Blowing Away Blau

Eli Pollak and I published in our weekly "Media Comment" column at the Jerusalem Post recently on the Uri Blau case.

And now this, from The New York Times, June 8, 2012,

Holder Assigns U.S. Attorneys to Investigate Possible Classified Leaks.

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. said in a statement on Friday that two United States attorneys had been assigned to investigate possible unauthorized disclosures of classified information. Ronald C. Machen Jr., the attorney for the District of Columbia, and Rod J. Rosenstein of the District of Maryland will lead separate criminal investigations being conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

“The unauthorized disclosure of classified information can compromise the security of this country and all Americans, and it will not be tolerated,” Mr. Holder said in the statement. Earlier on Friday, President Obama rebutted accusations that his administration leaked information about a terrorist “kill list” and cyberwarfare to make himself look tough in an election year. Without confirming the accuracy of the information — which was revealed in two articles in The New York Times last week — Mr. Obama said that such leaks dealt with the safety of the American people, its military and its allies.

What's good a la US democracy should be good enough for Israel.

^

Pal. Authority "Freedoms"

Remember my comparison of how journalist groups attack Israel but the PA seems to escape real criticism?

Well, from the new US report:
2011 Human Rights Reports: Israel and the occupied territories - the occupied territories

Section 2. Respect for Civil Liberties, Including:Share

a. Freedom of Speech and Press

Status of Freedom of Speech and Press

The PA Basic Law provides every person the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and expression, orally, in writing, or through any other form. The PA does not have laws specifically providing for freedom of press; however, PA institutions applied aspects of an unratified 1995 press law as de facto law. In practice, PA security forces in the West Bank and members of the Hamas security apparatus in the Gaza Strip continued to restrict freedom of speech and press. HRW reported that since 2007 most abuses against journalists in both the West Bank and Gaza were related to tensions between the PA and Hamas. The PA military judiciary detained civilian journalists, according to human rights organizations.
Israeli authorities placed limits on certain forms of expression in the occupied territories.

Freedom of Speech: Although there is no PA law prohibiting criticism of the government, there were reports that the government was not fully tolerant of criticism. HRW reported in February that the PA repeatedly responded to peaceful demonstrations with violent attacks (see section 2.b., Freedom of Assembly).
In the Gaza Strip, individuals publicly criticizing authorities risked reprisal by Hamas, including arrest, interrogation, seizure of property, and harassment. Civil society and youth activists, social media advocates, and individuals associated with political factions accused of criticizing Hamas in public fora such as the Internet faced punitive measures including raids on their facilities and residences, arbitrary detentions, and denial of permission to travel outside of Gaza. The ICHR reported numerous detentions of protesters in the Gaza Strip. For example, the ICHR reported at least 16 arrests of protesters in March alone and numerous instances in which Hamas quelled rallies and protests with violence.
In East Jerusalem, under Israeli authority, displays of Palestinian political symbols were punishable by fines or imprisonment, as were public expressions of anti-Israeli sentiment and support for terrorist groups. Israeli security officials regularly shut down meetings or conferences held in East Jerusalem affiliated with the PA or with PA officials in attendance. For example, the ISA warned organizers of a Palestinian agricultural trade show in East Jerusalem in September that they would face closure if they invited PA officials or displayed a Palestinian flag. In September Israeli police ordered shut a meeting in East Jerusalem on Israeli changes to Palestinian school curricula, and Israeli security officers questioned the organizers about their involvement in the meeting.


Freedom of Press: Across the occupied territories, independent media operated with some restrictions.
In the West Bank, the PA placed some restrictions on independent media as well as official media. The PA maintained a distribution ban in the West Bank on the twice-weekly pro-Hamas al-Risala and the Filistin daily newspapers, both Gaza-based publications. Hamas’s al-Aqsa TV reportedly enjoyed some degree of access to work in the West Bank without harassment.
In the Gaza Strip, Hamas restricted independent media, especially for non-Hamas-affiliated press and media outlets. Israel restricted the mainstream pro-PA dailies, independent al-Quds (based in Jerusalem), independent pro-Fatah al-Ayyam, and PA official daily al-Hayat al-Jadida (the latter two based in the West Bank), from importation into the Gaza Strip. Hamas authorities tolerated reporting and interviews featuring officials from the PA to be locally broadcast. Hamas allowed, with some restrictions, the operation of non-Hamas-affiliated broadcast media in the Gaza Strip. The PA-supported Palestine TV reportedly enjoyed access to operate in the Gaza Strip.
In East Jerusalem independent media were able to operate. As a general rule, Israeli media were able to cover the occupied territories, except for combat zones where the IDF temporarily restricted access, but closures, curfews, and checkpoints limited the ability of Palestinian and foreign journalists to do their jobs (see section 2.d.). Israel revoked the press credentials of the majority of Palestinian journalists during the Second Intifada in 2000, with the exception of a few Palestinian journalists who worked as stringers for prominent international media outlets. As a result most Palestinian journalists were unable to cover stories outside the Palestinian-controlled areas of the West Bank.

