To this, it should be added that the plaintiffs' claim and accordingly that the program continued to broadcast with other hosts while bearing Zehavi's name - not proven - the opposite became clear that although the broadcast strip was dedicated to other broadcasters, this was under a different name and not under Zehavi's name. This is what Zehavi testified in lines 15-18 on page 63:
"Adv. Abramov: I asked if anyone is broadcasting under the name Zahavi is nervous?
The witness, Mr. Zehavi: Under the name Zahavi is nervous?
Adv. Abramov: Yes, the name of the program.
The witness, Mr. Zehavi: No, I don't know."
In addition, in his supplementary affidavit, Zehavi explicitly claimed that the program was broadcast under the name: "Conversations with Listeners" - a generic name that has no clue between him and Zehavi.
In light of the aforesaid, I do not find it acceptable to accept the claim for the violation of the plaintiffs' moral right.
- Similarly, I do not find it acceptable to accept the claim for defamation. With regard to this, I will begin by noting that the plaintiffs refer - as the basis for their claim in this context - to the publication on the NEWSLY website of March 4, 2023. A perusal of this publication shows that it does indeed state that:
"The decision to suspend and apparently also fire Zahavi from his show due to the various statements he made against the ultra-Orthodox audience during his last show in November, was made by the CEO of FM103 Radio, Or Zelkovnik, who recently announced that Zahavi will be removed from his position indefinitely until he apologizes to the many listeners whose feelings he hurt... "
The problem is that the plaintiff did not present any evidence proving that Zelkovnik did indeed say the things mentioned in the publication, and moreover, in his testimony he testified that he had no proof of this. Thus, in lines 22-25 on page 69, Zehavi testified:
"The witness, Mr. Zehavi: It is reasonable to assume that the person who passed on most of the material was the station's director-general, but I said it is reasonable to assume that I do not determine it in half because I have no proof and I did not bring it here, but the offense to me was when they said that I harmed the sanctities of Israel and despised them."