On the eve of the 1973 war, a senior reporter received news that a war would break out at the end of the week. He wrote about this a few years ago, that he regrets from the bottom of his heart that the security establishment managed to prevent him from publishing with security arguments, and he regrets that he agreed and did not publish. But it must be said that even if he had published the news, it is doubtful whether it would have motivated the Golda Meir government to act, and the military intelligence to free itself from its fundamental views, since the security and political establishments in Israel are influenced by the public's position and not by the positions of individual journalists; And the public's position in journalistic contexts is expressed in the newspaper's editorial position, that is, the position of the entire media body, called for this elusive production here – journalistic truth. It is true that this is still the position of a faction of the public, i.e. the position of the readers of the specific newspaper, or the position of many of the readers of the specific newspaper, but in this case it will become clear, according to our assessment, that the positions of the media as a closed journalistic unit, are distilled, and devoid of background noise, and that positions of outrage that arise from social processes are separated from them and cleaned; To this we will have to add the assessment of the power of the specific media, wherever it is, whose power in many cases crosses sectors, factions and communities.

In other words, if the newspaper where the said reporter worked had stated as the editorial position, i.e. as the position of the newspaper, that war would break out on Shabbat, there is a chance that the Israeli government would have woken up from its slumber even before that Shabbat evening, when nervous Susita Carmel cars began to cut through the silent roads of Yom Kippur ; Because the public was then shocked, that such an important and well-established institution as the senior reporter's newspaper, states that this is the truth, and that Golda and her friends do not notice it. This is the real chain of influence in Israel: the public – the media – the institutions. (Political-cultural-journalistic-economic-legal). And the thing described above is about journalistic truth. This is not a universal truth, but until the appearance of the Messiah in Israel, one can be satisfied with acceptable types of public truth, for example legal, journalistic, academic truth, etc.

But in Israel, the newspaper editors do not determine the editorial board's position on crucial issues, i.e. the media's position, and there is no journalistic truth in Israel, or the newspaper's decisive position (sometimes newspapers do this implicitly, or from a not entirely conscious cultural view); And the multitude of positions that arise from the endless reports, in the endless media, their diversity, the spirit of the storm in which they are written, and the sense of rebellion that many journalists feel when they write them, and which runs through the text, deceives us all into thinking that the journalistic reality is the opposite of what is claimed here, that is, that it is a free and pluralistic dynamic press – and not in a toy press that ignores itself in front of the powerful establishments and that does not dare to express a sharp systemic position on crucial issues.

And so, when the Israeli press largely evades its duty (in our humble opinion) to determine journalistic truth since the dawn of our independence, the media in Israel did not warn in a systemic sense about the war that almost overwhelmed us on Yom Kippur.

And this is exactly how the Israeli media also adopted the view of the broken Israeli cultural establishment and never alerted to the Ashkenazi racial attack against the East, the end of which is the rise to the top of Israeli politics of Ben Gvir and Smotrich, as a result of a pre-biased Eastern vote, a vote of revenge and rage (which The Mizrahi and Mizrahim will probably never admit it, and yet it is a systemic journalistic task to put this truth in its place.) Instead of naming this journalistic truth, the newspapers described it, and still sometimes describe it, in stupid Ashkenazi terminology such as disenfranchised, sectarian demon, and other idioms that become the attacked as ridiculous, although in this case not as a journalistic truth, i.e., as an editorial position, but as a prevailing culture.

And the political event that raised Smotrich and Ben Gvir, and which stems from a journalistic truth that was never told, now threatens the democratic regime in Israel, and therefore it threatens Israel. And yet there is no Israeli media that presents this journalistic truth as the position of the board of editors. as the newspaper's position. as the position of the media. The danger to Israel from Smotrich and Ben Gvir worsens the closer they are to receiving the tools promised to them in the coalition agreements, but no clear voice of the media is heard. With the exception, of course, of the many conflicting and stormy voices coming from the thousands of keyboards of senior journalists, as important as they may be, but almost unimportant in the sense of journalistic truth. And the media themselves? They were already running forward to the next meaningless many voices. Without leaving in the arena a clear and distilled journalistic truth about what is happening right now in front of our eyes. And wherever it says newspapers and newspaper systems, this also means radio, television and network, of course.