- Dr. Altshuler also clarified that a journalist is not a police officer and there is no It's It is his job to investigate how the materials came into his possession, as long as the information is authentic and reliable, and the reference to the manner in which the materials were obtained is relevant only for the purpose of examining the reliability of the information (par. p. 345, paras. 22-32). Considerations of a free press, which is one of the foundations of the democratic regime and a condition without which it cannot exist, support this approach. The importance of fearlessly investigative journalism lies in the public role of the media as a critic and supervisor of the government, in exposing vital information to the public, and in maintaining a free flow of information that enables an open and effective market of opinion (Additional Civil Hearing 2121/12 Anonymous v. Dayan Orbach, paragraph 53 of the judgment of President A. Grunis (Nevo, September 18,2014) (hereinafter - The Ilana Dayan case); The Essenheim Affair, paragraphs 17-18). In order to preserve this public interest, I believe that it is appropriate to reduce the obligation to supervise and in-depth clarification regarding the legality of obtaining journalistic materials, while creating a functional separation between the various officials.
- Thus, in our case, a distinction must be made between a journalist presenting news and the managerial-editorial echelon at Army Radio.
As far as Barkai is concerned, it should be remembered that his position at Army Radio was that of a broadcaster and presenter of the program "What's Burning". Barkai did not hold a command or managerial position at the time of the incident. As someone who served as a presenter of a current affairs program, Barkai relied on the finished journalistic information as presented to him by the investigative journalist - Shteif. In these circumstances, and on the basis of the reasons I have detailed above, the normative obligation to find out from where the journalist received the information he is about to publish does not lie at the doorstep of a broadcaster or presenter on a current affairs program, such as Barkai. In other words, the broadcaster or presenter of a current affairs program is not obligated to ascertain the legality of the manner in which he receives the information he publishes.