Violence and Harassment: PA security forces reportedly harassed, detained occasionally with violence, and fined journalists several times during the year due to their reporting. HRW reported in April that the PA Preventative Security and General Intelligence services intimidated, detained, and assaulted journalists with impunity, including through detentions of civilian journalists by the military judiciary.
According to the Palestinian Center for Development and Media Freedoms (MADA), PA police officers prevented Ibtihal Mansour, a reporter for al-Sharq al-Awsat Studies Center, from covering a sit-in against PA political arrests in Nablus on June 13. Mansour stated that, although she adhered to orders, two female officers in civilian clothes beat her up and tried to confiscate her camera and cell phone. She was released after the intervention of members of the public and other journalists.
PA security services summoned and questioned several journalists in the West Bank. For example, on September 10, the Palestinian intelligence services in Bethlehem summoned al-Aqsa TV cameraman Osayd Amarneh, whom they questioned about filming a protest and later released.
In the Gaza Strip, journalists faced arrest, harassment, and other pressure from Hamas due to their reporting. There were reports that Hamas also summoned journalists for questioning in an attempt to intimidate them. Hamas also constrained journalists’ freedom of movement during the year, attempting to ban access to some official buildings, as well as several prodemocracy protests.
During coverage of popular intra-Palestinian reconciliation protests on March 19 in Gaza City, Hamas internal security forces forcibly entered the Gaza City offices of CNN, NHK (Japan’s public broadcasting service), and Reuters, assaulted several journalists, seized equipment, and demanded that the journalists stop filming the protests.
According to MADA, on August 17, Hamas security personnel prevented Wisam Zu’bur, a photographer for al-Hurriya Media Center, from taking pictures near al-Rimal neighborhood in Gaza City.
There were reports during the year of Israeli authorities detaining or assaulting journalists due to their reporting or coverage. In various incidents Israeli forces subsequently raided those journalists’ homes.
For example, on August 19, Israeli forces reportedly assaulted Al Jazeera cameraman Nabeel Mizawi and correspondent Shireen Abu Akleh while the two were covering Friday prayers at al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem’s Old City. In a live report on Al Jazeera, Abu Akleh claimed that IDF personnel beat Mizawi and ordered them to stop filming. According to the report, IDF personnel also cut a voice cable to mute the broadcast.
Local media reported that on November 22, Israeli authorities arrested Israa Salhab, a reporter for al-Quds satellite station, after she anchored a program on Palestinian prisoners. She was released on November 28 and never faced official charges.


Censorship or Content Restrictions: The PA prohibits calls for violence, displays of arms, and racist slogans in PA-funded and controlled official media. Media throughout the occupied territories practiced self-censorship. There were no confirmed reports of any legal actions or prosecutions against any person publishing items counter to these PA guidelines.
Civil society organizations reported that Hamas censored television programs and written content, such as newspapers and books. On January 23, according to HRW, Hamas police officers entered three bookstores in Gaza and confiscated copies of two novels--Haidar Haidar’s A Banquet for Seaweed and Alaa’ al-Aswany’s Chicago--and searched for copies of a third book, Forbidden Pleasure, telling the store owners that the books were seized because the Hamas ministry of interior “deemed them “against sharia” (Islamic law).
There were no reports that the Israeli government monitored the media in the occupied territories. Israeli authorities retain the right to review and approve in advance of printing all Jerusalem-based Arabic publications for material perceived as a security threat. In practice anecdotal evidence suggested the Israeli authorities did not actively review the Jerusalem-based al-Quds newspaper or other Jerusalem-based Arabic publications. Jerusalem-based publications reported that, based on previous experiences with Israeli censorship, over time they came to know what is acceptable and self-censored publications accordingly.


