by Israel Fried
The nearly complete mobilization of the Israeli media in support of the disengagement and the well-crafted effort to influence the public and establish the legitimacy of uprooting Jews from an entire area is what made the move possible.
Last year, journalist
Kalman Libeskind conducted an interview on Galey Yisrael with attorney
Dov Weisglass, who, as an adviser to the late Prime Minister Ariel
Sharon, was one of the leading figures in the formulation of the Gaza
disengagement plan.
"We estimated the
Palestinian Authority wouldn't have difficulty maintaining its rule in
Gaza despite the opposition of Hamas, whose numbers back then were only
in the hundreds, perhaps thousands," Weisglass said. "We were not wrong,
but this is the Middle East."
Next month is the
10-year anniversary of what some in Israel refer to as the
"disengagement" and others call the "expulsion." These two terms
highlight, in the most useful way, the importance of terminology and the
power of the media during times when fateful actions are being
conducted.
Today, in light of the
security situation in southern Israel and Israeli public opinion, the
fact that most Israelis once supported the disengagement and backed the
leaders of the country at the time sounds almost unbelievable. The
nearly complete mobilization of the Israeli media in support of the
disengagement and the well-crafted effort to influence the public and
establish the legitimacy of uprooting Jews from an entire area is what
made the move possible.
Media warnings were not
about terror that would emanate from Gaza the minute we withdrew from
it, but rather about the threat of violent resistance from Gush Katif
residents that could escalate into civil war.
Needless to say, this
did not happen and the thing the media should have really warned us
about ended up blowing up in our faces sooner than expected.
Since then, new voices
have joined the Israeli media and there are more religious Zionists in
the media than there were before, as well as a wider range of political
views among top media figures. However, the political ideology of those
setting the media's agenda is still mostly painted in a single color.
The recent election
campaign with its mobilization of whole media outlets on behalf of or
against one candidate has proved just that. The voices of entire sectors
of Israeli society, such as the ultra-Orthodox, new immigrants and
residents of periphery communities, are still hardly ever heard in the
media.
Established five years
ago, the Galey Israel radio station aims to represent a different
mindset and agenda. So far, three appeals have been submitted to the
High Court of Justice against us, in a bid to silence our voice.
Currently, the same
media outlets that sold the public on the Gaza disengagement are telling
us that the whole world is against us and that we must submit to the
demands of the Palestinians. And those who supported Sharon a decade ago
are now telling us that our relations with the U.S. are doomed unless
we commit to establishing a Palestinian state within two years.
Even after Ben-Gurion
International Airport was nearly shut down due to rocket fire during
Operation Protective Edge, no one has demanded the media be held
accountable for its tales back in 2005 about how the disengagement would
benefit our security.
The media is well aware
that no one will demand an explanation in 2025 when the actions it is
promoting today yield the same negative results.
When the media speaks with one voice, democracy is jeopardized.
Media pluralism is
vital for making the right decisions, both for the people and the
government. The public is wiser than one might think -- it just needs
all the information before making a choice.
Israel Fried is the director-general of the Galey Yisrael radio station.
Source: http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=13029
Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.
No comments:
Post a Comment