Israel is at war. How should its media cover the news?

There is an unwritten rule that journalists should not address their audience.

This of course includes the language we use in articles. We can’t say “you” in an article when addressing our readers. But it also means responding to the comments we inevitably and constantly receive.

This article violates this great principle. I will respond to the most visible criticism Jerusalem Lent received in the last few weeks.

It’s quite simple: We receive a lot of messages from readers who are disappointed that we, as a magazine, are willing to publish criticism of our government in times like these.

MEMBERS of Benjamin Netanyahu’s coalition applaud his speech in the Knesset yesterday. Will they continue to give him a Standing O? (source: MARC ISRAEL SELLEM/THE JERUSALEM POST)

These same commentators argue that now more than ever, Israel must take a united stand in the face of the evil of terrorists like Hamas and Hezbollah, as well as anti-Semites around the world.

There is some merit to this criticism, but not much, for the simple reason that Israel is not united. It has not been for some time, but especially not now.

The primary role of journalism is to express the truth as purely as possible and without subjectivity: without filters, without agendas. The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

So who would we be as a newspaper if we did not report the simple fact that before the war the people of this country were fragmenting into separate factions and that this situation has not changed over the past 11 months?

This society has long been divided, and the absurd judicial reforms proposed by the right-wing government currently in power have only highlighted and deepened this.

Even then, people were divided. According to an August 2023 Israel Democracy Institute poll, while 68% of voters preferred some kind of compromise on judicial reform, 72% of coalition voters supported the reform, and 91% of opposition voters opposed it.

Stay up to date with the latest news!

And then the unimaginable happened: October 7th.

Now the public is saying that Israel must be a united front. But how can that be when millions of people across the country believe in one thing and the government and its supporters believe in something completely different?

This is how this war ends: with an agreement or with action by the IDF.

What kind of publication would advertise only one side without the other? Society needs to be fairly represented in the media, and both groups exist – although one is much more publicly and by the masses than the other.

BUT THEN arguments arise that we are only showing one side and not the other.

Indeed, we have been widely reporting on the protests that have raged across Israel since Sunday. We learned this week from the IDF that the bodies of six hostages have been tragically discovered, murdered by Hamas terrorists just days before they were found.

The country has collapsed.

Hundreds of thousands of Israelis took to the streets of Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, Ber-Sheba, Haifa, Ra’anana and other cities to scream at the top of their voices in anger and suffering.

According to the Hostages and Missing Families Forum, some 300,000 people gathered in Tel Aviv on Sunday for a mass protest demanding an immediate agreement on the hostages before Hamas kills more.

So where would we be as a publication – what ethical line would we draw – if we refused, based on the distorted premise of promoting unity, of sharing the news?

Let’s say we’re trying to send a message to our enemies. Which would be better: sending an image of unity behind a government that most of the world considers evil, or showing that this country has a free press and independent journalism that can openly criticize and debate government actions? Uncritical, unified support for a government in times of crisis can lead to a lack of accountability and an inability to learn from mistakes.

Not to mention that we would be inaccurate. The public has a right to know the truth. Neglecting issues or presenting a monolithic pro-government narrative can undermine trust. Balanced reporting that examines multiple perspectives can help citizens make more informed judgments.

Fair enough, a delicate balance is needed in a national security crisis. But the benefits of a vibrant, free press outweigh the risks as long as the reporting is responsible, well-researched and seeks to strengthen national unity — and we strive to do that as best we can here at the Post — rather than sow division.

Ultimately, the role of independent media is to hold those in power accountable, not to be a government propaganda mouthpiece. I will stick to that, thank you very much.

The author is deputy editor of The Jerusalem Post.