I recently learned of a legislative initiative to take down the newspaper Israel Hayom. If this initiative succeeds, it will have removed a very important competitor from the Israeli media market on both a financial and conceptual level. In the economic sense, Israel Hayom is the only substantial competitor of another large newspaper. Before Israel Hayom entered the market, that other newspaper was essentially a print media monopoly, much like Pelephone once monopolized the mobile phone market. But when other mobile operators entered the market, the monopoly ended spurring aggressive competition and ultimately translating into benefits for the consumers. Both service and prices drastically improved. The strategy behind the launch of Israel Hayom was as follows: Invest initial capital into creating wide distribution at first, and then reap the benefits and a return on the investment with advertising revenue. Incidentally, it is ridiculous to claim that Israel Hayom causes harm to the Israeli economy by being distributed for free. After all, in the modern media market, nearly all content is available without charge -- news websites, the new generation of journalism, are free. In my opinion, the Israel Hayom financial strategy is wise. The paper's business model is interesting. As an industrialist, I remember the outcry in the 1980s when competition was introduced into the Israeli market in the form of imports. In retrospect, it turned out to have been a beneficial move that fostered efficiency, technological innovation and amazing high-tech achievements. The products became better, service improved and prices dropped. On the conceptual level, when Israel Hayom was founded it entered a new niche in the industry, one that was entirely unacceptable until that point. The news media was dominated by a general viewpoint against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. This domination was spearheaded by the biggest newspaper in Israel, at that point, and its subsidiaries. Incidentally, this newspaper provided free news content on the internet via these subsidiaries. Israel Hayom shattered this conceptual monopoly and provided the public with differing opinions. Instead of criticizing Netanyahu, the paper promoted him, balancing out the disparity that existed before, in which Netanyahu was constantly attacked, even in unacceptable ways (like going after his family for example). The people of Israel welcomed the new paper with open arms, and the proof is Israel Hayom's current exposure rate (higher than any other Israeli newspaper). Israel Hayom's wide distribution suggests that the monopoly that did nothing but criticize Netanyahu had actually gone about it the wrong way. Israel Hayom also serves as an important balancing agent in the spectrum of opinions regarding diplomacy and strategy. Viewpoints considered dovish previously had a stranglehold on several leading media outlets, especially the biggest newspaper at that time. Hawkish views, which I think are generally more realistic, were not represented as much in the media, and certainly not by the dominant media figures. Now that Israel Hayom has entered the market, right-wing views (which actually represent a large portion of Israeli society) are considered legitimate. Israel Hayom broke two monopolies: A financial monopoly and a conceptual one. On a financial level, it encouraged healthy competition. On a conceptual level, people and viewpoints that are prevalent among the public but were absent from the media have now become legitimate. I welcome these changes. Therefore, as a democrat and a liberal, I do not support legislation that would shut Israel Hayom down. If it is passed, it would be a reactionary, Bolshevist law. Brig. Gen. (Res.) Oded Tyrah is a co-founder of the Israel Leadership Institute.
