Blogs
entries tagged with: Sheldon Adelson
Newspaper fight gets political
(tags):
JERUSALEM – Should a billionaire tycoon who lives abroad be entitled to use his money to influence Israeli political life?
This question came to the fore in early December when a group of Knesset members moved to bar American Jewish casino mogul Sheldon Adelson from owning a free Israeli daily newspaper that supports Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
The Knesset bill, which is being promoted by a collection of interested parties ranging from owners of competing newspapers to rival politicians, stipulates that, as is the case with the electronic media in Israel, only Israeli citizens or residents should be eligible for licenses to own Hebrew language newspapers.
News Analysis“Imagine if a Saudi businessman were to own a newspaper in Israel,” Kadima legislator Yoel Hasson declared somewhat disingenuously, since the bill clearly was directed at Adelson.
It’s far from clear that the anti-Adelson campaign will succeed even if the bill is passed. Adelson easily could appoint a straw-man owner, or even hand over the paper to his wife, Miriam, who is Israeli-born.
The arguments for and against, however, go far beyond the Adelsons, and touch on the very essence of democracy and free speech in Israel.
The newspaper, Yisrael Hayom (Israel Today), was launched two and half years ago and has been so uncritical in its support of Netanyahu that it has been dubbed the “Bibiton,” a play on Netanyahu’s nickname and the Hebrew word for newspaper, iton.
Its opponents say it provides a venue for foreign money to shape the Israeli agenda. Additionally, they complain, Yisrael Hayom is nothing more than a propaganda sheet for Netanyahu posing as a genuine newspaper and taking in masses of gullible readers. For Netanyahu to buy that kind of publicity would have cost millions; the free newspaper with nationwide distribution could be seen as campaign funding from a foreign source, which might run afoul of Israel’s very strict campaign financing laws. Worse, say critics, the newspaper’s free distribution — some even get home delivery for free — and super-low advertising rates create an uneven playing field that threatens to destroy the competition.
 | Copies of the free daily Hebrew newspaper Israel HaYom are distributed in Jersualem. Hovev Shira/Creative Commons |
The loudest complaints come from journalists at the daily Maariv, which is already tottering. Maariv columnist Ben Dror Yamini said Adelson is ready to spend as much as it takes to wipe out all the existing Hebrew dailies. He predicts that Maariv will be the first to go, followed by Yediot Achronot. Within a few years, Yamini says, Israel will be left with a monopolistic party political pamphlet and no free press. His Maariv colleague Ben Caspit calls it a hostile takeover of democracy and free speech.
Their dire predictions, though, appear somewhat exaggerated. Besides Yisrael Hayom, Israel has only three other Hebrew dailies: Maariv, Yediot, and Haaretz. And although Maariv is not expected to survive much longer, Yediot remains a powerful economic empire. For Haaretz, the emergence of Yisrael Hayom has actually provided a boost in the form of significant printing revenues: Adelson’s newspaper is printed on Haaretz’s press.
For his part, Adelson dismisses the agitation against him as a ploy for power and market share by his competitors, notably Arnon Mozes, the publisher of Yediot.
“Mozes, the publisher of Yediot, is the most powerful man in the State of Israel, and all he wants is to maintain his power, and he manipulates the government,” Adelson told JTA in an interview last month.
Adelson also said the notion that Yisrael Hayom is a vehicle for Netanyahu is nonsense.
“Everybody thinks I started the newspaper Israel HaYom purely to benefit Bibi. Nothing could be further from the truth,” Adelson said. “I started the newspaper to give Israel, Israelis, a fair and balanced view of the news and the views. That’s all.”
In a long, often angry response to the charges against the paper, Yisrael Hayom’s editor, Amos Regev, echoed those arguments, accusing the owners of Maariv and Yediot of acting out of fear of losing their once prodigious influence.
Regev also argued that since electronic media use airwaves, which is state-owned space, the government is entitled to impose limitations on their ownership. Print journalism makes no use of public resources, however, and therefore should not be subject to restriction. Regev cited numerous examples of major newspapers around the world run by overseas owners, noting Australian-born Rupert Murdoch’s vast media empire.
Others on Regev’s side add that newspapers are entitled to have political agendas and to support politicians; for example, American newspapers regularly endorse candidates for political office. As for the claim that Adelson’s pockets are so deep that Yisrael Hayom competes unfairly by offering free distribution, Regev says this is necessary for print newspapers to compete with free internet news Websites.
Dahlia Dorner, the president of Israel’s Press Council and a former Supreme Court justice with considerable moral authority in Israel, calls the Knesset bill to outlaw foreign ownership of Israeli newspapers “inappropriate.” Dorner supports Regev’s distinction between TV channels and newspapers and says it would be wrong to limit newspaper ownership.
This analysis, of course, makes two implicit assumptions: That all the other newspapers don’t fold because of the uneven playing field, and that at least some continue to carry out the fourth estate’s most important functions: democracy watchdog and fearless critic of the powers that be.
JTA
Birthright foundation announces new matching grant
A new matching grant program by the Birthright Israel Foundation will provide a dollar-for-dollar match on any increase in donations to the foundation based on 2008 gifts.
That means if a donor gave $100 in 2008 and gives $120 in 2010, the foundation would match the $20 increase.
Private philanthropists, the Jewish federation system, the Jewish Agency, and the government of Israel fund the Birthright program. The foundation oversees the private money given to the program, which makes up the vast majority of the Birthright budget.
