Middle East
Coverage of the Columbia Shuttle Disaster in the Israeli Media
‘Yellow, Vulgar, and Invasive’
 |
| Israeli headlines, Feb. 2, 2003 (Photo: Eitan Abramovitch/AFP). |
The Israeli television coverage of the Columbia Shuttle disaster was humiliating. The United States showed us that it can be done differently.
Based on all accounts, Ilan Ramon was an exceptional person—modest, reserved, warm, and noble. Israeli television coverage of his death shown “live” on the air was exactly the opposite: yellow, vulgar, and invasive. And what stood out even more to the viewer was the respectable and restrained coverage on the American side of the Atlantic Ocean.
The tragic crash of the Columbia also happened to the Americans during those same dramatic moments. But at the same time that NASA escorted the family members of the astronauts from the landing area to grant them some privacy during that difficult and fateful time, here, the embarrassing celebration had just begun. Over and over, we saw Ilan Ramon’s father sitting in the studio and hearing during live coverage that something horrible happened to his son. Later on, journalists surrounded the house of this noble man, who luckily faced the invasion with dignity, only to be asked “live” on the air, “What did he tell Rona” [Ilan Ramon’s wife], and, of course, how he felt. “I don’t have a son anymore,” he replied. And what could he have said? It was so good of the networks to make sure he explained that to us in detail.
Later on, to take full advantage of the momentum, they put an earpiece in the grieving father’s ear, almost against his will, so that he could talk with retired Gen. Eitan Ben-Eliyahu. All this when it was so obvious that all this elderly man needed now was a moment of peace and quiet, to regroup by himself before he boarded a plane to the United States.
While the Americans are still remaining quiet, investigating, and conducting press conferences in a respectful manner, here they talk to Rona’s brother who asks Yonit and Gadi [television newscasters] live on the air to arrange a flight to the United States for the family at the earliest possible time (and Channel 2 reports back with glee that the matter has been taken care of).
It’s not his fault. Not every person who is caught in an emotional turmoil is able to express things tastefully. That is why there are editors, managers, and above all, a drop of good taste. It seems that here, especially in the age of electronic media, in order to get high ratings and fill hours of airtime, the TV networks treat Israelis as jaded from too much bloodshed and devastation—so jaded that they can’t understand nuance or tasteful understatement. Israeli networks seem to feel that nothing less than a punch in the face or a microphone shoved in their mouth will be strong enough to move the public.
I am betting that they are wrong, even though the ratings will never show it: The viewer is neither dumb nor void of feelings. He doesn’t need a vulgar newscaster to understand what a father who just lost his son feels, or a wife who lost her husband, even if we’re speaking of the first Israeli astronaut. There is no doubt that the Israeli media tried to get similar statements from Rona Ramon. Luckily all access to her was barred.
Ilan Ramon, an authentic Israeli, who was killed as he tried to realize a personal dream, also a universal dream—the aspiration to surpass the Earth’s borders and discover worlds unknown that are beyond us. He remained in the sky. We, here on Earth, are left with an open microphone and all the mud.
