Avner Finchuk of the Israeli Civil Rights Association, addresses the Knesset legislators in an article on ynet:

החוק לא נועד, וגם אינו יכול, לחנך את הציבור לנימוסים והליכות. אם רוצים המחוקקים בכנסת להשפיע על תרבות הדיון הציבורי, יתכבדו ויתחילו לעשות זאת בביתם ואל יפגעו בציפור נפשה של הדמוקרטיה.

Shahar Ilan of The Marker, writes:

נציגת משרד המשפטים, עורך דין תמר קלהורה, הביעה התנגדות להצעת החוק של חסון. לדבריה, אין להשתמש באמצעי החקיקה הקיימים לגבי מדיום חדש כמו האינטרנט אלא יש לבנות לו כלי חקיקה חדשים כמקובל בעולם. הצעת משרד המשפטים היא שברגע שתתקבל תלונה על תוכן גולשים. טוקבק או כל תוכן אחר האתר המארח יפנה לכותב, אם הכותב יודיע שהוא מתכוון להגן על התוכן בבית משפט, התוכן לא יוסר, אם הכותב לא יעשה זאת התוכן יוסר.

From this proposal, it is not clear how content provided by anonymous sources will be handled. Yonatan Klinger of 2jk writes:

The website owners got what they wanted, Hasson got his headlines (and removed his legislative whip), but the public, users who surf the web, came out losers. It was decided that within this framework of “self-regulation”, each website will decide its own comment-censoring policy, under the patronage of the Israeli Internet Association (which is, by the way, today’s biggest winner) in order to protect the public from being exposed to the horrors of web-comments!… oh, the horrors!

Today’s losers are the public. If up until now, comments on Israeli sites represented a form of public space - a city square which supported open conversation. From now on these conversations will depend upon the policy which each website decides to use.

Alisa describes Israeli “talkbalk” culture as important, but not always at its best:

Israel is a small country with a very vibrant political atmosphere. As everyone knows, every Jew, especially an Israeli one, has at least one opinion on any given issue, public or otherwise. Add to this the fact that we live in a somewhat interesting neighborhood, and that the issues we have to deal with are often just as interesting, and it is a small wonder that the advent of the Internet brought with it an explosion of various sites that deal with current affairs. But the really big explosion and the real action is in the commentary sections of these sites - the Talkbacks. The Talkbackists, as they have become known, are often the real stars, very often not in a good way.

There have been numerous online conversation for and against banning of these sites. Ilana, a representative of the Israeli portal, responded to the petition calling to close down blogs that encourage anorexia. Below is a translation of her response:

Israblog is a network of blogs created to provide every person with the means to express themselves as long as it abides by the country’s laws. Our motto, ‘life is here’, refers to all aspects of life, even the more hurtful sides can be expressed here. Any person can own a blog through our system, even if their self perception is problematic or if their body fat percentage is lower than the norm.

The second, and more important reason, is that we do not believe that erasing blogs will have a positive effect. On the contrary, it may be damaging. We realize that there exist other blogging platforms which erase this type of content, however we strongly believe that if we act in a similar manner, we will simply pass this ‘burning hot potato’ onwards without actually making positive change.

We agree that these blogs are problematic, but they also represent a true call for help. And it is best that this call will be heard here, in Israblog, a place where there are attentive listeners and arms ready to reach out and help, rather than a lonely, underground or extreme space.

One must remember that it is not possible to help someone with eating disorders by shutting her mouth. It is possible to help by providing an opposing voice, anti-anorectic, anti-bolemic.

This is precisely why we contact the psychologist Liran Rogev, from the Shahaf organization, who created the blog winning over eating disorders. In this blog, Liran describes ways to cope with eating disorders from his experience as a professional in the field. He tries to engage in supportive dialogue with those suffering from this complex issue, and suggests alternative methods of dealing.

In addition, we are looking for other ways to integrate other professionals who could consult, advise and support our bloggers. However the greatest force to support and make a difference is in your hands. The best thing about Israblog, which is always heart-warming, is these connections of concern, support and friendship made here between bloggers.

We ask you to sharpen your critique over western culture which idolizes the skinny, and point out these social messages, hidden or visible, which relate a person’s value, especially women, to their looks and weight. You can enter pro-ana blogs and leave comments. Don’t answer simply by saying “c’mon, what are you doing…” or “don’t you know that bones are NOT sexy?!”. Comments of this type cause detachment and anger. Liran posted a list of things to remember when formulating anti-anorectic responses in pro-ana blogs. Amongst all his recommendations, we want to emphasize the last - “try to make a true connection - do not criticize or be judgmental. Otherwise, the pro-ana blogger will only reach out to other people with eating disorders, something that can certainly feed this disorder and lead to a further deterioration in their health”. In other words - be friends, real friends, so that those suffering from eating disorders will not seek out only other pro-ana friends.

