Israel’s communications and national security ministers announced on Friday that foreign journalists are now required to obtain prior written approval from the military censor for any broadcast from Israel during wartime, including its location, despite the fact that the censor holds no such authority.

The joint statement by Communications Minister Shlomo Karhi and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir said that broadcasting from combat zones or missile impact sites without the necessary authorization would constitute a criminal offense and a violation of censorship regulations.

Karhi and Ben-Gvir accused foreign media of endangering national security by “operating under the guise of journalism.” Ben-Gvir added that “The media anarchy of the foreign media is over,” making it clear that “anyone who does not respect the security rules will be dealt with by the Israel Police.”

In response to a query from Haaretz, Karhi’s office said the authority for the ministers’ announcement stems from an order issued Wednesday by the chief military censor. However, that order, which has yet to be confirmed as signed or in effect, does not mention any such authority. The Justice Ministry declined to comment, and the IDF Spokesperson has yet to respond.

Israel’s chief military censor, Kobi Mandelblit, issued on Wednesday an emergency order requiring both Israeli and foreign media outlets, as well as social media operators, to submit for prior review any media reports revealing the location of missile impacts.

According to the order, anyone publishing printed or online material about the location of an enemy weapons’ impact, including missiles or drones, in the media or on the internet, including social media, blogs or chat groups, must submit it for prior review by the military censor. Violating the order, it states, could seriously harm state security.

In a post on Wednesday on X (formerly known as Twitter), Karhi said the order was the result of cooperation between himself and Ben-Gvir. “After shutting down [Qatari] Al Jazeera and [Lebanese] Al Mayadeen […] I approached the attorney general to examine how to enforce censorship rules on other foreign outlets that endanger state security during wartime,” he wrote.

“I welcome the censor’s decision to plug the holes with respect to other foreign broadcasts, and put an end to the lawlessness.”

What does this practically mean?

Censorship rules have long applied to foreign journalists operating in Israel, even without this order, but not to their outlets, raising questions about what, if anything, has changed legally.

“The content of this order is reasonable under current circumstances in relation to [missile] impact site locations,” said Dr. Tehilla Shwartz Altshuler, a senior fellow at the Israel Democracy Institute. “What would be required is to physically block those photographing impact sites without a permit — but that’s not the job of the censor. Declaring an area off-limits is a job for the police.”

On Thursday, the police halted live broadcasts from international news agencies AP and Reuters, claiming their footage of impact sites had also been used by Al Jazeera — though it remains unclear why that would be illegal.

A press release from the police cited “Minister Ben-Gvir’s policy” in coordination with Karhi, confirming that police were dispatched to halt transmissions by foreign media of “footage showing the precise locations of impacts — including footage used by Al Jazeera for illegal broadcasts.”

A foreign journalist in contact with photographers whose work was halted told Haaretz there was no difference between footage captured by foreign news agencies and that of the Israeli photographers working alongside them, and that the censor had raised no objections to the latter. When asked by Haaretz to clarify the distinction, police declined to do so, issuing a vague statement that blurred the line between law enforcement and censorship.

“We are engaged in a campaign against an enemy state and must take strict measures against anyone broadcasting from impact sites in violation of the chief censor’s instructions.”

The police added that they stopped the foreign broadcast immediately “following a request from the Communications Ministry.”

The Censorship Unit declined to respond to Haaretz’s question about whether it had any role in the incident.

Shwartz Altshuler voiced skepticism about the order’s ability to impact messaging on social platforms like WhatsApp and Telegram, and questioned its enforceability. “In terms of the platforms, public information campaigns would be far more effective,” she said. “For example, the Home Front Command’s spokespersons could work intensively with the platforms to remove problematic content. That’s a job for the Cyber Unit in the State Prosecutor’s Office — not the censor.”

“This order is a joke”

Prof. Adam Shinar, a legal scholar at Reichman University, added: “This order is completely unenforceable. Its definitions of ‘publication’ and ‘to publish’ explicitly refer to a clause in the 1945 Emergency Defense Regulations that doesn’t mention modern communications. So there’s a disconnect between the legal wording and today’s media landscape. I don’t think this applies to me or my neighbor on the seventh floor. No one seriously expects every resident of Petah Tikva who films something from their balcony and sends it to a friend on WhatsApp to first submit it to the censor.”

As for foreign media, Shinar said, “The censor doesn’t really have leverage over foreign news outlets. It relies on cooperation, so it asks them to submit materials voluntarily. But Israel isn’t going to jail Le Monde or BBC reporters who skip the censor. The chances of any consequences are slim. In my opinion, this order is a joke meant to ‘trap’ foreign media.”

In addition to Karhi’s post on X (formerly known as Twitter), the Government Press Office (GPO) issued a notice to journalists announcing the order, but included a glaring and puzzling error. The notice, titled “A State Under Threat,” included a summary that bore little relation to the actual order.

It details “a new emergency order” that “requires anyone planning to publish sensitive content — ideas, statements, information or opinions — that may be deemed offensive or threatening to national security, to submit them for prior review by the appropriate authorities.”

The GPO called it “a dramatic step marking a new red line in enforcing the boundaries of free expression in sensitive times,” adding that it applies to “even private posts intended for audiences in Israel or abroad.”

Shwartz Altshuler responded: “This statement reflects a profound lack of understanding of the meaning of the right to freedom of expression, even and especially in times of war.”

The GPO struggled to explain the discrepancy between its press release and the actual order. It told Haaretz: “The accompanying message to the censor’s order was not meant to add any restrictions but merely to convey the legal language in more accessible, everyday Hebrew. If any discrepancy was created, it was an honest mistake, and we apologize for it.”

A foreign journalist covering Israel for a foreign media outlet, who wished to remain anonymous, claimed on Friday that he had not been informed of any policy change.

“The censorship rules clearly do not include written permission for filming in Israel,” he said. “I spoke with the censorship office [on Thursday] and no one mentioned such permission. It seems like someone is trying to play games with us, I’m guessing Ben-Gvir’s people.”

(Emphasis original.)