Israeli Media Criticized for Dismissing Likud Voters as "Tribal"
Translated & summarized from Makor Rishon by baba
An opinion piece criticizes Israeli media, exemplified by Channel 12's Danny Kushmaro, for a condescending bias against Likud voters, particularly those in the periphery. The author argues that media outlets dismiss voters' complex motivations as "tribal," ignoring rational security concerns and contributing to a blind spot in reporting. This bias, the piece suggests, allows explicitly pro-Likud channels to gain viewership by addressing the segment of the population ignored by mainstream media.
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- Israeli media, particularly Channel 12, is criticized for a condescending bias against Likud voters.
- Reporter Danny Kushmaro is singled out for dismissing voters' choices as "tribal" after the October 7th attack.
- The article argues media ignores rational security concerns and complex motivations of Likud voters.
- This bias creates a blind spot in reporting, benefiting explicitly pro-Likud media channels.
- The criticism extends to some within the Religious Zionist community for ignoring Likud voters.
An opinion piece criticizes Israeli media, particularly Channel 12 reporter Danny Kushmaro, for what the author describes as a consistent bias and condescending attitude towards voters of the Likud party and those living in the country's periphery.
The article highlights a recurring phenomenon where journalists from central Israel venture out to cover voters in southern or northern towns, often framing their choices as stemming from ignorance or blind loyalty rather than rational thought. This election cycle, the author argues, saw an extreme manifestation of this bias in a monologue by Kushmaro.
Kushmaro, discussing the results from the town of Ofakim, where many residents bravely fought terrorists on October 7th, expressed surprise that 65% of the residents voted for the "Netanyahu bloc," which he held responsible for the disaster. He extended this criticism to Sderot, Netivot, and Kiryat Shmona, labeling the voting patterns as "tribal" and suggesting that voters from the periphery are primarily traditional and follow their "tribe" rather than making informed decisions.
The author contends that this perspective ignores the complex reasons why people vote for Likud, citing explanations from residents of the north and Gaza envelope who believe Netanyahu is the best leader to manage security and war. The piece argues that media outlets, instead of understanding and reporting on these viewpoints, dismiss them as mere tribalism, contributing to a blind spot that benefits explicitly pro-Likud channels like Channel 14.
Furthermore, the article suggests that this dismissive attitude is not limited to the media but is also present within parts of the Religious Zionist community, which tends to engage more with the left than with Likud voters. The author concludes by stating that while she personally disagrees with Netanyahu's continued leadership after the October 7th attack, the media and other groups should not dismiss the rationales of the over a million people who voted for Likud.