Today, Judge Roital Baum dismissed Radio North's lawsuit against journalist Tali Liebman. Liebman is a journalist at Yediot Haifa, but the lawsuit was against a post she published on her private Facebook and not as part of her journalistic work. Tali Liebman was represented by lawyers Uri Shilo and Lior Detz.
Sends a salute to Haifa Municipality employees
The defamation claim, filed by Radio North, deals with a post that Liebman published regarding a special transmitter that Radio North broadcast on 14/05/20. The broadcaster was broadcasting a "salute to the municipality employees", who successfully dealt with the corona disease. During the broadcast, Liebman wrote on her private Facebook a criticism against the municipality, which allegedly led Radio North to broadcast a broadcast that glorifies the municipality's employees and the mayor Dr. Einat Kalish Rotem.
In the post, Liebman also criticizes the choice of the spokeswoman of the Haifa municipality for Radio North, because according to her it is not a radio whose broadcasts are allegedly consumed by the residents of the city. In the Liebman post, harsh criticism is also leveled at Eliran Tal, who is now the spokesperson of the municipality and in the past was a reporter for Channel 11 and Channel 20. Liebman wrote that the questions that the Radio North broadcaster asks the interviewees were allegedly written by Tal, who even when he was a reporter used to ask his interviewees easy questions.
According to Radio North, Tali Liebman's motive for publishing this post was her many years of work at Radio Haifa:
"According to the plaintiff, the publication quoted above constitutes defamation of her, as it was done with the aim of harming her, her profession and her status, this is apparently in an attempt to please the defendant's senders at Radio Haifa. The plaintiff adds that she was presented in it as someone who supposedly acted out of money pursuit while renouncing her principles The journalists, as someone who allegedly broadcast from a "licking" channel and acted under dictates dictated to her by the Haifa municipality (the identity of the interviewees and the questions they will ask)."
The plaintiff further claims that "quoting the words of the complainant, Mrs. Rina Ben Ayon, was done by the defendant in a fraudulent and malicious manner, and that the blunt writing style used by the defendant, including the graphic descriptions of her secretions, shows her lack of good faith in the publication."
In addition to that, according to the plaintiff, "the defendant did not contact her for a response before publication."
Silence claim
Liebman claimed through her lawyer, Lior Detz, that the object of the Post's criticism was the municipality of Haifa and not Radio North and that the lawsuit is a silence lawsuit, designed to prevent the expression of legitimate criticism of the municipality. Liebman tried to prove in court that between Radio North and the municipality there was allegedly an improper relationship of "give and take" in the framework of which both parties wanted to promote interests - Radio North allegedly wanted to increase its influence in Haifa while pushing Radio Haifa's feet, while the municipality was interested in a transmitter that would allegedly praise the mayor Dr. Einat Kalish Rotem.
"The seemingly cynical use of the memory of the IDF space"
According to the verdict, Radio North sent Liebman a letter before the lawsuit, in which he suggested that Liebman remove the post, publish an apology, and pay him 20,000 NIS to contribute to perpetuating the memory of the IDF veteran. Liebman rejected the offer and claimed that her post was not slanderous and published another post in which she wrote that what is most terrible in her eyes is the seemingly cynical use of the memory of the IDF veteran.
Radio North claimed in its lawsuit that this post is also defamation against it.
Both parties were asked to submit documents and clarifications to the court. Radio North claimed in its clarifications that it did not receive any financial consideration from the Haifa Municipality for the broadcast.
The main criticism is towards Kalish Rotem and the Haifa municipality
In her decision, Judge Baum stated that Liebman's criticism in the post is directed in general towards the Haifa municipality regarding the existence of the transmitter. Baum agreed with Liebman's claim that the criticism against Radio North is secondary and marginal to the main criticism against Kelish Rotem and the municipality. Baum added that she does not agree with Radio North, that those who read Liebman's post will think at the end of reading that Radio North is apparently not professional.
At the same time, the judge ruled that Liebman failed to prove that the municipality directly or indirectly paid Radio North for the complimentary broadcast.
"Expressing a legitimate opinion and not defamation"
Baum analyzes Liebman's post sentence by sentence and states that most of the sentences in the post are expressions of a legitimate opinion and not defamation. Moreover, she agrees with Liebman's defense that the criticism in the post is against the municipality and not against Radio North. Regarding the question of why Liebman did not ask for a response from Radio North, Liebman replied that she works with the Haifa Municipality and therefore contacted the holder of the education portfolio at the time, Rabbi Dovi Hayon, who replied to her that the broadcast was closed between Radio North and Dovarat, so he does not know what the agreement was between the two.
Expressing a legitimate opinion
In the post Liebman claims that it would have been fine if the municipality of Haifa had closed the broadcast with national radio, but it chose to broadcast on local radio. Baum states that within the framework of the right to freedom of expression in the country, Liebman was allowed to write the words and they are not defamation.
In conclusion, Baum states that Liebman's words are an expression of opinion, negative but permissible, and therefore the entire publication must be interpreted as an expression of opinion and criticism.
"The explained reader understands that this is the personal opinion of the defendant about the existence of the transmitter and that is how things are also referred to."
Silence lawsuits against journalists and media
It should be noted that many journalists have faced lawsuits against them over the years. In some cases, a journalist, who is doing an investigation against one or another body, is threatened by that body, that if he continues the investigation and publishes it, a libel suit will be filed against him. In a significant number of cases journalists fold or the media body they work for is not interested in backing them up. This means that the national and local media are elevated in their role to expose injustices because of silence claims.
This ruling will strengthen the freedom of expression of journalists and citizens against the PA.
