With uncertainty surrounding another Iran war and the future of Gaza, it’s not surprising that one of the most significant crises in Israel’s history – the future of freedom of the press – is falling between the cracks among the public at large. It definitely should not.

I care deeply about media trends and follow them closely. This is only natural; after all, I was involved in countless spokesperson activities for Israel during my 40 years as a civil servant. As if to prepare for my eventual career, I followed a strict newspaper-reading regimen beginning in the 4th grade, acquired a university degree in journalism and worked as a reporter.

If my background has taught me anything, it is that Israel’s current media crisis points to a critical weakness of our society: the lack of a culture of consensus regarding freedom of the press. If we fail to quickly rectify this at the deepest possible level, we doom ourselves to worsening domestic unrest.

Growing up in the US, the sanctity of freedom of speech and of the press – as anchored in the First Amendment of the Constitution – was drilled into my head from an early age. Compare that with the experiences of my Israel-raised family: little or no mention of these in the school system.

The fact of the matter is that Israeli law doesn’t explicitly ensure these freedoms.

Our Declaration of Independence, considered the moral compass in a country without a formal constitution – and as such is leaned upon by the Supreme Court in its decisions – only guarantees freedom of conscience. The Knesset (parliament)-adopted “Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty” also doesn’t make specific mention of freedom of speech and/or the press, albeit the Supreme Court has interpreted it as the legislative basis for such rights.

I don’t possess the tools to decipher the historical reasons for all this. Having said that, I will mention here that David Ben-Gurion – responsible for much of how Israel developed, the good and the bad – mostly considered the media a nuisance and maintained a clear preference for journalism that towed his party’s line.

Not so his legendary political rival, Menachem Begin. Known to quote even left-leaning media to make a point, he considered a broad and strongly protected right to freedom of speech absolutely necessary to the existence of genuine democracy.

Begin’s view was reflected in comments made recently by retired Supreme Court Justice Hanan Melcer, currently head of the Union of Journalists in Israel (UJI), at the organization’s “emergency” conference in December. Why does the UJI consider the current state of the Israel media an “emergency”?

Nothing occurs in a vacuum, certainly not in this country. Every Israeli interested in the freedom of the press issue has for the past year been monitoring advancement of the proposed Broadcast Bill, which in November passed its first parliamentary reading (out of three required by law).

At its most basic level, the proposal would close the country’s two media regulatory bodies. These would be replaced by one council of seven members, four of whom would be chosen by the communications minister.

Israel’s Attorney General has described the proposal as interference that endangers a free press. A recent publication by The Israel Democracy Institute attaches importance to media market reform but warns that the current proposal in effect cancels mechanisms ensuring the quality of journalistic content.

Alongside this controversy, another has been heating up: the government’s decision two months ago to close Army Radio. After the Attorney General coined this an attempt to silence a central media outlet, the Supreme Court issued a conditional injunction – in effect suspending the decision.

Then there is the growing possibility that a significant percentage of shares in local Channel 13 will soon move to a businessman who already controls a local cable network and a rival channel. Critics of the move fear mass dismissals, regulatory breaches, harm to independent news coverage and preferential treatment based on political allegiances.

The crisis trail doesn’t end there. There is growing talk about plans, yet to be acted upon, to drastically cut government funding of documentary films – a kind of extension of the press, in my mind – all the way down to 10 percent.

This tug-of-war surrounding the media’s future is not unique to Israel, of course. Perhaps its eventual outcome will be less impactful than feared by critics, in an age when news consumption is increasingly digital and broad.

Perhaps – but better not to leave our future to fate. We Israelis, supported by friends abroad who care about the future of freedom of the press, should already be pushing hard to quickly reach a culture of consensus – preferably one that puts a stop to the disparaging of mainstream news outlets based on political inclinations.

The alternative is unthinkable – especially in an election year.

© The Times of Israel (Blogs)