“Dear israeli chief-censor. sincerely yours, the palestinian editor-in-chief”: censorship, negotiation and procedural justice

Abstract

This study identifies censorship as a power relationship that takes place between two organizations: the offices of two Palestinian publications, and the Israeli Censorship office. To understand how power operates in practice, and to determine how Palestinian journalists challenge censorship decisions, 198 letters exchanged between two editors-in-chief and two chief censors are thematically analyzed. The analysis reveals that Palestinian editors-in-chief take a tactical approach to power and challenge censorship by raising six procedural justice rules that they claim the censors do not follow: consistency, bias suppression, accuracy of information, correctability, representativeness and ethicality. The challenges create gaps in censorship and enable Palestinian journalists to publish some nationalist news despite censorship. The study also discussed the disadvantages of challenging censorship categories, rather than addressing the fact of censorship itself.