Libel Laws/National Security: There were instances in which slander and libel laws were used to suppress criticism. For example, on August 16, the PA attorney general banned the annual Palestinian Broadcasting Corporation’s Palestine TV Ramadan comedy program series, Watan ala Watar, in its third season, after PA security forces, representatives of the PA Ministry of Health, and the union of PA employees filed complaints claiming the program slandered members of their respective professions. On August 18, the PA attorney general issued final orders sanctioning the forcible suspension of the program.
There were no known reports that Hamas used security justifications or slander or libel laws to censure public critique.

Internet Freedom

There were no PA restrictions on access to the Internet; however, there were reports that the PA, Hamas, and Israel monitored e‑mail and Internet chat rooms. Individuals and groups could generally engage in the peaceful expression of views via the Internet, including by e‑mail.
On August 11, the Palestinian Telecommunication Company (PTC) suspended the Web site of electronic newspaper Alshu’la for one week, according to MADA. Alshu’la filed a complaint against the PTC with the PA attorney general. Alshu’la was reportedly forced offline because of a dispute between the PA and former Fatah member Mohammed Dahlan, who financially sponsored the site.
On November 15, PA intelligence services arrested George Qanawati, station manager of Bethlehem 2000 Radio, after he published a comment on his Facebook page on September 8 about tensions within Fatah. He was released five days later without charges.
Hamas did not restrict Internet access; however, based on anecdotal reports from Palestinian civil society organizations and social media practitioners, Hamas authorities monitored Internet activities and postings of Gaza Strip residents. Individuals posting negative reports or commentary about Hamas, its policies, or affiliated organizations faced questioning, and authorities at times required them to remove or modify online postings. No information was available regarding punishment for not complying with such demands.
Israeli authorities did not restrict access to the Internet; however, they monitored some Internet activity.

And Beinart & comrades criticize Israeli democracy.

^

Which Is More Typical?

Which story is more normative and typical?

This one -

Press freedom watchdogs have called on the Israeli military to release the director of a Palestinian TV station who was detained last Thursday (17 May).  Israeli soldiers arrested Baha Khairi Moussa, who runs the Palestine Prisoner Channel, a satellite broadcaster based in the West Bank. They also confiscated the station's equipment.

But the reason for his arrest remains a mystery, as do his whereabouts. Both the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) and the Vienna-based International Press Institute (IPI) have called for his release.

Or this one -

The Palestinian Media Forum (PMF) has strongly condemned the PA judicial and executive authorities’ decision to try the director of Radio Bethlehem 2000, George Canawati, because of comments on his facebook page.  The forum said, in a statement on Thursday, that Magistrate Court of Bethlehem City has adjourned on Wednesday George Canawati’s trial to September 5.

Canawati was arrested by the PA security service on September 2011 after he published a comment critical of Bethlehem’s Health Directorate on his Facebook page in addition to criticizing the presence of Israeli products on a table in a department meeting of managers. Then he was released on September 2011 with the provision that he appears before court again.

^

Yes, But...

Haaretz is gloating:-

Israel drops
six spots
in world press freedom rankings

Israel drops six spots in world press freedom rankings

Report cites indictment of Haaretz's Uri Blau and the four-and-half-year prison term handed down to Anat Kam for passing him secret military documents as reasons for decision.

But don't feel too bad, that's not the whole story:-

a) The Palestinian Authority was dropped three slots to 153, due to the attacks on journalists in Palestinian demonstrations.

and

b) The United States dropped 27 places and is now at 47.

All is relative - relative to the standards and uideological outlook of the authros of the report.

^

I Have A Press Problem

A "Press TV" problem.

Today, I was interviewed again by the Press TV rep in Jerusalem, Ibrahim.

And then I find out this, via :-

Britain revokes Iranian TV network’s license

Britain’s media regulator revoked the broadcast license for the Iranian state-owned television network Press TV on Friday, saying the network had failed to address concerns over its editorial independence and had not paid a fine. The network was set to cease broadcasting almost immediately...The move follows a marked chilling of relations between Britain and Iran after hundreds of Iranian protesters stormed the British Embassy in Tehran last November. Britain closed its embassy in Tehran and expelled all Iranian diplomats in London...(New York Times)

and

Press TV was found to have been operating editorial control from Tehran, breaching UK broadcasting licence rules.

