The Ministerial Committee on Legislation greenlit on Sunday a bill proposal to significantly reform government regulations on Israel’s media market, despite reservations by the Attorney General that it would lead to increased political meddling.
The bill, whose main backer is Communications Minister Shlomo Karhi (Likud) now heads to the Knesset plenum to begin its legislative process, which will likely take months.
The bill completely overhauls regulatory aspects of Israel’s media market. Its stated goal includes updating regulations so that they match today’s media market, creating lower prices for consumers, increasing the variety and plurality of content, increasing competition, and increasing free sports broadcasts.
The bill’s centerpiece is the dismantling of the current regulatory bodies – the Second Authority for Television and Radio and the Cable and Satellite Broadcasting Council – and replacing them with a new council that will conduct centralized oversight of all public media platforms, including satellite and cable TV, radio, internet-based platforms such as streaming services, and more. The formation of such an authority is in tune with recommendations of parliamentary and professional committees from the past decade.
The bill’s more controversial aspects are changes to the news market. The proposal cancels two central regulatory aspects intended to ensure the independence of news providers from both political and commercial influences. The first is the requirement that news providers must be a separate legal entity from the commercial TV channels that broadcast them. This applies mainly to the news on Channels 12 and 13, which are currently run independently of the channels’ other broadcasts.
The second is the prohibition on what is known as “cross ownerships,” or the ownership of two separate types of media. For example, the owner of a television channel may not own a newspaper, and vice versa. The reason for this is to prevent one commercial entity from gaining too much control of the media market across platforms.
Karhi has argued that both measures unnecessarily burdened the market and distanced potential investors. However, critics have argued that the move will lead to the opposite of the bill’s purpose – rather than increase competition, the removal of the above regulatory barriers could lead to increased meddling in news broadcasts by both commercial and political interests, as well as increased concentration of cross-platform media outlets in the hands of a few owners.
In addition to these arguments, Deputy Attorney-General for Economic Law, Meir Levin, added in a detailed opinion on the proposed reforms that the law should be viewed in the context of a series of private bills by Likud MKs at Karhi’s behest, targeting Israel’s Public Broadcasting Corporation (known as KAN) as well as other bastions of independent media.
According to Levin, whose opinion was approved by Attorney-General Gali Baharav-Miara, hundreds of hours had been invested in ironing out legal issues with the bill, but the process had not ended. The current bill did not include sufficient guarantees to ensure that media outlets remain independent of political influences and maintain their ability to criticize the government, Levin wrote.
The deputy attorney general pointed to legal problems with other parts of the bill, such as a provision that would give the new regulatory body influence over media rating measurement methods. The ratings, which are currently measured by an independent committee, are used to set advertisement prices, and as such the measurement methods should be set in negotiations between advertisers and owners. Government intervention was unjustified, and in this case were problematic since politicians could attempt to influence rating measurement methods in order to gain greater control of broadcasts, Levin opined.
He concluded that the bill could not continue in its current format, since “there exists a strong fear that free media in Israel could be severely damaged.” However, the ministerial committee chose to proceed regardless.
Karhi accused Baharav-Miara in response letter to Levin's opinion
Karhi accused Baharav-Miara in a letter in response to Levin’s opinion of being a “political player” and a “defender of monopoly rule” rather than of democracy. He portrayed himself as someone who was “working for the public” while accusing her of working for the elites.”
A spokesperson for Karhi confirmed that the reason he decided to move forward with the bill even though professional procedures were still ongoing was so that the bill could pass its first reading by the end of the Knesset’s summer session in late July.
The Israel Bar Association expressed its own concerns on the bill in a letter on Sunday, noting that free press is a cornerstone of any democracy, and that, in Israel, it is cemented in law in the form of Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty.
It added that it views the free press as the watchdog of democracy, and that there is legal precedent establishing its importance.
“The free press allows for a constant flow of information and opinions that are varied in character. It serves as a funnel that allows citizens to take part in the democratic process,” wrote the IBA.
The press has the ability to criticize the government and people who were granted power to serve by the public, as well as expose any indecencies and demand transparency. It also dictates public discourse and protects civilian rights, including but not limited to the ability to provide citizens with enough information to make informed decisions, the IBA wrote.
The proposed reforms would “harm the entire public, regardless of political affiliation,” wrote the IBA, adding that they would endanger the freedom of the press and the independence of broadcast groups.
The IBA pointed to four main dangers it sees in the proposal: the politicization of news organizations; a massive hit to journalistic pluralism; the erasure of criticism; and a prevention of complete knowledge from the public.
The association recommended freezing the legislation as it is being formulated right now, establishing a Basic Law protecting free press, and to appoint a public committee that would examine the state of public broadcasts in Israel.
The Movement for Quality Government in Israel (MQG) in Israel also weighed in. Adv. Ori Hess, head of MQG’s economic division, argued in a statement that the bill was a “carbon copy of the Hungarian model for taking control of the media: establishing a political regulator under the control of the minister, abolishing the structural distinction between news organizations and channel owners, and granting powers to impose heavy fines on media organizations.”
“The proposed law will allow the government and proprietors to have full control over the broadcast media in Israel. This is another step in the attack on the gatekeepers – after the ouster of the head of the Shin Bet and the attempt to change the composition of the judicial appointments committee. Now they are trying to silence the media. We will use all the means at our disposal to prevent the Israeli media from becoming a propaganda arm of the regime," Hess said.
