Netanyahu Offered Bribe To Haaretz Publisher To Keep Up Antagonistic Coverage

It aimed at depicting his political rivals as deranged, obsessed, and dangerous, given the affinity between them and Haaretz.

Tel Aviv, February 22 – New revelations continued to rock Israel’s political scene today as allegations emerged that the embattled prime minister had proposed an illegal payment and other possible benefits to the publisher of a prominent newspaper known for its opposition to his policies, in exchange for maintaining its editorial line, opposition that has served to cement the premier’s political position among voters.

Police announced this morning (Thursday) they are investigating reports that Binyamin Netanyahu ordered a subordinate to contact Haaretz publisher Amos Schocken with an offer to grease certain regulatory wheels in the paper’s favor and to contribute to the coffers of the publication, whose share of the print news market in recent years has shrunk below four percent. No immediate clarification was available on whether Schocken accepted the offer.

The episode marks another potential bombshell in an ongoing series of scandals and corruption allegations against Netanyahu, which have come to a head in the last week and thrown the political picture into upheaval. Police recommended indictment on two of the many open cases, and new allegations arose Tuesday after a High Court justice disclosed the offer of a prestigious position by an Netanyahu confidant in late 2015 in exchange for declining to pursue a case against the prime minister’s wife Sara. It remained unclear Thursday why the judge and a colleague aware of the offer waited until now to reveal the incident.

Netanyahu’s alleged collusion with a publisher has precedent in previous charges that the premier attempted to arrange positive coverage by the daily Yediot Aharonot. Yediot appears not to have altered its antagonism toward the prime minister as a result of the alleged offer. In the case of Haaretz, however, the object of the alleged offer would be to maintain or augment the oppositional tone of the paper’s analysis, editing, and opinion toward Netanyahu, with the strategic aim of depicting his political rivals as deranged, obsessed, and dangerous, given the affinity between them and Haaretz.

Experts predicted difficulty in establishing whether Schocken accepted or implemented the arrangement. “It’s pretty hard to tell,” admitted legal expert Moshe Negbi. “Could they even get more antagonistic? In any case, even aside from the challenges in proving the offer occurred, it would be strange to say it falls under the legal definition of bribery, since Bibi appears to have asked for the opposite of a quid pro quo. I can see his opposition making a big deal out of it, which will make them look ridiculous, and I guess maybe that was the point.”

Please support our work through Patreon.