Latest news with #KobiMandelblit
LeMonde
17 hours ago
- Politics
- LeMonde
Israel is tightening media censorship amid war with Iran
On Thursday, June 19, the Israeli Government Press Office – the body responsible for managing relationships between authorities and journalists working in Israel – sent an email to foreign correspondents in the country, detailing new censorship guidelines. This was the fourth such message in less than a week, since the launch of Operation "Rising Lion" against Iran on June 13. "Any live or recorded broadcast from a combat zone or missile impact site requires prior written approval from the military censor, covering both the location and how it is described," the message stated. Written authorization is mandatory. A dedicated phone line, available 24 hours a day, has been set up to contact the military censor's office, a unit under Israeli military intelligence led by Brigadier-General Kobi Mandelblit. Issue of sensitive sites The update followed directives reiterated the day after Israel's initial strikes against Iran. Under Israeli law, all articles – both in traditional media and on social media – that address national security or related matters must be approved by the censor before publication. Live broadcasts from television networks at impact sites pose a more immediate challenge, as they enable the Iranian regime to assess the accuracy of the strikes. Israeli authorities generally allow this when civilian areas are targeted, but intervene immediately when sensitive sites, such as military bases, are involved.
Euronews
2 days ago
- Politics
- Euronews
How social media is fueling the Israel-Iran conflict
As missiles fall on Israel and Iran, civilians face a second battlefield: the online space. Since the beginning of Israel's offensive, communication tools have come under increasing control - both for spying on the enemy and for suppressing dissent. New restrictions have been imposed on the population in Israel. Meanwhile, in Iran, long accustomed to censorship, repression has reached new heights. During the 7 October Hamas attack on Israel, one of the targets was the Nahal Oz military base. An investigation published in March revealed that the assault was made possible in part by public social media posts from soldiers themselves, which allowed Hamas to map the layout of the facility. Since then, Israeli soldiers have been banned from taking photographs inside IDF facilities or using platforms like Facebook. The aim is to prevent enemies from building intelligence profiles. Even documenting events such as ceremonies or gatherings with civilians is now prohibited. A Stanford University article explains how social media can offer a tactical advantage to adversaries: 'The phenomenon of 'geotagging' – the process of adding geographical identification metadata to various media – is particularly sensitive as it can reveal specific locations of military units or vulnerable civilian populations.' It adds that social media is a double-edged sword in modern warfare: 'While it can offer a lifeline and a platform to some, it also presents a significant intelligence resource for others.' On Wednesday, Israel's military censor, Brigadier General Kobi Mandelblit, warned that anyone sharing details about the location of strikes — including via social media, blogs, or chat apps — must submit the content for prior review or face prosecution. Iran is also acutely aware of these risks. On Saturday, the Revolutionary Guard issued a statement warning that any 'exchange of information' perceived as aiding Israel would be met with the harshest punishment — which could include social media posts or images. Babak Kamiar, the head of Euronews' Persian desk, said that the maximum punishment indicated in the sentence is 'the death penalty for sure'. State television went so far as to urge Iranians to delete WhatsApp from their phones, claiming the app shares user data with Israel. WhatsApp denied the accusation, stating that it does not track users' locations and that its end-to-end encryption ensures message privacy. In 2022, Iran blocked access to WhatsApp and Google Play during nationwide protests sparked by the death of 22-year-old Mahsa Amini while in police custody. The apps remained unavailable for over two years, until access was restored in December 2024. Social media isn't just a tool for spying, it also serves as a real-time political barometer. 'Being able to track social media content is a very important strategic asset. It's an instant polling device, really,' Philip Seib, Professor Emeritus of Journalism and Public Diplomacy at the USC Annenberg School, told Euronews. 'The public's social media can provide some hints about the intent of the population. Are they rallying around their government?' Authorities are closely monitoring these signs. On Saturday, Israeli police arrested a man at his home after he posted an image of the Iranian flag, a salute emoji, and a message of support. By Monday, Israel's National Security Minister, Itamar Ben Gvir, vowed a zero-tolerance approach toward any 'expressions of joy' over Iranian attacks on Israel. Seib also explained how foreign governments could be watching these signs closely. 