Media personality Yinon Magal falsely reported on social media that News 12 journalist Guy Peleg was arrested by the Shin Bet for his reporting, Now, in his defense to Peleg's defamation suit, Magal claims he was only joking. According to Magal, his social media followers were aware it was a joke since he didn't use the "Yinonews" headline at the top of the post.

Last summer, Guy Peleg published on News 12, Israel's prominent news channel, security camera footage from the Sde Teiman military detention facility, showing soldiers taking one of the detainees to a hidden area. There, according to suspicions that turned into an indictment, the soldiers abused the detainee, beat him, stepped on him, stabbed him in his buttocks, and caused internal bleeding.

Magal is currently known mainly as the host of The Patriots on Channel 14, Netanyahu's propaganda and disinformation channel, and for hosting a daily show of invective on Radio 103FM. However, besides traditional media, Magal also spreads opinions and reports through his highly popular social media accounts.

In November, Magal tweeted: "Cleared for publication: News 12 journalist Guy Peleg has been detained for a week in a Shin Bet investigation facility following the broadcast of the fabricated video that harmed Force 100 soldiers, endangered the hostages, and sparked antisemitic waves worldwide. So far he has not been allowed to see a lawyer. Other investigation details are under a gag order."

The next day, following responses he received, Magal tweeted: "Want to clarify: This tweet is fake! Yes, they did let him meet with a lawyer." He added a winking emoji. Both publications appeared simultaneously on Magal's Telegram channel.

Following these publications, Peleg, together with News 12, filed a 1 million shekel lawsuit against Magal. Peleg clarifies that this is a complete lie: he was not arrested by the Shin Bet, certainly not held for a week in an investigation facility without seeing a lawyer, and naturally no gag order was imposed on a non-existent case.

According to Peleg, following the publications, his son, who recently enlisted in the IDF, called his mother from his basic training base, frightened that something had happened to his father. Peleg also notes that he received an inquiry from Reuters requesting comment. News 12 spokesperson Alon Shani received a request for comment from journalist Liad Danzig, and attorney Assaf Sharaf, who represents Peleg in various proceedings, received an inquiry from a businessman asking if the news was true. Additionally, Magal's publications led to follow-up publications, including on the Edna Carnival defamation website.

Peleg is represented by attorneys Dr. Yisgav Nakdimon, Dikla Biran, and Noy Hadar.

Social Commentary

In his defense, Magal claims that the lawsuit against him is "a SLAPP by a business (and political) rival intended to shut him up."

According to him, he merely "published a completely satirical tweet, which everyone who read it not only understood was a joke but also understood the sarcasm and public criticism of the joke."

In his lawsuit, Peleg connected Magal's publications to the fact that the day before the first publication, the court approved publishing the name of Eli Feldstein, Netanyahu's former spokesperson, as one of the suspects in a case linking him and Netanyahu to a false propaganda campaign in German Bild and other media outlets.

Magal also connects the publication to the Feldstein-Netanyahu case. According to him, "In contrast to the excessive severity with which the investigating authorities handled the above leak case, the authorities' intentional foot-dragging was notable in handling another leak case that occurred several months earlier, which in the defendant's view was several times more severe."

To protest law enforcement's inaction in finding who leaked to Peleg, Magal explains, he joked as if the News 12 journalist was being investigated for a week by the Shin Bet.

According to Magal's defense, "The defendant's unique style that made him popular among many followers - combines publications where the defendant expresses his opinions on current affairs, funny/satirical/humorous publications - where the defendant jokes about current affairs in his style familiar to anyone who follows him and watches his shows, and a minority of publications are news items that the defendant usually publishes under the 'Yinonews' headline - thus informing his followers who know his style that unlike all the humoresques - this is a news item from his creation."

Magal notes that his Twitter and Telegram bio explicitly states that "some content is not satirical" and adds that his profile picture on social networks is also humorous.

"In his publications, the defendant often jokes about himself, but also about various politicians, political rivals, other journalists, amusing situations, etc. [...] Indeed, not everyone might laugh at the defendant's humor, but the satirical content that the defendant posts is so grotesque and absurd that the vast majority of his readers understand this, know the language, and respond accordingly."

According to Magal, "On the Telegram channel, an overwhelming majority of followers (3,400 users) responded with a 'laughing tears' emoji. Meaning readers responded with amusement to the joke and nothing more."

Moreover, Magal argues, Peleg appeared on television and on his radio show in the days preceding his publications, so it's clear to everyone that he wasn't detained for a week in a Shin Bet investigation facility.

Magal, it is claimed, "is not responsible for those who don't know his style, just as the creators of Eretz Nehederet [a popular satire program on Channel 12] aren't responsible when their sarcastic comment about someone is taken out of context, and someone thinks it's not a joke but a real event."

"While the right to satirical expression isn't absolute," Magal writes, "and although free satirical discourse should be allowed as much as possible, boundaries must be set. But it should be emphasized that this isn't such a case since any reasonable person understands in both publications that this is such a grotesque publication, and therefore shouldn't be taken seriously."