The host of Channel 10 News flagship program resigned live on air after the channel was forced to broadcast an apology to Netanyahu’s American patron Sheldon Adelson for an unflattering report. The program’s editor and the CEO of the news company resigned earlier this week.
In an extraordinary move, the host of one of Israel’s main news programs resigned live on air, citing a “breach of ethical and professional values.” The resignation of newscaster Guy Zohar came at the end of a program which saw a junior colleague read out a text of an apology to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s patron Sheldon Adelson. Adelson is a Las Vegas casino tycoon and the proprietor of fiercely pro-Netanyahu freesheet Yisrael Hayom, the most widely read newspaper in Israel. As Zohar announced his resignation the production credits at the bottom of the screen rolled blank, without any names. The camera then panned to the program’s control room, which erupted with applause.
The spat between Adelson and Channel 10, the more liberal competitor of the state-run Channel 1 and commercial heavyweight Channel 2, began in January, when channel ran an in-depth profile of the billionaire. Adelson alleged that the profile piece contained two defamatory segments: One, an interviewee claiming Adelson owed him substantial sums of money, a claim the interviewee reportedly recanted a few months later; and another interviewee seemingly insinuating Adelson got special treatment when appealing for a casino operation license. The report was removed this week from the channel’s website.
While Adelson attempted to pursue legal action against the news company, the apology was eventually aired thanks to a direct intervention by one of the financially strapped channel’s three shareholders, Ron Lauder, of the Estee Lauder business dynasty. According to a source involved in the preparation of the original Adelson report, who spoke to the Walla news site, the channel negotiating an agreed phrasing to the apology when Lauder intervened to stress the news company must aired the apology as dictated to them by Adelson’s attorney. The apology broadcast tonight included references not only to the disputed quotes but to the phrasing of the questions asked by the channel’s reporter and to the channel “not checking the accusations” prior to broadcast.
The CEO of Channel 10 News, Raudor Benziman, and the editor of the news program, Ruthie Yovel, resigned already on Wednesday, once the decision to air the apology was made. “We were made to understand that unless we do this, the channel will shut down,” a source in the news company told Walla. Another source in the company said: “This is proof positive that in present-day Israel you can’t do an investigative report on Sheldon Adelson. At least not on Channel 10. It seems a financially weak channel can’t stand up to the pressure.”
The strong bonds between Adelson and Netanyahu are well known, and as Noam pointed out in a post earlier this year, many of Netanyahu’s closest staffers have previously worked for companies owned by the tycoon. Adelson’s freesheet Yisrael Hayom is seen as so pro-Netanyahu it’s been nicknamed Bibiton (“Bibisheet”).
Noam Sheizaf contributed to this report
For additional original analysis and breaking news, visit +972 Magazine's Facebook page or follow us on Twitter. Our newsletter features a comprehensive round-up of the week's events. Sign up here.
Shaul
He didn’t resign he only cut a few hours.
weinstein henry
No more video available: just like in Iran.
Sylvia
The News CEO and editor did the right thing by resigning. First because an important journalistic principle of non-interference has been breached and because the research was – to put it mildly – sloppy if not purposedly slanderous and dishonest.
.
Adelson did the right thing: he could have dragged the News Channel to court and won. Settling for an apology was charitable on his part since his reputation was harmed.
.
Channel 10 did the right thing by finding a compromise that didn’t lead it to bankrupcy.
.
.
Instead of interjecting irrelevant distractions such as Bibi and Bibiton, perhaps the writer should have posed the problem of journalism and ethics. That’s what it is about after all.
Nephtaly Hans Velez Crespo
Svlia, you hit the nail on the head. I fail to see how this is somehow relevant to Netanyahu!
Benjamin Kweskin
Someone should translate this, it’s important for those in the galut to understand what is going on in Israel.
weinstein henry
@Sylvia
Having read some of your comments, I don’t doubt you’re a decent person. However, and being myself not obsessed with Bibi, I wonder genuinely how can you can come to the conclusion that the only problem here is “journalism and ethics”.
