A first-of-its-kind academic article seeks to outline a model for measuring "anti-journalism," enabling researchers and the general public to explore and distinguish between genuine news media outlets and those that appear to be journalistic but in practice spread lies, hatred, and propaganda while constantly undermining democracy.

To this end, a content analysis was conducted of broadcasts from Channel 14, a channel of propaganda, lies, and false conspiracy theories that consistently serves Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is charged with bribery.

The article, "Anti-Journalism: Channel 14 as a Case Study for a New Model" was recently published in “Media Frames,” a peer-reviewed academic journal published by the Israel Communication Association and edited by Prof. Doron Shultziner of the Department of Politics and Communication at the Jerusalem Multidisciplinary College. It was co-authored by Dr. Ayala Panievsky, a political communication researcher at City University of London; Chen Egri, a reporter for “The Seventh Eye”; and Shuki Tausig, editor of “The Seventh Eye” and “Shakuf.”

During 2024, Egri published several public reports on "The Seventh Eye" website, which presented for the first time a model examining the media activity of Channel 14 and its fundamental difference from journalistic media outlets.

According to Egri, the channel "provides political services under the guise of a news channel, ostensibly operating within the framework of journalistic norms and ethics, and under the guise of an ideological 'right-wing' and 'religious' media outlet. It uses the appearance of a journalistic organization to claim the protections afforded to journalists by law and case law."

Egri identified seven categories characterizing Channel 14 as a political propaganda outlet: dissemination of false information (fake news); incitement to violence and the commission of crimes and war crimes; agitation against the opposition, the judicial system, the military, and government critics; attacks on the media and the press; the spreading of conspiracy theories; the dissemination of propaganda and the talking points of Netanyahu and the Likud; and the promotion of an anti-liberal worldview: misogyny, LGBTQ-phobia, and anti-secularism.

In her book “The New Censorship,” published in English in 2025, Dr. Panievsky coined the term "anti-journalism" to refer to anti-journalistic media outlets that exploit a news-like appearance to systematically and deliberately spread lies and incite violence, promote the censorship and silencing of government opponents and critical media, and echo government propaganda.

The journalistic facade, Panievsky warned, grants "anti-journalistic" media outlets the right to demand the protections reserved for journalistic media even as they act against the traditional goals of a free press in a democratic society.

We saw an example of this recently when Channel 14 petitioned the court to compel the Democrats party to allow its employees to attend party events in order to "cover" them. The channel justified this request by citing such principles as freedom of the press and the public's right to know, which are meant to protect the work of journalistic media outlets.

For the academic article, which aimed to transform the theory into a workable model, broadcasts of Channel 14’s two leading programs, "The Patriots" and "The Main Newscast," were examined over the course of twelve randomly selected days during 2024.

Each program was divided into segments and analyzed according to four criteria defining "anti-journalism": broadcasting lies and conspiracy theories; spreading hatred, racism, and incitement to violence; disparaging media outlets that criticize the government; and echoing government propaganda.

The findings revealed that Channel 14 meets all the criteria for "anti-journalism."

About 40% of the items examined featured uncritical echoing or journalistic framing of the government’s key messages from that period, as presented in press releases and media statements spread by Netanyahu.

The researchers cite several blatant examples of the propagandist nature of the channel's broadcasts. For instance, one could see Yaakov Bardugo, Netanyahu’s advisor who also serves as the "senior political commentator" for Channel 14, saying,  "The person who stood alone at the top and made the decision, with a great deal of daring and a great deal of courage, was Benjamin Netanyahu."

In another example cited in the study, Yinon Magal, host of “The Patriots,” said, "I trust Netanyahu, even when he is under general anesthesia, more than I trust Gantz or Lapid." And broadcaster Erel Segal commented, "I say wholeheartedly that I believe the Prime Minister, that if he asked Yoram Cohen to conduct wiretaps, it was only for the sake of national security."

In one of the programs in the sample, a promotional video for Netanyahu was aired without framing or critical commentary. In another program, host Yinon Magal wore a hat with the slogan coined by Netanyahu’s media advisors ("Total Victory"). In contrast,  no criticism of the Prime Minister was found in the sampled broadcasts.

Lies and Conspiracies

False, deniable statements were found in 34% of the items, meaning not just opinions or unsubstantiated positions but factual claims about information that had already been disproved.

Among the examples cited by the researchers is a statement by Yotam Zimri claiming that the majority of the Israeli public favored continuing the war and defeating Hamas, while polls from that same period consistently showed that about 70% of the public supported signing an agreement to end the war.

Another example touched on a statement by Amir Ivgi suggesting that anti-Israel protests on U.S. campuses are funded by groups that finance "left-wing organizations" in Israel, a claim refuted by a report published by the U.S. Congress.