'If I were Donald Trump, I'd want to monitor that situation closely. For instance, Netanyahu [the Israeli Prime Minister] might soon request more weapons resupply. But how much public support does he actually have in Israel?' Disinformation is rife online, and this conflict is no exception. Speaking to Euronews, Dr Sahar Khamis, Associate Professor in the Department of Communication at the University of Maryland, said dynamics seen during the war in Gaza are playing out again – with people getting informed more on social media than by mainstream media and so being subjected to misinformation or disinformation. 'Truth is the first casualty of war,' she said. Khamis noted the use of deliberate mistranslations of Israeli leaders' speeches, AI-generated images of missile strikes, and misleading out-of-context footage. 'Controlling the narrative is a crucial part of this conflict. Winning the information war matters almost as much as winning on the battlefield.' During previous escalations in Gaza, Israel demonstrated its digital warfare capabilities. In 2023, its foreign ministry paid for ads using graphic content, emotive language and even AI-generated video. These campaigns blurred the line between official messaging and psychological operations. Some were removed by Google after violating rules on violent imagery. Euronews' Arabic team uncovered several fake narratives online — from claims of a Mossad building being bombed, to an Iranian strike on Haifa's Bazan oil refinery, or Iranian defences downing two aircraft — all of which turned out to be video game simulations. Iran's government has a long-standing habit of restricting internet access during periods of unrest. In 2019, it imposed a six-day nationwide blackout during mass protests, during which authorities launched a brutal crackdown that reportedly left over 100 people dead. Since hostilities with Israel began, Iran has throttled internet speeds, leading to intermittent blackouts. On Wednesday, the country experienced a total outage lasting more than 12 hours, according to NetBlocks, a UK-based internet monitoring group. 'The government officially announced that they slowed down the internet because they want to be able to have cyber defence,' said Amir Rashidi, Director of Internet Security and Digital Rights at the Miaan Group. But he told Euronews the explanation doesn't hold up - cyberattacks have continued regardless. The timing is also worrying as it comes at a critical time, he added: 'For exemple, people trying to find alternative routes when they want to escape look at Google Maps — but it's not working properly. There are a lot of people lost in the middle of nowhere with no fuel or water.' In response to the outages, Elon Musk announced on his platform X over the weekend that he had activated Starlink, his satellite internet service, in Iran to help restore connectivity. The Irish Data Protection Commission (DPC) has said it needs more money to carry out additional tasks it now handles, including oversight of the EU AI Act. The AI Act – which regulates the technology according to the risk it poses to society – has already entered into force, but as of 2 August all member states need to appoint an oversight authority to ensure companies' compliance with the rules. In its annual report published Thursday, the DPC said that 'in light of new responsibilities and a significantly additional workload for the DPC as a result of the AI Act and other digital regulations [...] it is critical that we continue to receive funding increases enabling the expansion of our workforce.' 'The Government's continuing support will be critical to the DPC's ability to meet its EU wide responsibilities and the delivery of effective regulation in support of the digital economy,' it added. This year, the Irish already dealt with several AI questions, stemming from the launch of chatbot tools such as X's Grok and Meta AI. As the lead authority for Meta, it ordered the company to halt the tool last year due to concerns about the use of personal data of users of Facebook and Instagram to train its large language models (LLMs). Euronews reported in May that – with months to go until the deadline – in at least half of the 27 member states, it remains unclear which authority will be nominated as AI oversight body. In addition, countries need to adopt an implementing law that sets out penalties and that empower their watchdogs. Not all of them have yet done so. The Irish watchdog is currently overseeing the implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in Ireland, including those of the global big tech companies that registered their EU headquarters in Dublin. It received some 11,091 new cases and resolved 10,510 ones, the report said. It gathered a total of €652 million in fines. Its staff increased from 213 in early 2024 to 251 as of 1 January.
Al Jazeera
2 days ago
- Politics
- Al Jazeera
How does Israel restrict its media from reporting on the Iran conflict?
