Meretz TV Demands Government Funding For Sake Of Independent Press

“The independence of Israeli journalism rests on it receiving funding from the entity from which it is trying to assert its independence,” explained Gilon.

Tel Aviv, August 1 – Questions surrounding the establishment of a new government-owned corporation to manage public broadcasting continued to swirl today as the left-wing party Meretz said it would establish its own television channel that would require, in the interest of a robust press independent of the government, significant government funding.

Meretz Chairwoman MK Zehava Gal-On convened a press conference at the party’s headquarters this morning to discuss the initiative. Gal-On and like-minded legislators from the party such as MKs Ilan Gilon and Tamar Zandberg told reporters that for the sake of journalism that enjoys true editorial freedom without the psychological constraints of being dependent on the government for survival, the new government-owned corporate entity must be required to underwrite Meretz TV.

“Freedom of the press depends on this measure,” asserted Gal-On. “How can anyone credibly claim Israel enjoys freedom of the press when our ideas are relegated to the margins, in keeping with our electoral numbers and market demand, instead of being forced into the minds of news consumers regardless of their express interests?” She contrasted the free press that would prevail if Meretz TV were funded with the situation that obtains in the absence of such a government-funded initiative, and in which outfits such as Israel HaYom offer uncritical support to Meretz’s ideological opponents without being dependent on government funding.

“The independence of Israeli journalism rests on it receiving funding from the entity from which it is trying to assert its independence,” explained Gilon. “It sounds complex, but that’s only because you’re not part of the leftist elite, and therefore lack the intelligence to comprehend how it works.”

Essentially, added Zandberg, journalists can only be truly independent if they need not worry about such trivialities as what the people consider important in their news. “Democracy is all well and good in voting  – well, provided the Left wins, of course – but it’s a disaster if the masses have their say in what angle and type of news they want to receive,” she lamented. “If the press cannot wean itself of dependence on market forces and the quality of its journalistic output as reflected in market demand, in favor of dependence on the government from which it might or might not want to be independent, then how can our views – which are manifestly the only correct ones, and if you disagree you’re an unvarnished fascist – ever be streamed into every home and office whether people want it or not?” She shuddered as she contemplated such a prospect.