According to the proposal, a popular site, defined as one with an average of 50,000 hits or more per day, will be considered a “newspaper” and thus liable for the damage or harm caused to a person as a result from its user generated content (i.e. - comments). Ironically, the web post describing this case, published yesterday on the popular ynet news site, has already received over 200 comments.

Hasson’s reasoning for the importance of such a law:

“It is unreasonable that a response, possibly anonymous, sent to a newspaper, will be held under the editor’s responsibility, but a response submitted to the online portal of that same newspaper will be under nobody’s authority… We must not turn the network into a vandalizing, evil tool.”

Gal Mor’s recent post describes Hasson’s argument as coarse and lacking reference to implications on the basic right for freedom of speech:

Israel Hasson’s proposal, which imposes criminal responsibility on commentators, editors and operators of large websites, passed the preliminary vote today. 29 Knesset members supported and only two opposed this evil law proposal. Evil - not because those who slander will tremble before writing now, but because of the lack of reference to the thin texture of freedom of speech. The legislator’s coarse treatment of the internet is similar to that of a Beitar (sports group) fan’s visit to a museum.

It is hard to claim that Shelly Yachimovich, who opposed the proposal along with Gideon Sa’ar, saved the Knesset’s dignity, not even that of the Labor party. But her vote and reasonings are definitely worthy of respect: “the internet works by a different code of conduct from those of traditional media. True, it is not pleasant to have slanderous talkbacks pointed at you, even I feel unpleasant sometimes, but not enough for me to lower the gavel as a legislator. I suggest to remove this proposal from the daily agenda. It harms freedom of speech and will not be effective. The immense advantages of the web outweighs its disadvantages by far.”

It is necessary now to think of an effective response to protest the continuation of this legislative process. For instance, set one day when all the websites block the option to insert a talkback in order to demonstrate what will happen if this proposal is accepted.

UvalS writes about privacy and posts a link to an online petition:

Part of what I like about the internet is anonymity… I do not like being forced to identify or expose of my information on the web. But I do it when I want to, and that is the big difference. No one forces me to identify and give my private information. And here essentially is your problem, Israel Hasson.

I don’t really believe in petitions, but to sit and do nothing will never help. Nana created an online petition against the Talkback Law here.

Jonathan Klinger’s argument notes the government’s attempt to make private entities liable to censor data, and warns that a future implementation of this law will diminish freedom of speech and conversation, as in Iran:

I’d like to emphasize two major topics: death to the culture of discussion on the one hand, and forcing websites to report the amount of traffic on the other. It is clear to everyone that filtering content on the web leads to censorship. It is clear that forcing websites to be liable, will lead to them not supporting the conversation. I do not believe that, by Hasson’s words, “we have progressed today a substantial step towards a culture of conversation and mutual honor in the State of Israel”. The only advancement that we saw today, after the approval of this law proposal in the government’s committee, is towards a country where censorship is operated by private entities for the government… We will all pay the price for this censorship!

The real blow in rights is that of the websites and their right of property: they will be obliged to report to a government apparatus the number of hits on their pages, the information of their editors and their information stored in a site list. This is substantial damage to one’s right of expression, especially when the person does not have the ability to open a website that will act as a stage because he/she will be subject to sign up with a government official. Israel will be like Iran, where website owners must register with the government and be fully liable (for their content).

Hanan Cohen describes his feeling of fatigue, constantly trying to protect Israeli democracy:

… I have a feeling that every time we shout about a new topic, from subject to subject, from law proposal to the next, we become tired. The struggle over a law or against censorship drown us with the little details. And in the meanwhile, the general trend is increasing. We need to start talking about the general trend and point to the forest, not just the trees.

Earlier in his post, Hanan relates to various law proposals which have been brought to the discussion board during the current government’s reign in power:

The Talkback Law
The Internet Censorship Law
Communication information Law (Big Brother Law)
Censorship during the second Lebanon war
Daniel Friedman’s reform in the legal system
Reduction of the strike’s legitimacy as a method for protest

In the meanwhile, the Hebrew blogosphere braces for a fight. Various commentary cartoons and slogans have already been created to draw activists attention to the implications of the Talkback Proposal. Following are two images. The first, a slogan, designed by Liz Cugan and posted on Ma’ariv’s site. This translates to “Talkback Now” and relates to a well-known campaign in Israel, rallying for “Peace Now”. The following image is designed with similar font, colors and wording.

The illustration below was created by Roni, describing the possible result of posting comments on a site.