Baseless conspiracy theories featured in about 11% of the sampled items. All of them shared a common premise, that a plot involving many individuals and organizations was unfolding behind the scenes, operating secretly and maliciously to harm a single politician: Benjamin Netanyahu.

Among other things, the false claim was made that the criminal cases for which Netanyahu is standing trial were "trumped up" against him as part of a "witch hunt" by Israeli law enforcement and media.

Guy Bossi, for instance, explicitly argued, "A group of senior officials in Israel decided to oust a sitting prime minister, and committed every possible offense and legal violation to accomplish that mission." Similarly, Yaki Adamker said, "There is a system here that colluded to bring down a sitting prime minister." Itamar Fleischmann claimed, "All these cases are rigged. All these cases are a witch hunt; all these cases exist because they call him Netanyahu."

Another conspiracy theory identified in the items sampled in the study is reminiscent of  the anti-Semitic "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" conspiracy, claiming that wealthy Jews pull strings from behind the scenes and steer world events to serve their own interests. It was Moshe Cohen-Eliya who said, "Pritzker, Soros, and Gelman are the ones who funded the campus protests."

The most common conspiracy theory in the sample concerned the "betrayal from within" narrative, according to which the Hamas attack on October 7, 2023 succeeded thanks to Israelis who wanted to damage the Netanyahu government. For instance, Shay Kallach said on the program “The Patriots”:

"The state needs to be rebooted from within the 'Deep State.' Now, what is the Deep State? People imagine it as some sort of Supreme Court octopus, with all its tentacles: media, Mossad, Shin Bet, the police. That’s all true, but it’s not the main point. The Deep State is an organic system. The Supreme Court didn’t order Colonel Uri Sagi to remove me from the unit. It didn’t order the Chief of Staff to appoint that dubious commission of inquiry. It didn’t instruct Blinken to say, 'I’m coming to meet you in secret,” and it didn’t tell Major General Toledano, 'Listen, answer Minister Strook with brazen insolence.' Rather, there is a system here that’s been functioning organically, consciously, and authoritatively for 120 years. Ultimately, it leads to the same danger: a situation where the Southern Command chief, the head of the Shin Bet, the Chief of Staff, and the head of Military Intelligence sit together and decide, 'We won’t wake up the Prime Minister.'”

"In terms of the treatment of facts, the Israeli case appears to be more severe than those recently documented in other countries," the study claims.

Incitement and hate speech

Incitement and Hatred Examples of hatred, racism, and incitement were identified in 16% of the items in the sample, most directed at government opponents.

MK Ofer Cassif was portrayed as someone who identifies with the enemy, Democrats’ chairman Yair Golan was depicted as a criminal, and protesters against the Netanyahu government were characterized as Hamas collaborators looking to injure the State of Israel.

Yotam Zimri, for example, commented about the protesters: "They are also passing information to the Americans, when someone needs to blow the whistle, as certain Jews did throughout history . . . there was a name for those Jews historically." Yaki Adamker argued that Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar could "rub his hands in glee and say 'thank you very much'" to the leaders of the protest against Netanyahu.

About 13% of the items featured criticism directed at journalists and media outlets identified as critical of the government. This did not constitute legitimate criticism but rather branded specific journalists and media outlets as enemies of the state. So, for instance, Tamir Morag said, "Only here do some media outlets struggle to break free, if not from Hamas then at least from an inexplicable addiction to defeatism."

In another instance, Yaki Adamker said that “Haaretz” journalists "undermine the war we are waging against our greatest enemies." Moshe Cohen-Eliya claimed that “New York Times” and “Yedioth Ahronoth” journalist Ronen Bergman, along with "the likes of Barak Ravid," are acting against the state. "The work of our enemies is often carried out by people from within," he said, referencing them.

Instances of incitement to violence, war crimes, and genocide in the Gaza Strip were identified in about 12% of the segments. "Stop the humanitarian aid, stop the fuel, and stop the water," demanded Guy Bossi, for example. The channel's many calls for war crimes and genocide are currently under police investigation following complaints and a petition filed against it.

"To develop tools"

In their concluding remarks, the researchers write, "The rise in attacks on press freedom worldwide, and the manipulative use by populist politicians of co-opted media outlets to undermine the information environment essential to any society aspiring to be democratic, compel the journalism community—both journalists and media researchers—to develop tools to differentiate journalism and manipulative attempts to use a journalistic facade to spread lies, hatred, and propaganda.

“This article takes a first step in this necessary direction, attempting to develop metrics that will help position media outlets on the spectrum between genuine journalistic outlets and those masquerading as such to disseminate disinformation, propaganda, and hate.”

According to the researchers, the model they created would need to be adapted for implementation in other countries, "but the fundamental criteria, stemming from a normative concept of the press's role in a democratic society, remain intact."

This article was published in Hebrew on August 21, 2026
Translation: Harriet Brown