**4. The case of Maccabi Tel-Aviv and the Israeli Public Channel**

As my case study I look at a long lasting alliance between Maccabi Tel-Aviv Basketball Club and the Israeli Public Channel (Channel 1). Since the beginning of the 1970s and up to 2007, the team's European matches have been almost invariably broadcast by Channel 1. Over the

Symbiosis and Exploitation in Sports-Media Interrelations:

characterized by similar constraints and features.

**4.3 1970-1990: Interdependence during the monopolistic era** 

income. Why then did Maccabi choose to allow the broadcasts?

reconstructed them as events of emotional and national significance.

center-bourgeois statehood.

The Israeli Case of Maccabi Tel-Aviv Basketball Club and the Public Channel 347

standards, diversity and balance. In addition, the channel must certify a representation of different views of debatable political issues, and it is relatively free of direct governmental interference in broadcasting contents (Zuckerman 1999). The Israeli Public Channel is

During the 1970s and 1980s Channel 1 took full advantage of its monopoly in the Israeli television market to avoid paying for sports' broadcasting franchises almost completely. Until 1976 the channel did not compensate Maccabi Tel-Aviv at all for the broadcasting of the team's European matches. Between 1977 and 1985 the payment was fixed at \$7000 a year, although Maccabi won two European titles during that period. Only in 1985 did the payment rise to \$35,000 a year, and to about \$100,000 two years later (Maariv, July 27, 2001). Seemingly, under such minimal compensations the team should have preferred to prevent the broadcastings altogether. A large portion of the team's yearly budget was then based on revenues from selling tickets, and the broadcasts could have jeopardized this source of

The answer lies mainly in the reputational realm. The main advantage of the exclusive television broadcastings was in building Maccabi's local name and providing it with an aura of a national team. This happened similarly to what Whannel (1992) describes in the British case. During its monopoly years, until the 1950s, the BBC broadcast various "national" events, which were connected to the state and to royal institutions. Among these were the soccer Cup Finals, the Derby horse race and the Wimbledon tennis tournament. Interestingly, some of these events received their national labeling only *following* their BBC broadcasting. In other words, the placement of these specific sports events in the channel's broadcasting schedule conferred upon them with a special meaning for the British public. It

A similar process took place in Israel. The broadcasting of Maccabi Tel-Aviv's basketball matches on the Public Channel began in an age when statehood was still a primary principal of Israeli society (Horvitz & Lisak 1990). It therefore provided the games and the team with an aura of statehood. The games were promoted as national events, and Maccabi became "the national team". This positioning provided the team with wide public support and a relative advantage in its competition with the other Israeli basketball teams. Unlike the major sports events in Britain, which are guaranteed to take place every year, regardless of the participants' identity, the European league games became a national event only when Maccabi Tel-Aviv participated in them. This led many to believe that there is a public interest in Maccabi winning the local league (a pre-condition for participation in the major European league at the time). And so, as Nevo (2000) notices, following the demise of the Israeli labor party, in the late seventies, Maccabi became the representative of the new Israeli

Channel 1 on its part also had a clear interest in the games becoming a national event. The construction of a sport match as a national event defines this match as a central and important event, which must be watched. The process is two-way: while fortifying the sport event's status, it also reinforces the television channel's position, as the authority with the power to distinguish between the "national" events and the "regular", less important ones

years, both sides shared a clear interest in the alliance, and their mutual choice served them both well. Yet, this long lasting relationship has been also characterized by varying patterns of exploitation. At different periods, both sides took advantage of their relative position in the television/sports market. They forced the other side to accept their terms, and maximized their rent on the other's expense. To study the historical evolution of this interdependence I rely mainly on the archives of the three major daily Israeli newspapers: *Yediot Ahronot, Maariv,* and *Haaretz*, and their respective websites: *ynet.co.il, nrg.co.il,* and *Haaretz.co.il*.
