See also: Khaled Ganaim, Mordechai Kremnitzer, Boaz Schnur, The Law of Defamation - The Common Law and the Desired Law, p. 206 (Expanded Second Edition, 2019):
When interpreting a news item and defining the message that emerges from it, considerable weight must be given to what is stated in the headline, and sometimes even the headline should be examined separately from the body of the story. The reason for this is that the headline particularly attracts the attention of the reader or viewer, and sometimes he is exposed to it and to it only, and therefore a more moderate message in the body of the story does not dispel the impression created by the headline. The greater the physical size of the heading, the more blunt its wording, and the more its content differs from what is stated in the article itself, the greater its uniqueness and interpretive weight in the case law.
- In the Azor case, it was held that there is no justification for examining the subheading separately from the article. It was held that the headline was not particularly prominent, referred to the dispute between the parties, was not worded in an offensive manner, and that the article understood the context presented in the headline (ibid., at paragraph 28). In Civil Case (Jerusalem District) 2528/00 Karpin v. Maariv Modiin Publishing in Tax Appeal, paragraphs 32-33 (November 28, 2002), the District Court held that there are elements of defamation in the title. The court emphasizes the discrepancy between the title of the article and the content of the article, that its wording is unambiguous, it does not reflect what is stated in the body of the article itself, it is relatively larger than the body of the text and is painted in a different color.
- The application of these criteria in his case leads to the conclusion that there are reasons that justify examining the headline separately from the body of the article - in view of its characteristics in this case: the size of the letters, the degree of emphasis and the chosen phrase whose language is blunt and attracts the eye. Although this is a subheading, and not a main headline, and it is located in the middle of the article and not in the opening - it does open and describe the part that deals with the plaintiff, and in view of its style, it can be assumed that it has generated interest among the readers.
- The question therefore arises whether defendants 1-3 have the defense of truth in the publication in respect of the headline. In my opinion, the answer to this is no. The starting point is that I trusted Dana's version that the plaintiff told her the said sentence, or at least because it was an example of a blunt remark he would have made in her presence. A reading of the article as a whole allows us to understand the context in which the sentence was made, and that this is an example of the style of speech that characterized the plaintiff of making "illegitimate remarks." On the other hand, reading the headline as it is detached from the body of the article does not necessarily make it possible to understand the context of the sentence, and the impression that may be understood by the reasonable reader from reading the headline alone is that it is a purely factual description of an action performed by the plaintiff. Thus, while it has been proven to the degree of probability that a defense of truth is required in a publication in relation to making illegitimate and blatant comments, there is no truth defense in advertising for the headline when it is examined separately from the entire article.
ז. Interim Summary
- To summarize this part: It appears from the compilation that a defense of truth was established in the publication of the published article and the complainant's version of the disturbing acts and statements experienced by the plaintiff, at the level of probability required in civil law. On the other hand, I found that the conditions for granting the protection of the truth of publication to the title of the section are not met. I will now examine whether defendants 1-3 have a " responsible press" defense in respect of the headline. For the sake of caution, I will briefly refer to the application of this defense in relation to the entire article.
VIII. Defense of "Responsible Journalism"