There is no person who does not echo his thoughts, even the malicious and foolish ones, in the ears of those close to him. This is the nature of close friendship and mutual support. We all need a listening soul and we all entrust stories and intimate reflections to the trust of people we trust.
That's why I was shocked by the media's publication of the phone conversations between Ehud Olmert and Shula Zaken. It's alarming and frustrating to hear a former prime minister plotting, gossiping about colleagues, and preoccupied with petty material matters. It's also hard to fathom how a person who is supposed to be responsible and thoughtful would have such an unbridled relationship with a political aide who has become a slave. But I'm no less shocked by the content of the conversations than I am by the way they were exposed to the public.
I understand that the media is obligated to expose injustices, warn and denounce, especially in an era of distorted capital-government relations. But somehow this method of exposure doesn't feel good to me. One could have waited for the ruling of the judges, who consider all the evidence and the context. When raw testimony is brought to the ears of the general public, the suspect is lynched. This is not a fair trial. This is a media trial, and it's frightening (by the way, a planned part of the conversations, which were published in the media, did not touch on criminal matters and amounted to spreading gossip for the purpose of defamation and ratings).
Want more news, videos and stories? Join the Haredim 10 WhatsApp channel >>
The Olmert-Zaken conversations issue raises questions about defamation laws and privacy in the age of media. Olmert did not speak on a public stage. This was a private conversation between him and his assistant-girlfriend. If confidentiality and censorship (behind closed doors) are acceptable for reasons of security sensitivity, why can't this be accommodated for individual privacy? After all, there is already a law that protects against secret recordings and it is anchored in that important fundamental right.
In my opinion, the main social impact of the tapes affair and their publication will not be further tarnishing of Olmert's image. He was already indicted in court and lost his life, even before his conversations with Zaken were revealed. It is doubtful whether the affair will further deteriorate the image of politicians. Even so, polls show that it is in the netherworld.
The light hand of publishing quotes from conversations in the media will mainly affect social relationships. People will continue to lose trust in their friends and relatives and, in fact, in human morality. They will have to carefully consider every word that comes out of their mouths and keyboards, assuming that they are exposed to public humiliation and denunciation rituals, without the ability to defend themselves.
I've noticed that lately, football players and coaches often talk to each other in the stadium with their hands covering their mouths. They do this for fear of being lip-read by the paparazzi broadcasters who are lurking around. It's almost a sad metaphor for the new era ahead of us. We will all live with one hand free and the other hand covering our lips.
Oz Almog is a professor of sociology in the Department of Land of Israel Studies at the University of Haifa.
