AhlulBayt News Agency (ABNA): Amid the ongoing war with Iran, discussions in Israeli media circles have intensified regarding the nature of information available to the public and the limits of its dissemination, a significant development that has extended beyond mere coverage of military operations into a deeper debate about the very management of information during wartime.
According to a report by the Quds News Network, journalist and political analyst Rafif Drucker, through Israel’s Channel 13, has raised questions about the near-total absence of information regarding the locations where missiles have struck or footage of interceptions, as well as the lack of precise statistics on attacks.
Meanwhile, Gideon Levy, a journalist for Haaretz, believes that Israeli media have shifted from complying with military censorship to engaging in self-censorship. According to him, the withholding of information is no longer merely imposed but has become a voluntary practice by the media, which they present as a professional obligation.
This perspective reflects a deeper transformation in the structure of media activity in Israel, where outlets preemptively omit information while simultaneously declaring their adherence to restrictions—a phenomenon indicative of a more complex model of information management.
Information control is not limited to censorship; in some instances, it has extended to the dissemination of misleading information. One such case involved a video released by an Israeli military journalist, which was claimed to show American bombers over Tehran but was later revealed to have been taken from a simulation game. Similar instances have appeared in other media outlets, raising questions about the accuracy of the information being published
Concurrently, Israel has undertaken certain official measures to contain rumors, including the release of a video featuring Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to deny speculations about his condition, amid an environment marked by the spread of fabricated content and AI-generated material.
Overall, these policies reflect three levels of impact. First, a cognitive impact, shaping public opinion based on limited information. Second, an external impact, creating ambiguity for adversaries regarding the outcomes of attacks. Third, an analytical impact on other actors, who assess the situation based on this incomplete information environment.
**************
End/ 345E
