Court Orders Channel 14 to Pay 100,000 Shekels to Lobbyist Yosefa Barak
The Rehovot Magistrates Court ordered Channel 14 and journalist Nati Langermann to pay 100,000 shekels to lobbyist Yosefa Barak over defamatory COVID-era publications, including unproven claims of bribery and threats.
The Rehovot Magistrates Court has ordered Channel 14 and journalist Nati Langermann to pay 100,000 shekels in damages and legal fees to media consultant and lobbyist Yosefa Barak. The ruling, delivered by Judge Israel Pat on August 30, 2026, follows a series of defamatory publications dating back to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Barak initially filed a lawsuit for 300,000 shekels against Langermann over posts he shared on social media and platforms associated with Channel 14. She later increased the claim to 500,000 shekels, adding the operating company of Channel 14 as a co-defendant.
Unproven Allegations of Criminality and Bribery
The lawsuit centered on several severe claims published by Langermann, including allegations that Barak planned to physically harm the son of Dr. Sharon Alroy-Preis, offered "sexual bribery" to a police officer, threatened a judge, severed ties with her own son, and was a "convicted criminal."
Langermann and Channel 14 argued that the publications were protected under journalistic privilege, truth in advertising, and good faith. They maintained the reports were part of Langermann's legitimate coverage of Barak's public campaign against the Ministry of Health's vaccination policies.
However, Judge Pat examined each claim individually and ruled that the defendants failed to substantiate most of their allegations. Regarding the "sexual bribery" claim, the court found it to be unproven defamation based on a single source, published without independent verification or a request for Barak's response. The court awarded Barak 35,000 shekels for this claim alone.
Metaphors and Misleading Labels
The court also rejected the claim that Barak threatened Judge Tal Havkin. Judge Pat ruled that Barak's use of the term "firing squad" was a harsh metaphor rather than a physical threat, noting that the police investigation into the matter was closed without charges. Barak was awarded 12,000 shekels for this publication.
Furthermore, the court ruled that calling Barak a "convicted criminal" was misleading (awarding 18,000 shekels), and that claims about her abandoning her son (10,000 shekels) and her financial insolvency (10,000 shekels) were inaccurate or based on data that emerged only after the publication date.
Partial Defense and Final Judgment
Not all of Barak's claims were accepted. The court agreed that there was a factual basis, supported by prior judicial decisions, for the publication stating that Barak had harassed Dr. Alroy-Preis's children. This specific report was deemed protected under the truth in advertising defense.
In total, the court ordered the defendants to pay 100,000 shekels, a sum that includes court costs and attorney fees. Barak's request for a formal apology and the removal of the publications was denied, as the defendants had already voluntarily removed the content in question.