“In the course of correspondence and meetings with Ofcom, statements made by Press TV Limited about the operation of the Licensed Service failed to satisfy Ofcom that the Licensee had general control over which programmes and other services were comprised in the Licensed Service. Ofcom therefore concluded that Press TV Limited had ceased to provide the Licensed Service in accordance with section 362(2) of the Act and that, accordingly, it was appropriate to revoke TLCS Licence 1211 under Condition 29(2)(a) of that Licence and section 238(4) of the Communications Act 2003. The Licence was revoked on 20 January 2012,” Ofcom said in a statement.

Press TV blames the 'Zionists':-

The Zionist Britain Israel Communications & Research Centre (Bicom) has collaborated with the state-controlled British Office of Communications (Ofcom) to ban the alternative English-language channel Press TV in the UK, a political analyst says.

“With anti-Iran sabotage activities high on its agenda, Bicom has worked closely with Ofcom towards eliminating a critical voice: Press TV,” Ismail Salami, Iranian author and Middle East expert, wrote in an article published on Press TV on Sunday.

So, why is Press TV still working in Israel?  Are we the most democratic, pluralistic society around?

^

Miriam Tzachi Wins

Here. (Background):-

(via Google translate)

The Jerusalem District Court accepted in part the appeal of the newspaper Makor Rishon and photographer Miriam Tzachi

Photo credit: YMedad


against the decision of the Jerusalem Magistrate's Court, which held that the newspaper for the police photos taken by Zahi events last month when "price tag" near the Gilad Outpost. The judge ruled that most of the pictures will not be given, except for photos documenting burning tires, some of them have been released days after the first source event, and they do not reveal the identity of the photographer's origins among the settlers.


The police demanded by them the pictures and be used as an investigation of settlers attacked several army officers, but the photographer and the newspaper refused it, claiming that the freedom of the press. The refusal was also supported by the Press Council, which announced that it will protect the photographer's press immunity.
District Court Judge Moshe Cohen ruled that the immunity indeed applies not only to the identity of sources of information, but also the information itself, when "the consideration of encouraging sources to cooperate with the press is the underlying consideration in secrecy". The judge mentioned that the Knesset oriented bills seeking to correct the Evidence Ordinance, so that journalists will not be obliged to give police evidence they've had in the line of duty journalist.

"The existence of such a special relationship between the source and the journalist and the preservation of immunity not only the source of private interest or journalist, but also an important interest of the general public, and they are designed to ensure the freedom of the press and the public's right to know", Cohen in his decision the judge wrote.

The judge criticized the police's position in relation to the pictures and noted that the situation in which journalists are carrying out work at the beginning of the investigation work for the police, is "a dangerous situation that has serious potential harm to press freedom".

First-response: "We welcome the decision of the Jerusalem District Court, which kept the freedom of the press and the confidentiality of the sources of press photographer Miriam Tzachi. Our position was and remains that journalists covering an event - especially photographers - can not become information providers as agents of the police against their will".

^

Judge Dorner - A 'Dictator'

Here is how the JPost reports on the statement by Justice Daliah Dorner, retired from the Supreme Court and now chairperson of Israel's Press Council:-

Dorner: Public opinion should dictate coverage of Schalit

Her thinking goes like this:

Public opinion and not legal or political measures should be the factor that forces the media to behave in an ethical way while covering the homecoming of Gilad Schalit over the next few days...official controls on press freedom is not an option.

“I would never control the media, but I will say to those who are responsible for the fate of Gilad Schalit that it is up to them to persuade the public that an invasion by the media will cause this boy harm,” she said.

“If they are successful, then public opinion itself will control the media, because the media wants to do all it can to keep the public happy.”

...she believes that public opinion is one of the natural ways to control the press. "Only those who are very brave can write something that everyone will hate or disagree with,” she said.

Unfortunately, Dorner has it all backwards.

It is the media that controls, quite successfully in most cases, public opinion. They shape it, frame it, manipulate it and actually hide any opinions or actions which do not fit the opinions of the editorial boards and staff.

It is they who dictate and Dorner, obviously willingly blind, deaf and dumb, goes along with the charade that Israel's democracy is healthy due to the freedom of the press.

Israel's Media watch, since March 1995, has proven that that charade exists, that there exists an axis of upheaval whereby links between politics-money-media dominate public discourse and Israel's democracy is under the thumb of media dictate. The press dominates the public, feeds them garbage, entertains and unethically.