The Israeli government has issued new directives restricting how its media covers its current war with Iran. On Wednesday, a circular from Israel's military censor, Brigadier General Kobi Mandelblit, announced new rules on what Israeli media organisations and journalists within the country can – and cannot – publish about the effect of Iranian strikes. The legal underpinnings of censorship in Israel are older than the country itself. Restrictions on media freedom in the territory were first established by the British during their Mandate for Palestine in 1945, before being incorporated into Israeli law after the state was created three years later. However, restrictions on press freedom in Israel go further than just outlawing aspects of journalists' reporting. According to figures from the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ), Israel has killed at least 164 journalists in Gaza since October 7, 2023. More have been killed in Lebanon, the occupied West Bank and, now, Iran. Since May 2024, the Israeli government has banned Al Jazeera from its territory and, since November, has sanctioned the Israeli liberal daily, Haaretz, over coverage considered critical of its actions. So, what are the new restrictions on journalists and how does media freedom in Israel stack up against that in other countries? Here's what we know. The new regulations relate specifically to the conflict with Iran. They place special restrictions on the way journalists and editors can report the impact of Iranian strikes on Israel. In a circular, published on Wednesday, titled Rising Lion – IDF Censor Guidelines for Media Coverage of Attack on the Israeli Home Front, the office of Israel's chief military censor ordered editors to take 'strict measures' when reporting on missile and drone attacks. The censor is also warning against reporting anything that could indicate attack positions or air defence operations, or damage assessments that could 'assist the enemy' and pose 'a tangible threat to state security'. Specifically, journalists and editors are prohibited from: The new restrictions have taken immediate effect. Photographers in the port city of Haifa were arrested in the early hours of Tuesday morning while setting up cameras to capture images of potential strikes on the port. Journalists and editors were already required to submit any article that could touch upon Israel's security to the military censor for approval ahead of publication. Under the existing regulations, the censor has the power to halt publication of any article if 'there is a 'near certainty that real damage will be caused to the security of the state' by its publication. It may not, however, restrict articles or reports on the grounds that they might damage the reputation of either the Israeli army or the country's politicians. In 2023, Israel's already tight restrictions were increased via an amendment to the country's anti-terrorism law which punishes those who 'systematically and continuously consume terrorist publications' or who broadcast 'a direct call to commit an act of terrorism'. According to media freedom organisations, such as the Index on Censorship, even before the new restrictions on reporting the Iran conflict were introduced, the censor's definition of 'security issues' was very broad, covering topics as diverse as the army, intelligence agencies, arms deals, administrative detainees, aspects of Israel's foreign affairs, and more. Any journalist, publication or media group can appeal a decision by the censor to the Supreme Court, which has the power to overturn its decisions. Frequently. In May, the Israeli-Palestinian magazine, + 972, described what it called an 'unprecedented spike in media censorship' since the start of the war on Gaza. According to the magazine, throughout 2024, Israel's military censor fully blocked 1,635 articles from being published and imposed partial restrictions on another 6,265. This amounted to an average of roughly 21 interventions in news stories every day; more than twice the highest previous daily tally of about 10 interventions during the 2014 Gaza conflict (Operation Protective Edge), and more than three times that typically recorded during peacetime of 6.2 per day. Complicating matters are regulations banning outlets from stating whether parts of an article have been censored, so readers cannot be certain what information has been censored and what has not. None of the countries that Israeli leaders typically compare themselves with has any institution comparable to Israel's military censor. According to the Reporters Sans Frontieres (RSF) World Press Freedom Index, Israel currently stands at 112th place out of 180 countries for freedom of the press – below Haiti, Guinea Bissau, South Sudan and Chad. According to the RSF: 'Press freedom, media plurality and editorial independence have been increasingly restricted in Israel since the start of the war in Gaza, launched by Israel on 7 October 2023 following the deadly Hamas attack.' RSF also noted the importance given to political connections in choosing the leadership of Israel's broadcasting regulatory bodies and that only firmly pro-government networks, such as Israel's Channel 14, are generally selected to host interviews with senior figures.