A personal claim and not against the media body
Radio North's choice to sue Liebman over a Facebook post required it to deal with the lawsuit independently. Usually when a journalist is sued for what he published in one of his articles, the owner of the media organization he works for finances his legal representation. Once Radio North sued Liebman over a Facebook post, he apparently knew she would have to fund her own lawyer. Moreover, many people feel free when they write on social networks to criticize and express their opinion, as opposed to publishing a journalistic article, where it is common to receive responses from those who criticize him.
On social networks, people write their opinion and do not ask for a response from anyone. Radio North's lawsuit shows how careful a person needs to be, when he sits at home and writes a post on Facebook. You know where it starts, you don't know where it might end.
Can a post on Facebook cause damage to an established media organization?
The last question, which you should ask, is whether the post on Facebook has such a big impact that it might harm an acceptable and well-loved media body like Radio North. Liebman has thousands of friends and followers, but of course, only a small part of them were exposed to that post, which is the subject of the lawsuit. Can a post on Facebook really cause damage to a media outlet, which has been operating for years and has a high rating?
Liebman: "To express an opinion and criticize without fear"
Liebman told Hai Fe today that she was happy about the court's decision, which did justice and outlined a bright spot for each and every one of us to express an opinion and criticize without fear.
"I am sorry that a media outlet that should fight for the right to express an opinion and for freedom of expression, took the lawsuit, which I interpret as a lawsuit for silence."
Liebman's lawyer, Lior Detz, from the office of A. Shiloh Co., said today to Lahi Fe:
"I am happy that the court accepted our position and protected freedom of expression. At the same time, I am sorry that the court ruled that the loan of equipment from the municipal warehouses, purchased with public funds, given to a private radio station, is not a monetary consideration, not even an indirect consideration.
I am sorry that the court did not consider the fact that the spokesperson of the municipality, Mr. Eliran Tal, transferred the entire list of interviewees to the broadcast and from which the radio chose, as an act that the municipality actually determined the interviewees. Simple logic, which the court probably did not have.
It is a shame that the court did not allow us to question witnesses, who work in Haifa Municipality, in order to establish our claim of improper connection between Haifa Municipality and Radio North. Although the court made it difficult for us to conduct the trial, I am happy that it finally accepted our position and rejected the lawsuit.
Me, attorney Lior Datz and my partners attorney Uri Shilo from the office of A. Shiloh & Co., we will always be happy to assist in the fight for freedom of expression and against silence lawsuits and we will not be afraid to be partners in the fight for proper administration of the Haifa Municipality even if investigators send us details.
It is unfortunate that a media body, which is trusted to protect freedom of opinion and encourage criticism, chose to file a silence lawsuit against an active journalist, probably only because of "writers' envy". I am sure that in the future Radio North as a media outlet, will share our position regarding the right to criticize the authorities. The fact is that the radio also criticizes Klish, despite the alleged threats of the municipality's spokesperson and the attempt to silence the media. This is another contribution, probably, to the administration of our law.
Apparently the municipal public relations body should move to being financed and independent from the municipality, but to receive a budget from the state directly, until then captive by the municipality. This is not municipal public relations, this is lobbyists. No? .
Why was Liebman unable to prove a payment by the municipality to the radio that supports her?
Because this method of Klish was also Yahav's method. Payment is made through multiple advertising. Whoever likes me, I will post more with him.
This week's council meeting is interesting precisely for this matter, where the municipality's spokesperson demands to be allowed every 10 days to re-evaluate media outlets in which he will advertise. That is, if God forbid you uploaded an investigation or a review, then no no no no, your publication will be stopped. Yes, these were exactly the methods of the previous city speakers during Yahav's era: Tzachi Tarno (convicted of fraud and false registration in the parking lot king donation case but continued his work at the municipality, and this despite the fact that Yahav said in his answer to the city council about Tarno's employment during his trial that if he was convicted, he would not be employed further.. And also during the time of Ido Minkowski, under whom all the media already "went in line" and in return Yahav even appointed Yaakov Shaham to the museums, the owner of Radio Haifa Nishelis to the municipal theater and then also to a faction member. The give and take relationship between the municipality and the local media has never been more brazen, blunt and uglier than during the era of Idan Yahav , but Klish very quickly buried her hand in the budgets of the barges, which of course keep getting inflated, like taking a bone with a string and stimulating the dog, that's how the watchdog is stimulated and well tamed with the budgets of the municipality's barges.
And again it is worth noting that the municipality has no desire to distribute equally or according to exposure indicators. no and no. Eliran Tal's every wish was to divide according to "is he for us or is he against us" every 10 days in order to terrorize when everyone knows that the municipal advertising budget in the local media channels is one of the largest and sometimes decisive in the ability of a media body to exist. But the municipality wants flattering media, and if, for example, a very specific entity in the Shokan network receives sponsorship for the "Haifa Education Conference" for a million shekels, you can be sure that you will only hear words of praise for the management of education in Haifa, as it was during Yahav's era and the mess Yahav left in the field of educational buildings, closing schools, discrimination of Ethiopian students and more covered it with silk gloves because who wants to lose a fat budget at the Haifa Conference for Education, or the Carmel Tourism Conference, or hosting Lasha's beauty pageant (a sympathetic national media is also needed...)
Yes, it is absolutely clear that the municipality wants to silence criticism and is trying to achieve this with the help of millions of shekels for advertising. It's not that the other municipalities don't operate with such methods in Haifa, simply because of the relationship between Nischlis and Yahav, the microphone of Shelton Capital, including budgets of millions for Nischlis Jr.'s municipal events production company, Goldfish, which produced everything without a tender and without supervision... It has already become so visible and stinking that all of Haifa has smelled the The stench not only from Bezan but also from Dania and the Grand Canyon
Kudos to the brave journalist and the Bihamesh??
It is encouraging to see that there are other people, journalists and judges, who see the common good.
Shabbat Shalom