Some in the Israeli media, legal and intelligence communities are trying to make Tikun Olam the blog that dare not speak its name inside Israel.
A bunch of nonsense has been published lately in Israeli media and blogs about the Yoav Even case and my breaking of the gag. But an article that just came out in The Marker, Haaretz’s business publication, really takes the cake. The reporters are shocked, I say shocked that when you insert Yoav Even’s name into a Google search the terms “rapist,” and “detained” display. The odd thing is that I did precisely what the reporters did and I didn’t get any results even close to theirs. No mentions at all of the word “rapist” or “detained.” Just references to his work at Channel 2 and the like.
And if you insert the name of another media personality accused of rape five years ago, holy mother of God, similar terms come up. I don’t know about you but it seems to me that these reporters need to do a reality check. Since when does Google determine reality? Last I checked, Google was a tool to aid users in obtaining information. I’d never understood that Google was the ultimate arbiter of reality.
It reminds me of someone I recently heard bemoan the fact that in times past she could tell people who hadn’t heard of her to look her up in Google and she was so proud of the results that they would see. But now, horror of horrors, people have said terrible things about her and her life is ruined, all because a Google search doesn’t bring up all the nice things she thinks the world should know about her.
Give me a break people. Get a life. If you must Google your name, why let it bother you if there is something published there that disturbs you? Google is not God. At least not yet.
The most chicken-shit thing of all about the article is that in referring to the role of this blog in breaking the gag they refuse to even name it as if poor old Tikun Olam has coodies. I can marginally understand refusing to link to the blog (more of that shortly), but treating us as the blog that dare not speak its name?? Really?
But here’s what really irks me. The reporters actually quoted an attorney, Chaim Ravia, who said that not only is it illegal for a journalist in Israel to break the gag, but it is a criminal act to LINK to any form of media anywhere in the world which breaks the gag. Now, I’ve heard of wildly extravagant claims before. Anyone who had to listen to Dick Cheney talk, for example. The word draconian comes to mind. But this goes far beyond the pale:
Links [by Israeli media, social networks, or bloggers] to foreign media, in my opinion, aid in the dissemination of the information forbidden by the gag, and likewise at the very least aid in the commission of a crime, if not actually being a crime. Anyone who adds a link concerning information about the incident could, at the very least, be considered an accessory to violation of the gag order and, in my opinion, someone who indirectly violates the gag order. If that individual does this knowing of the existence of the gag order then he has committed a criminal act [!] People must be extremely careful in these situations.
There is a major fallacy in the lawyer’s account. As any Israeli journalist will tell you, you’re only bound by a gag if you or your publication receive the gag order. If you haven’t received it you’re not bound by it and can’t be prosecuted for violating it. Now, if a blogger does receive a gag order (and very few do), that would be a different story. But Ravia doesn’t even make this point.
But let all Israeli Google engineers breathe a sigh of relief. The good solon relieves them of any responsibility for violating Israeli criminal laws because the algorithm is automated and not something they can control themselves. Phew!
The next question asked of the attorney by the reporters is another doozy: is there anything that can be done to prevent the Google search engine from violating gag orders. I kid you not. These reporters are the journalistic equivalent of Big Brother.
To his credit, even a lawyer with very dumb ideas has a few drops of intelligence. He responds that there is little one can do in such a case. Baruch ha-Shem, finally someone within ounce of seychel.
Let me speak plainly: I am war with notions like this. They are garbage. I only wish I or someone could test this in Israel; could dare the police to arrest you for publishing a link to a foreign source like this blog. Can you friggin’ imagine making the creation of a link a criminal offense? Is this North Korea? Iran? And what does this philistine take us for? Wards of the state who need to ask permission before we go to the bathroom?
In the age of the internet if you cannot link you cannot live. I don’t mean this literally of course. But I mean that the internet cannot live if we criminalize the act of creating a link. The link is the essence of free speech. It should be sacred.
This is the dumbing of democracy, maybe it’s even the death of democracy. Come let them take us away for linking to strivers for freedom outside our own countries. Let them criminalize social networks. Let them make us afraid to say our own names.
No link yet to the article. But when I do link to it, do you think I might be arrested by the internet police??
Hi Richard,
The auto-complete results of Google didn’t show up because you were using the American Google, just try to go to Israel Google. It will change its location and thus the results.
http://www.google.co.il
I did do a Hebrew search, but you’re right I did it using google.com & not Israeli Google.
The notion that the state could or should moderate internet linking is nonsense. I would understand the claim that Israeli bloggers can be considered part of Israeli media and as such are obliged to gag orders. I don’t see the difference between linking to a foreign site and just hinting that there is a site out there that contains the information. Why is the former supposed to be a crime while the other is permissible? The mentioned article only indirectly (!) hinted on the existence of this blog. Now, every 12 yr-old child who knows how to google can find the mentioned posts, and the result is as it were if The Marker would have linked directly to the blog.