To say the least, it seemed to me that this focused post put on the table the internal control of media by tycoons closely linked to the current political establishment. That’s why I wonder what you mean by writing that “first an important principle of non-interference has been breached” with this investigative profile endorsed by Channel 10′s editorial staff about Sheldon Adelson.
Do you mean journalism must not interfere with judiciary?
David
It is good that someone stops the Israeli media from time to time. They acted irresponsibly and broadcast lies that were not checked. Their problem is that they were messing with the wrong guy and they got what they deserve.
weinstein henry
By the way, speaking of apology considered as a charitable move (Sylvia’s comment), it’s impossible not to think of Erdogan & Turkey.
Do you consider, Sylvia & Nephtaly, that the Israeli government did the right thing by refusing stubornly to apologise for the Mavi Marmara’s deaths? Did the Israeli media inform you these last few months about the consequences of a refusal?
Shir Alony
Hi, I’m one of the leaders of the protest in Israel.
In response to Sylvia, and everyone here: Perhaps you see this apology as the right thing that should have happened.
But there is a wall-to-wall agreement with the fact that the tone and words chosen for this apology were above and beyond what normal clarifications or fixing of a report would have read. In Israel the feeling is that the hands of tycoons like Edelson, Dankner, Verthaim and others, control the information here in Israel which effects our lives and our awareness in the very harsh way.
Perhaps Edelson was right to ask for an apology, but this apology had a sense of money-dictatorship. Dear friends, our struggle here in Israel for a true democracy is at its peak, because of things like that.
I was in tears to see this broadcast, for it was historical- finally someone puts the truth on the table and doesn’t give up to this money-mind terrorism. Yes, that’s exactly what this is!
Kibbutznik
Well said Shir Alony and dont you give up , what you and your friends have done has renewed my hope and faith in this country .
Philos
Not to be a wet blank Shir Alony but the “free” press has never exactly been free in the sense that it is free to report what it likes. It is free in the sense that air is free but it is not liberated or emancipated; it is constrained within the framework of the business and election cycle. That’s why a degenerate pedophile from somewhere will get pages and minutes more coverage than say an environmentalist trying to save a nice bit of land somewhere. The news isn’t really there to inform but more like subdue. In fact it is considered a form of entertainment by its producers and this can be seen in the huge investment in crappy music, effects and totally sentimental programs on horsesh*t.
Chanel 10 in particular is guilty of this: cue sad music, “Shir just discovered that everything he once knew about the free press in a liberal capitalist democracy are all lies” – cue even sadder music, cut to journalist looking concerned, cut back to Shir – “How will he deal with this traumatic revelation? That is a question we’re not going to answer and instead leave you with a sense of foreboding tread.” Cut sad must, cue anchor with lame witticism, cut to article about ginger children particularly liking Strauss Cottage cheese over Danoe
Sylvia
Henry what I am saying is that they had to resign for two unrelated reasons:
1- It is clear that there was violation of freedom of the press due to the fact that the board and the management interfered by not only imposing an apology, but by dictating its wording and intonation. And in view of the violation of that principle of non-interference, they were justified to resign.
2- It is also clear beyond the slightest doubt that the report was malicious and its purpose was to smear an important and respected international businessman, leaving out or suppressing facts that were public knowledge so as to depict him as a dishonest thug, who made his fortune by fraudulent means, which could prove costly to the target. And therefore those responsible for the program would have had to issue the apology themselves as dictated by their victim and thereby diminish their own credibility and affect his own career, or resign. They chose the latter.
.
Unethical journalism is also a threat to democracy. In Israel journalists of major newspapers and electronic media are very powerful. Some become arrogant thanks to their uncritical fans and end up thinking they’re above the rules. Repeated lawsuits can result in impoverished newspapers who then have to reduce the quality and the quantity of news, and sell themselves just to stay above water. Unethical
Sylvia
Henry this by no stretch of the imagination comparable to the dispute between Israel and Turkey – except for the word apology.