In the specific Schalit case, what the media downplayed was a central element of the reality of the family's campaign:

there while on the one hand, the Schalit family not only used emotional extortion based on their son - which we would accept - but also on the fact that Noam's twin brother, Gilad's uncle, was killed in the Yom Kippur war and so, whereas on the other hand, they are now demanding, basically, that the rest of us do not use the same emotional pressure, they have acted in an immoral manner and the position they have taken, because it is immoral, it threatening to the rest of us but that is the development of individualistic Israel which the press feeds.

^

Freedom of the Press?

Reported:

WikiLeaks: Qatar ‘uses Al-Jazeera as bargaining chip’

Qatar is using the Arabic TV news channel Al-Jazeera as a bargaining chip in negotiations with other countries, US diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks suggested today...It has also offered to drop critical transmissions in exchange for concessions, the cables suggested. A US dispatch from November 2009 predicted the station could be used “as a bargaining tool to repair relationships with other countries, particularly those soured by Al-Jazeera’s broadcasts, including the United States.”

...In an example of the channel being used for political ends, the embassy in Doha said Qatar’s Prime Minister Sheikh Hamad bin Jassem bin Jabr al-Thani proposed a bargain with the Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak. The Qatari leader told US Senator John Kerry he had proposed a bargain with the Egyptian president which involved stopping broadcasts in Egypt if Cairo changed its position on Israel-Palestinian negotiations.

“[The Qatari prime minister] had told Mubarak ‘we would stop Al-Jazeera for a year’ if he agreed in that span of time to deliver a lasting settlement for the Palestinians,” according to a cable from the US embassy in Doha in February. “Mubarak said nothing in response, according to [the Qatari leader].”

Rebuttal here.
^

That HaAretz Journalist Blau Protecting His Sources?

Well, in Canada, he might have a problem.

Journalists cannot protect sources: top court

Canadian media's attempt to establish a right to protect confidential sources was quashed by the nation's highest court on Friday. In an 8-1 ruling, the Supreme Court ordered the National Post daily to hand over to police documents obtained from a source in 2001 alleging a former prime minister's involvement in a loan scandal.

The court recognized the public's interest "in being informed about matters of public importance that may only see the light of day through the cooperation of sources who will not speak except on condition of confidentiality."

...But the public's interest "is not absolute," the court ruled. "It must be balanced against other important public interests, including the investigation of crime. "The bottom line is that no journalist can give a source a total assurance of confidentiality. All such arrangements necessarily carry an element of risk that the source's identity will eventually be revealed," it said.

...In its ruling, the Supreme Court also said that a constitutional protection of freedom of expression is not limited to "traditional media" but is enjoyed by "everyone."

The rights extend to blogging, tweeting, "standing on a street corner and shouting the 'news' at passing pedestrians," as well as publishing in a national newspaper, the court said.

But granting immunity to sources deemed worthy to quote on condition of anonymity by "such a heterogeneous and ill-defined group of writers and speakers... would blow a giant hole in law enforcement and other constitutionally recognized values such as privacy," it added.

Hamas and (cough, cough) Press Freedom

The Hamas interior ministry has decided to deny Palestinian and foreign journalists access to the southern city of Rafah and too all hospitals in the Gaza Strip until further notice. The ban was issued on 14 August, after fighting broke out in Rafah between the Hamas government and a radical Islamist group.

“The Hamas-led government’s interior ministry has again demonstrated a desire to control news and information in the Gaza Strip,” Reporters Without Borders said. “Only the presence of journalists would ensure independent information about what took place in Rafah on 14 and 15 August.”

The press freedom organisation added: “This ban leaves journalists powerless and allows the authorities to avoid having to account for their actions during the fighting between the Hamas government’s security forces and members of Jund Ansar Allah, an armed Salafist group, which left more than 20 dead and 112 wounded. It was sparked by the Friday sermon delivered by the group’s leader, Sheikh Abdul Latif Musa, in the Ibn Taymiyya mosque on 14 August, in which he announced the creation of an Islamic emirate in Rafah.

The interior ministry’s ban has been greeted with anger by virtually all of the Gaza Strip’s journalists, who say it is an attack on media freedom and their autonomy. The Palestinian media and Palestinian journalists managed to keep operating and provide coverage during the Israeli offensive against the Gaza Strip last January. But this ban concerns Palestinian journalists as well.