Netanyahu Interview on Kan 11 Criticized as Soft and Biased
Translated & summarized from Walla by baba
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's recent interview on Kan 11 with Ayala Hasson has been heavily criticized for its lack of journalistic rigor, resembling an election speech more than an interview. The author argues that Netanyahu is avoiding critical media outlets, opting for platforms that offer softer questioning. The interview failed to challenge Netanyahu on key issues like the October 7th attacks and his trial, leading to accusations that Kan 11 provided a platform for biased reporting, thereby damaging its credibility.
The story in 6 lines · by baba
- Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's interview on Kan 11 was criticized as a 35-minute election speech, not a real interview.
- The author claims Netanyahu is avoiding critical Israeli media, preferring friendly outlets and podcasts.
- Journalist Ayala Hasson is accused of failing to ask tough questions about October 7th and Netanyahu's trial.
- The interview on Kan 11 provided a veneer of legitimacy to what was essentially a one-sided presentation.
- The author suggests Netanyahu's interview environment was carefully curated to project a superior image.
- Kan 11's failure to provide a rigorous journalistic response is seen as damaging to the public broadcaster.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently gave a lengthy interview to journalist Ayala Hasson on Kan 11, which the author describes as more of a 35-minute election speech than a genuine interview. The article criticizes Netanyahu's recent trend of granting interviews only to outlets that he perceives as friendly, avoiding those with "journalistic values" like Kan 11, Channel 12, and Channel 13. Instead, he has appeared on podcasts hosted by self-proclaimed fans and on Channel 14, which the author likens to a platform for his supporters.
Hasson's interview is depicted as lacking tough questions, particularly concerning the October 7th attacks, a lawsuit filed against Netanyahu by the former Shin Bet chief, and his ongoing trial. The author notes that Hasson herself has a history of controversial interactions, including a past incident with former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit, which the article suggests may have influenced her approach.
Despite the interview not reaching the level of sycophancy seen on Channel 14, the author argues that Kan 11's platform lent an air of legitimacy to what was essentially a one-sided presentation. The article contrasts this with an interview given by Gadi Eisenkot, which was conducted under less favorable conditions and with more challenging questions, suggesting that Netanyahu's team carefully curated his interview environment to project an image of being in a "different league."
The author expresses disappointment that Kan 11, a public broadcasting corporation, did not provide a more rigorous journalistic response to Netanyahu's statements, arguing that this failure tarnishes the entire channel. The piece concludes by highlighting Netanyahu's self-perception, evidenced by his statement that his trial is the "most important in the country's history," overshadowing national suffering.
Mentioned
The same event, reported separately by each outlet. Open a few to compare what different newsrooms emphasize — and what they leave out.
Centre 2Right 1
Not the same event — other stories that share this one’s people, places, or theme: background, reactions, and follow-ups.