If I were to compare this case to anything, it would be to the British case of News of the World where the “journalists” engaged in phone-hacking of unsuspecting victims. In this case, Rupert Murdoch closed the paper and dismissed everyone. And as far as I know those responsible did issue apologies.
This is an exemple of how unethical journalism can bring down a news outfit. This was prevented in this case of Israel channel 10 by the management violating the rule of non-interference in reporting.
Shir alony
Philos, just for the record… I’m a girl, not a guy
Sylvia, as a student of communication, I’ve learned the term “reality formation”, the theory that judges media by formalistic methods and sees what the messages include beyond what the regular viewer can see. Even though this theory suggests as you claim that the viewer gets a depicted reality from the news, suggesting that the regular viewer would have automatically assume that Edelson is the source of all evil just by watching a normal news report+interviews, is to think lowley of the viwer’s critical awareness of the news. I don’t think the channle and the reporters have crossed any normal and ethical news-making rules. There is also a room for mistakes and suggesting that the reportes wished only to slander Edelson is not a balanced argument, for the most of that show was really OK with him, he just didn’t like two things they said.
To ask for those to things to be corrected, is also OK and legitimate, legal and fair.
BUT- to DEMAND an apology of 1:30 minutes, claiming the reopters did a horrible job, didn’t check the facts, and forcing the channle to do so just because the channle might shut down over money problems- that, my dear, is WRONG, undemocratic, this is a dictatorship of money.
I suposse that in your mind Edelson is one hell of a guy, but in my mind and my reality this guy holds a serious threat to free objective journalism in Israel. He already did a lot to slander us, protesters for normal prices, through his & Bibi’s newspaper “Israel Today”. Reading that paper makes me feel like this is a nowadays version of the communist “Pravda”. The First Channel, is controled by Bibi because he’s the minister in charge of this channle and you can already tell how he calles up the desk for some changes…
One last thing: I saw a report that one of Bibi’s parlamentar assitats is about to call “The First Channle”->”Israel is one” which is has a political tone to it in Hebrew like a party’s name, and this desicion also includes “The Educational Channle” for kids. Just so you know what’s going on.
weinstein henry
@ Sylvia
Thanks to explain you meant non-interference by the board and management of Channel 10.
I haven’t a clue about the program itself, so I just can say it seems very strange to me that the editorial staff let broadcast an outrageous program.
The point for me was the control of media by tycoons and its consequences. I say this because I doubt the way the business protagonists in this affair agreed to deal between them was the right ethical thing to do. Looks more like a scene in a Martin Scorcese movie.
And, by the way, Rupert Murdoch didn’t convince me in his recent impersonation of Pontius Pilatus.
I think there should be an independent authority to ensure the respect of ethics in media.
Sylvia
Shir
I would have said the same thing had it been George Soros, with no connection to Bibi.
I recognize that both the right of freedom of the press and basic human rights have been violated. There is no winner in this story. There are only losers, the Israeli viewers.
Shoded Yam
“…This is an exemple of how unethical journalism can bring down a news outfit.”
Evidently, these guys over at 10 must’ve hit pretty close to the mark, in order to elicit this level of histrionics from a guy who already controls a large portion of the Israeli Media. One would think a free newspaper read by 40% of the Israeli population, would be a sufficient counter-weight to any bad publicity, but even shelly understands that you can put lipstick on a pig, but at the end of the day, its still a pig. And thats when the lawyers enter the room.
.
Bullshit. This had nothing to do with journalism, unethical or otherwise. “The News of the World” incident reflects the greed and amorality of its owner, actualized by his employess.
.
“…It is also clear beyond the slightest doubt that the report was malicious and its purpose was to smear an important and respected international businessman, leaving out or suppressing facts that were public knowledge so as to depict him as a dishonest thug, who made his fortune by fraudulent means”
.
No. As a matter of fact, its not clear at all. Certainly the wikipedia entry for shelly contains a certain level of ambiguity while it descibes adelson’s business practices, leaving one with the distinct impression that Shelly’s shit is not a pure as the undriven snow.