The foundation has up to $20 million to use for the matching grants, which are being funded by a $10 million gift from casino mogul Sheldon Adelson and another $10 million from a small group of other donors.
The Adelson money is the second installment of a $30 million pledge he made in 2008.
According to Birthright, the foundation is in the middle of a huge push to broaden its donor base.
In 2008, the foundation had 2,823 donors. The number nearly tripled to 8,370 in 2009 as it rolled out a national grass-roots campaign. The foundation aims to have 50,000 donors by 2015.
The matching grant program came out of a late January summit of 49 major donors held by the foundation in Las Vegas and hosted by Adelson, although he was not in attendance.
Of the 49, only three of the 15 original private funders who helped launch Birthright — Michael Steinhardt, Charles Bronfman, and Lynn Schusterman — were present in Las Vegas, according to the foundation’s CEO, Bob Aronson.
Among the 15 original donors, only eight are still giving to Birthright. The rest have dropped off either because of changed economic circumstances or philanthropic focus, or death.
This trend, Aronson said, highlights the need to build a much broader donor base.
According to Aronson, funding for the trips has held steady. In 2008, the foundation raised $55 million to $56 million, and in 2009 it brought in $57 million — even as the mega-gift from Adelson dropped by $10 million.
Fund raising, when subtracting Adelson’s mammoth gift, rose from $26 million to $37 million.
By 2015, Aronson wants to be raising some $49 million per year without Adelson money. Anything Adelson would pledge at that point would be gravy.
JTA
| This article was adapted from JTA’s philanthropy blog, TheFundermentalist.com. Major funding boost for Birthright from Israeli gov’tBoosters of Birthright Israel are hoping that the Israeli government’s decision to more than double its investment in the popular free 10-day trips for young diaspora Jews will yield dramatic results. But their hopes could be short-lived if Jewish philanthropists fail to ramp up their own contributions to the tune of some $222 million over the next three years. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced last week that his government would provide $100 million in financing to Birthright Israel from 2011 to 2013. The funding, which will rise over the three-year period from $26 million this year to $40 million by 2013, is aimed at increasing the number of Birthright participants to 51,000 annually by 2013. Last year, 30,000 diaspora Jews went on the program. “It’s a historic decision which is going to revolutionize the relationships of young Jews to the State of Israel,” said Gidi Mark, the CEO of Taglit-Birthright Israel. “It’s going to bring, for the first time ever, the majority of young Jews to Israel.” That prediction will hold true only if Jewish philanthropists, who now fund about half the Birthright budget, increase their investment.
While the program brings tens of thousands of 18- to 26-year-old diaspora Jews to Israel each year, spots are available now for only about half who apply. About a decade old, Birthright Israel was envisioned as a more or less equal partnership between the Israeli government, the Jewish federation system, and private philanthropists, with each providing about a third of the budget. But the federation share of funding has remained low. In 2010, federations provided only about $6 million of Birthright’s $76 million budget, according to Birthright officials. That has increased pressure on the Israeli government and donors to make up the difference. The Birthright Israel Foundation, the charitable organization that helps fund the program, raised $49 million for Birthright in 2010. The budget for 2011 is projected at $87 million. By 2013, it will be $126 million, Birthright officials said. Robert Aronson, the president of the foundation, said there is no question that the Israeli government will reduce its giving if the foundation fails to raise the balance needed to bring significantly more diaspora Jews to Israel over the next three years. It’ll take another $222 million over three years, he estimates. “We have our work cut out for us,” Aronson said. A major U.S. fund-raising push under way is targeting Birthright alumni, as well as their parents and grandparents, in an effort to expand the foundation’s financial base well beyond the core group of major philanthropists that helped launch the organization. Birthright has been sustained recently in large part by a $100 million gift from gaming magnate Sheldon Adelson, as well as continuing support from founding philanthropists Michael Steinhardt and Charles Bronfman. But in the decade since its founding, the donor base has expanded to more than 13,000. Aronson says it is most important to ask parents and grandparents for contributions, as they care about Birthright because they can see its effect. Hailed as one of the most successful Jewish identity projects in recent memory, Birthright Israel has brought more than 250,000 young Jews to Israel since its inception in 2000. Based on data showing that an Israel trip was among the most effective contributors to Jewish identity formation, Birthright aimed to counter trends showing declining connection to Israel and weaker Jewish identification among young diaspora Jews. In 2009, a Birthright-funded study by Brandeis University found that participants in the program were 57 percent more likely to marry other Jews and 30 percent more likely to view raising Jewish children as “very important.” As Birthright’s numbers grow, the level of Jewish engagement of participants tends to decline, which could dilute that largely rosy picture. But Len Saxe, the Brandeis professor who directed the 2009 study, said further research shows that the impact of Birthright doesn’t change even if the participants come from less Jewishly engaged backgrounds. “It really doesn’t matter exactly what the mix is,” Saxe told JTA. “You still have the Birthright effect.” Expanding the range of that effect now depends in large measure on how much money Aronson and his staff can wring from the pockets of American Jews, a task sure to be complicated by a still uncertain economic climate. “It’s going to take a lot of hard work, a lot of effort,” Aronson said. “When I see the results of Birthright Israel, and the product in effect that we create for our young people, I am very optimistic that the American Jewish community will respond.” JTA Wire Service
Page 1 of 1 pages
|
