in Israel, show that this polarization is also reflected in aspects such as disappointment if one of your children were to marry someone from the other political camp.”
Michael Jordan (Photo: Reuters)
There is not even an island of escapism left
Cressanti limora media woman in the past and the owner of a company for the management of publicity systems and public relations in the present: “There is definitely a trend change in the world of culture, more and more artists are expressing their political positions. The problem is when it comes out of social satisfaction and not out of the artist’s free will. The freedom of democracy and the possibility of expressing an opinion are about to win All of them, at the same time, the massive coercion towards certain artists to take a stand and the expectation from them as if it was their ‘job’ – is unnecessary.”
“The case of the singer Shlomo Artzi is an example,” continues Crescenti. “Just about a week ago, the media stormed why he doesn’t express his position and his sorrow over the situation, his answer was – the words of my songs are not enough? In the next step, he refused to accept the Israel Prize. And the question arises how much social pressure contributed here. Beyond that, I see art as another language, which consolidates and connects people, without choosing between camps or differences of belief. I recommended to any artist who is a public figure – not to represent a certain segment but his work that belongs to everyone, because the power of the work that has escapism and quality time is a must in these crazy days and if there will at least be quiet there And unity for all – blessed us.”
Shlomo Artzi (Photo: Gabriel Beharlia)
Prof. Udi Lebell from Bar Ilan University’s School of Communication and BSA Center has closely followed the Israeli political discourse in recent years through a variety of prisms: through monitoring the media discourse, through the political campaigns and especially through the many focus groups he holds. According to him, this is really a transformation that happened before our eyes, which may explain what happened here, including the behavior of the artists: “For most of the years, politics has been about policy, are you for or against the continuation of construction in the settlements, do you support or oppose the privatization processes, do you see Abu Mazen as a partner, yes or no Public transportation on Shabbat. For the most part, the position of those who thought differently than you did not paint them as your enemy. In any case, in most of these issues there is no real decision or differentiation between left and right governments. Most of them continued the same policy towards the Palestinians and public transportation continued not to run, not on Shabbat and hardly on weekdays The great change has been taking place in recent years and at its peak in this government. Neglect of policy issues in favor of identity issues. In an identity relationship there is no room for compromise and there is almost no ability to remain ‘friendly’ with those who are not in my camp. Everyone is suddenly “with” or “against me”. The observation is a tribal observation Who wants a Jewish state or a gentile state. Or on the other hand: who wants a sane and progressive liberal state versus who wants a primitive state and poses a risk to it.”
“In a situation like this, trying to appeal to both camps is difficult, very difficult,” Hayat concludes. “How can you expect a coach not to express his political position? Or with which camp does he identify? Whether the attempt to maintain ‘neutrality’ stems from financial interests, or others, it is clear why the audience is so accustomed, on any subject, to categorizing people who belong to my camp, or For the second camp, he would like to do this to artists as well.”
“When this is the reality – it is very difficult for the audience, from their point of view, to be tolerant of those who are not of their opinion,” adds Labell. To be at his exhibition on the weekend – are they all ‘in my political family’. Someone, some will say his genius and some will say his irresponsibility – brought the whole system into a political psychology of ‘who is a friend and who is an enemy’. People are less able to be patient with a good movie, it is important for them to be critical of it. They want to know that by watching it they are not ‘giving a like’ to its creator who is ‘forbidden’ from the opponents of the reform if they are its supporters, and vice versa. The ability to simply ‘enjoy’ the movie is almost non-existent. Suddenly every opponent of reform is Muhammad Bakri and suddenly the presenter of a beacon ceremony from channel 14 cannot give a state framework to the ceremony. Even if all she has to say there is ‘raise the beacon’.”
Experts in everything
In this context, the question arises – why do I expect coaches to express their political opinion, if they are not politicians at all and do not necessarily have sufficient knowledge in the field, and certainly in a legally complex issue such as the reform recently promoted by the government. “I want to slightly expand the discussion about politics and artists and question the legitimacy of celebrities in general to express their opinion on matters that are not their area of expertise,” he says Matan Aharoni, from the School of Communication at Ariel University. “I want to present a modern thought and approach in a postmodern era and request a return to the idea of specialization and expertise, so that every expert in his field will present his educated understanding of the matters relevant to him and in a way that characterizes his field and not every celebrity who is followed on the networks or watched on television will express his opinion on everything that comes to his mind” .
“This approach was presented in a slightly different way and also quite bluntly by the fashion woman Doreen Atias, who claimed, rightly, that the influencers on the net, those who are followed by many surfers, cannot recommend everything that they are offered to recommend to all followers and cannot call themselves an expert either” , adds Aharoni. “As she said: ‘Everyone who has given birth has become an expert on children. There are no more experts, there are a lot of experts.’
“Therefore, if artists and creators want to engage in politics, they should use their abilities – their expertise – to express their opinion,” continues Aharoni. “That is, to write and compose songs on the subject, to create political representatives and display them, to photograph and present things with an artistic eye. Accordingly, journalists who are experts in a certain field, such as religion (and even those who have written a research paper on a certain rabbi), cannot reflect on broad ethnic and sociological issues which are not in their field of knowledge. Rather, they should use their tools to create articles in their field of expertise only. Only in this way can we restore the trust of Doreen Atias and many others in expertise as an important value.”
“The celebrities who have the education, experience and abilities in a certain field should not only use their popularity to express their opinion, but they should express it with the help of their art,” concludes Aharoni. “This is a rather desperate call because apparently the media works mainly on speed and simplicity – it is looking for celebrities who will express their opinion in the clearest and fastest way on almost anything, as seems to be done most often in the panels of the morning and afternoon programs and sometimes celebrities are also invited to the panels of the news releases to express their opinion on a variety of subjects. But you have to understand that this is an opinion that is no different from that of any ordinary citizen caught on the street and asked for his opinion.”