.
Re. “…suppressing facts that were public knowledge so as to depict him as a dishonest thug, who made his fortune by fraudulent means.” is concerned;
.
While it might be true that the mob no longer controls gambling in Las Vegas, Reno, etc., the same cannot be said of the food and drink concessions, towels and linen service, waste disposal, and other services connected to the gambling industry. And while it might be true that shelly himself is not a thug (at least not in the traditional sense), he certainly travels in those circles when the demands of business necessitate, which is to say, most of the time. So to catagorize shelly adelson as something distinct from the sea of feces he swims in, would be akin to plucking pepper grains from gnat shit.
SIREN
Shir Alony- even if you don’t like them, at least get their names right? *A*delson.
The tycoons make great whipping boys for the activism-du-jour but without without Adelson indeed there’d be no “Bibiton” and no media “slants” but there’d also probably be no Yad Vashem and all the other worthy causes he supports. Is that what you and your fellow protestors aspire to?
For the record, that doesn’t change the fact that Guy Zohar absolutely did the right thing in this situation and is to be applauded.
Shoded Yam
“…but there’d also probably be no Yad Vashem and all the other worthy causes he supports”
.
Thats absurd. There was a Yad Vashem before Adelson and there’ll be one after he’s gone. Believe me. He’s not the only rich jew in the world with a holocaust obsession. In any case, what with the gov’t spending between 2-3 billion shekels annually in the territories and pie-in-the-sky promises to everyone else concerning everything from free education to subsidized refexology treatments, I’m sure Israel will manage, with or without adelson’s dime.
Philos
Ah, my apologies madam
Sam
So… the reporter failed to research properly and the editors failed to fact check properly, but the man who was defamed is to blame? That’s wrongheaded.
The journalists deserved to be fired. Lauder’s intervention saved the channel a very costly lawsuit. Zohar and the rest of the crew acted like babies.
Sylvia
“Bullshit. This had nothing to do with journalism, unethical or otherwise.”
.
So you don’t even live in Israel but you’re going to tell us to resign lourselves to a deceiving media. Is that it? Well, it may be OK in your neck of the woods but we’re not ready to take that kind of abuse anymore. Journalists are paid to inform, and inform they should. That implies research. Whoever doesn’t have the time or the inclination to deliver the goods should go into advertising where lying is a virtue.
Shoded Yam
So you don’t even live in Israel but you’re going to tell us to resign lourselves to a deceiving media.”
.
Thats right. I don’t live in Israel. But I did live there for many years. Long eneough to have become a citizen. Long enough to have served 3 years as a combat soldier in the Nachal Brigade, long enough to have married an Israeli and long enough to have fathered an Israeli son. So tough shit. Now you (and every other shtetl dweller) will listen to every goddamm word I have to say whether you like it or not. And btw. The media hasn’t decieved you. You decieved yourself so drop the melo-drama sweetheart. You’re pissed off, because a few people decided not to validate your stupidity. Period, end of story.
Shoded Yam
“…Journalists are paid to inform, and inform they should. That implies research”
Shelly’s casino deal and how it was arrived at is one of the worst kept secrets in Israel.
.
One other thing. The journalists did inform. The journalists did do reasearch. Come off it. How difficult could that’ve been? We’re talking about a country with more gum-flapping yenta’s than you can shake a stick at. If you blow a wet fart in Tel Aviv, they’re talking about in Jerusalem a half-an-hour later
Shoded Yam
“…So… the reporter failed to research properly and the editors failed to fact check properly”
.
Again, Bullshit. The reporters did do their research. Apparently, the crime that was committed here was not checking with ron & shelly before airing their dirty laundry on national televison. I mean, its one thing for the empereor not to wear any clothes. It’s entirely another if the only thing he’s wearing is a pair of soiled, shit-stained underwear.
Sonja
Amusing, will attract a sizable crowd of viewers. And what is the real importance of this? There is none.