The media is keeping mum
Photo: Hagai Aharon
The media's dilemma
Israeli journalists clash between national loyalty and duty to report
The media have always made a living off mystery. When no official information is available, the media rejoices. This is also the case in wake of the reports pertaining to the Air Force activity in Syria.
In the absence of an official Israeli statement or claim of responsibility, the stumped public was bombarded by a plethora of foreign media reports. A story that could have been summarized into one news item was stretched over several high-rating days.
Imagination is working overtime to fill in the missing pieces. As was the case with past security affairs, this time too we saw the emergence of a process of reading between the lines, with the assistance of code-words familiar to those in the know.
Now, as then, public discourse has been limited to the very few who are familiar with the secretive affairs. The discourse is managed through codes and a language that is veiled to the general public, most of which plays the role of extras wholly unfamiliar with the details of the incident.
If and when the celebrations and euphoria subside, we would be able to consider at least two main lessons. First, in the current media reality, which includes diverse media outlets competing fiercely with each other, it is more difficult yet still possible and worthwhile to block information and resort to general ambiguity.
As several leaders started realizing in recent election campaigns, some media exposure can be damaging. On the contrary, silence and the lack of exposure are a wise move. Such insight can jeopardize an entire public relations industry premised on the working assumption that "the more media exposure, the better."
Secondly, as opposed to folkloristic images disseminated among the general public, media outlets have been clashing with and harassing the government to a lesser extent than both sides are attempting to present. Usually, both editors and correspondents, and particularly military correspondents, "gather around the flag." This time too, Israeli media outlets are debating between national loyalty and the duty to report to the public.
Foreign media no braver than Israeli counterparts
As on previous occasions, Israeli media outlets resolved the dilemma in a way that proved itself in the past: Editors quote foreign sources that publish information received partly from Israeli reporters. This time too, a safe way to circumvent censorship is to secretly hand over information to foreign correspondents and then quote what they published.
For this reason, foreign media outlets may be scoring some points, for a short while. After all, foreign media are not braver than their Israeli counterparts. It all depends on the subject. It is easier to be brave and publish sensitive information about another country.
While American newspapers seemingly conduct themselves boldly and provide details regarding the Air Force's operation in Syria, they are just as cautious and disciplined when it comes to affairs involving the United States. For example, see their conduct during the First and Second Gulf Wars.
Even though our leaders have demonstrated, for the time being, a sense of maturity and overcame their media urges, the Air Force activity in Syria may help PR experts or attorneys make a living in the future. If and when this affair is revealed to be a success, PR experts will engage in battles over the question of who made the decision and who should get the credit. Yet if the operation is proven to be a failure, attorneys will be engaging in fierce battles before a commission of inquiry looking to identify the guilty parties.
Professor Caspi chairs the Department of Communication Studies and heads the Burda Center for Innovative Communications at Ben Gurion University
