Download Abstract This research study explores the functions of modern mass

Abstract
This research study explores the functions of modern mass media and media ethics
from the viewpoint of Hebrew law and Jewish philosophy. The study is divided into
three sections: the first presents relevant Jewish legal background as well as the
theoretical perspective of modern communication. The second section analyzes case
studies drawn from Jewish legal literature, illustrating different ways that information
was publicized. The final section grapples with a number of dilemmas in journalistic
ethics by comparing the ethical guidelines in Israel and abroad with those set out in
that literature.
The first issue discussed is freedom of expression, specifically the difference
between traditional Jewish views and modern liberal-democratic ideology. The latter
sets the boundaries of freedom of expression based on the “utilitarianism test.”
Conversely, the former, with a heritage of seeking knowledge, engaging in analytical
disputes, and critical thinking since the time of Scripture, sets the boundaries
according to the content.
This discussion is followed by an analysis, based on contemporary research, of
the functions of the media and its wide-ranging influence. In addition to the four
standard models of supervision mechanisms in communication, a model based on
traditional Jewish concepts is presented, which is essentially an amalgamation of the
first four.
This is followed by a survey of the “structural approach”—a theory that
provides an infrastructure for a proper analysis of the interactions among various
social agents over time and enables a comparison of the political-communication
systems of the past with those of today.
Next, the relationship between Halacha (Jewish law) and its commentators and
the society and communication is examined, focusing on the Halachic definition of
mass media and the references to it in Jewish legal literature. A fresh look at the
Halachic and pre-Halachic works that view both King Solomon's Temple and the
synagogue as venues for mass communication follows, and that issue is explored in
depth in the second section.
Toward the end of the first section there is a discussion concerning the
approach of Orthodox Jewish leaders from the late 19th century on to mass media in
their own time. Their diverse opinions took shape against the backdrop of an everincreasing accessibility and circulation of mass media and brought about a debate
regarding Orthodoxy's approach to both written and broadcast media. A significant
majority of these leaders focused on the media's basic right to exist and ignored the
enormous Halachic challenges inherent in producing communication.
The final chapter of the first section presents the methodology of the research
that was done. The points discussed include finding the relevant topics, their
classification, and a fresh evaluation of the texts. This review was an attempt to study
the Halachic literature, ranging from Talmudic dissertations through the Responsa of
contemporary rabbinical figures, while using concepts from modern day research in
the field of communications. Various journalistic ethical theories are evaluated
against the norms that are apparent from a perusal of Halachic texts.
The second section offers an analysis of seven case studies relevant to Judaism
and communication, which reveals Judaism’s varying approaches toward the media
throughout the latter’s colorful history. The section begins with a survey of ideas
concerning the enforcement of social norms—a subject that Judaism has always
considered to be a major function of mass communication—and also discusses the
role of the media in socialization and help to the individual.
The third section focuses on a number of dilemmas that arise in journalistic
ethics, with particular emphasis on the intrinsic differences between standard
journalistic ethics, both in Israel and abroad, and the ethics that arise from Jewish
legal obligations. The first topic discussed in this section is the need for ethics in
society, focusing on the importance of journalistic ethics, and this leads into a debate
as to whether the Halacha recognizes non-Halachic-based morals. The laws of libel
and slander—an ever-present issue for journalists publishing or broadcasting an
exposé—are discussed from both secular and Halachic perspectives.
An examination of the dilemma inherent in the relationship between the
journalist and his or her sources follows, which deals with two major issues. The first
is “leaks,” where the journalist is given access to “private” information. These leaks
abound in situations ranging from closed trials to confidential boardroom meetings to
disclosing the content of a conversation. The legal prohibitions and the moral
dilemmas involved in exposing secret information are examined from the standpoint
of both the journalist and the source.
The second issue is the controversial question of the immunity granted to
journalistic sources. A range of ethical guidelines that call for varying levels of
responsibility and numerous legal precedents are described. These are compared with
Jewish legal texts that stress the obligation to protect private information and this is
followed by a discussion of the major dispute, which has spanned many centuries,
regarding the strength of this obligation. The crux of the disagreement concerns the
question of whether the requirement to protect is binding by Jewish law or is simply a
matter of custom. It appears that the distinction would be whether the source could be
revealed post-mortem.
The next issue to be examined is the proper form for journalistic investigation
from the point of collecting and assembling the information through the time that the
“scoop” is made public. This is a groundbreaking attempt to compare various attitudes
as to the proper approach and action when derogatory information comes to the
attention of a journalist. Ethical guidelines call for the right of the subject to comment
before the story is released, whereas Jewish law demands “an obligation to protest”
prior to the release of the derogatory information.
The final topic in this work concerns the principal question of the right of the
public to know. After presenting the principles that justify this right according to
liberal-democratic ideology, various other ideas are offered, such as the notion that it
is the right of the public, or possibly the obligation of the public, not to know. A novel
approach—an outcome of this research and the various rationales that were
examined—is offered, which suggests that many issues – for example, instances of
injustice, charlatanism, and incompetence among public officials – should be
publicized, as in such cases it is the duty of the public to know.
In summary, throughout its storied history, Judaism has always been aware of
the tremendous inherent strength that lies in mass communication. This was especially
true among religious leaders who had influence in the field. This awareness brought
about practical results, both in terms of imposing certain responsibilities on the
communications field and the use of mass communication to further their interests as
social and religious leaders.
The linking factor that becomes apparent from the case studies presented in
the second section and the dissection of various texts in the third section is the
principle that information is made available to the public because it is the public’s
duty to know. This includes publicizing injustices done to an individual with the
objective of providing assistance in his plight, as well as exposing criminal behavior.
Above all else, the agents of mass communication are entrusted with providing
legitimate criticism of public officials and the actions of governments.