However, I can understand the fear that such publications can wrongly smear a person’s reputation (and have substantial repercussions on his life). Google’s Hebrew (!) auto-complete algorithm does suggests “rape” as a natural completion to Even’s name, and your posts are at least fifth in line when searching Even’s name in the English website (I checked for myself). These facts, considering that he wasn’t even trialed yet, make me think that the whole deal isn’t entirely fair. Even might well be a horrible rapist, as all of these publications imply (and I think he is), but he might not. In that case he was publicly convicted before even going on trial. You yourself condemned cases like Abu-Sisi’s because insinuations by the media made him seem guilty even before the trial. What is the difference between these two cases?
Richard,
I’m not sure that publishing the accused of sexual assaults names is the right path to go.
On one hand, this will prevent covering up and closing the issue.
On the other hand, the mare publication of their name cause great harm to that person and often terminates his career and his way of supporting him selves and his family. Which when he is acquitted, he will never regain. Take for example the case of Mr. Shuv. He was a rising media star, he was accused, acquitted, but never got his work status back. He is gone from Israeli media.
1. If you will google Even’s name in Google.co.il you will get the exact results mentioned.
2. You are a real keyboard hero – get on the first plane to israel and test the notion yourself, why send someone else to test your theories and pay the price ?if you’ll fly soon enough you may be able to participate in the 3rd intifada you preached.
You are the biggest chicken i came across in my 29 years on this planet.
a chicken who plays god who violates המלבין פני חברו ברבים
ease your worries, you will pay the ultimate price.
You are walking a very fine line. I’ve warned you now several times about violating the comment rules. Next time could be your last.
I don’t take well to threats or wishes for my demise or misfortune befalling me.
Can one user of google get “rape” and another not get it for the same search terms?
Can Google in Israel (the s/w you invoke when you “google”) be different from the s/w you invoke in, say, USA? Could someone “twiddle” google.il to make references to ‘rape” get highlighted?
Or might THESE SEARCHERS get “rape” highlighted because that’s what they have recently been looking for (in other searches)?
Anyone know? I know all the nifty s/w these days (“nifty”: leave the driving to us, we know you better than you know yourself, etc.) pays attention to what people have recently looked up, etc., the pages they’ve clicked.
No, I think Google.com (U.S. version) serves different results than google.il.co, the Israeli version of Google, even if you do Hebrew language searches in Google.com. I bet if you use Google Israel you’d get similar results to what Marker got.
As for yr questions: it is illegal to do the things the lawyer claims only for an Israeli (whether common citizen, blogger or journalist) living inside Israel. Anyone outside does not fall under Israeli jurisdiction prob. including an Israeli living in the U.S. In fact such a person HAS linked to my blog & proudly so he tells me. But he’s not in Israel. Of course, if lawyer Revia is right, on this person’s return to Israel he could be prosecuted for what he did, though I’d think it would be incredibly difficult to make a case that the State of Israel has jurisdiction over an Israeli outside Israel for a matter like this.
It is “illegal for a journalist in Israel to break the gag, but it is a criminal act to LINK to any form of media anywhere in the world which breaks the gag.”
Question [1]. [WHICH ACTOR] Illegal for anyone to POST to the internet a reference (LINK) to [etc] or only illegal for a journalist to do so?
Question [2]. [WHICH ACT] What if the reference is NOT A LINK but mere text, like “abc dot com”?
Question [3]. [WHICH ACT-2] Is it illegal for Google to publish such a LINK?
Question [4]. [WHICH ACTOR-2] Is it illegal for Joe Schnook, an Israeli citizen presently living in NYC to put up such a LINK on his USA Blog?
Question [5]. [WHAT’S THE GAG SAY?] Does the “gag order” prohibit all persons in the universe from doing an act? All persons who are Israeli citizens? Merely all Israeli journalists?
Question [6]. [IS THE GAG ORDER PUBLIC?] How should an American, acting in the USA, putting a LINK up on his USA BLOG, know whether or not he has been ordered by the Israeli government, or court, or third-rank administrative aide, not to do that?
I understand the supposed illegality of links so far exists only in the opinion of Chaim Ravia; it hasn’t been tested in court in any way, shape, or form.
That said, it goes without saying that Israeli law has no force outside Israel, at the very least with non-citizens. The Israeli govt has no business ordering a non-citizen outside the country to do or not to do anything at all.
That one really takes the cake. It’s one thing for a lawyer to air a legal opinion, dubious as it may be, but quite another for journalists to ask the government to please be more like China and prevent them from doing their jobs.
RE: “In the age of the internet if you cannot link you cannot live.” – R.S.
AS ONE OF THE ‘FOUNDING FATHERS’ SAID: “Give me Hyperlinks, or give me Death!”
Google adapts to what it thinks you (or your IP) usually search for. (This can tell you a lot about colleagues and other household members!)
So, googling from a journalist’s desk may produce very different results from the same search terms from a professor’s desk. Especially if a headline word like “rape” is involved.
Google also adapts to what others have recently been searching for in the user’s locality. It is an intelligent, learning search engine, not a mere electronic card index.
If that’s what you want, try “Bing!”
I don’t have a blog, so I just had to link it on my facebook page.