Slop.

On The Times of Israel’s liveblog that day, I reported that the missile had hit an open area and no injuries were caused, citing the rescue services, as well as footage that emerged showing the massive explosion caused by the missile’s warhead.

But what I thought was a seemingly minor incident during the war has turned into days of harassment and death threats against me.

The saga begins

Later Tuesday, I received an unusual email, in Hebrew, from someone named Aviv.

“Regarding your Times of Israel report that described today’s launch as an ‘impact’ — Beit Shemesh Municipality and MDA (Magen David Adom) later corrected their reports to clarify that what fell was an interceptor fragment, not a full missile,” he claimed.

“I’d appreciate it if you could update your article, as in its current form it does not reflect reality. Alternatively, if you have information that it was indeed a full missile that was not intercepted, I would be glad to be corrected.” I told Aviv that, from what I know from the Israeli military, the impact outside Beit Shemesh was indeed a missile warhead and not just fragments. I added: “The footage also shows a massive explosion of hundreds of kilograms of explosives from the warhead. Normally, a fragment does not produce such an explosion.”

A day later, on Wednesday, I received another email, also in Hebrew, regarding the impact just outside Beit Shemesh, from someone identifying themselves as Daniel.

“Sorry for reaching out without a prior introduction, but I assume we will get to know each other well,” he wrote, in a somewhat threatening manner.

“I have an urgent request regarding the accuracy of your report on the missile attack on March 10. I would really appreciate a response if possible. There is an inaccurate report from you about the missile attack on March 10, and it’s causing a chain of errors,” Daniel’s email continued.

“If you could reply to me tonight… you would be helping me, many others, and, of course, the State of Israel. And along the way, you would gain a good source.”

It was indeed a little strange to receive the same question, about something relatively inconsequential, from two different people within a day. But I responded, naively: “Hi Daniel, can you elaborate on what the problem is?” He replied: “In the article and in your tweet you wrote, ‘One missile struck an open area just outside Beit Shemesh.’”

“However, it appears that this was a missile that was intercepted, and its debris and interceptor fragments fell at the scene. No security authority so far has confirmed that it was a missile that was not intercepted and fell in an open area,” he claimed. “If you could correct this tonight, you would be doing me and many others a great favor,” Daniel added. Why does such an inconsequential detail matter to these people, I wondered.

Half an hour later, Daniel sent me another email: “If one of you could change everything to interceptor debris, or missile fragments even tonight, it would help a lot,” he persisted.

I went to sleep without answering.

By Thursday morning, Daniel had sent me another email. “I would appreciate an update from you as soon as possible, because in the meantime you are already being quoted in The Economist, saying that the IDF confirmed that most of the missiles on Tuesday were intercepted except for one that fell in the Beit Shemesh area,” he said, attaching a screenshot from The Economic Times, an Indian English-language business-focused news site, and not The Economist. “I ask again, if you could handle this as soon as possible, it would help us a lot. It’s really important, if possible, still this morning,” Daniel demanded.

As I read through Daniel’s veiled threats, I received another email from an anonymous user: “Is the article about March 10 interception gonna get updated?”

Moments later, I received a message on the Discord online platform: “In regards to March 10th. Some sources are saying all the missiles were intercepted on March 10th per IDF. Is that true?”

The Polymarket connection

Meanwhile, on X, I saw a user reply to a recent tweet of mine: “There are people saying that they have received word from you that the missile strike in Beit Shemesh on March 10th was in fact intercepted, is this true or did no such interaction occur?”

Another X user responded to my post with the video showing the Iranian ballistic missile impact in Beit Shemesh with: “was there any video of the actual impact.” (Clearly, he didn’t watch the video.) Checking those X accounts, both appeared to be involved in gambling on the Polymarket betting site. As far as I now understand, the emails I received were intended to confirm whether or not a missile had hit Israel on March 10 in order to resolve a prediction on Polymarket.

Polymarket is one of the largest prediction markets in the world, where users can wager their money on the likelihood of future events, using cryptocurrency, debit or credit cards, and bank transfers. However, there are accusations that the site has been plagued by manipulation and insider trading. The event that these people had bet on was “Iran strikes Israel on…?” More than 14 million dollars had been wagered on March 10.

The rules of the bet state: “This market will resolve to ‘Yes’ if Iran initiates a drone, missile, or air strike on Israel’s soil on the listed date in Israel Time (GMT+2). Otherwise, this market will resolve to ‘No’.” However, there is a clause: “Missiles or drones that are intercepted… will not be sufficient for a ‘Yes’ resolution, regardless of whether they land on Israeli territory or cause damage.”

My minor report on a missile striking an open area was now in the middle of a betting war, with those who had bet “No” on an Iranian strike on Israel on March 10 demanding I change my article to ensure they would win big.

More emails arrived in my inbox.

“When will you update the article?” one was titled. The email had no text content, only an image — a screenshot of my initial interaction with Daniel.

Except it did not show my actual response to Daniel, but a fabricated message that I had not written. “Hi Daniel, Thank you for noticing, I checked with the IDF Spokesperson and it was indeed intercepted. I sent it now for editing, it will be fixed shortly,” I supposedly wrote. (To be clear, I wrote no such thing.) I then received a WhatsApp message from someone named Shaked: “Can I ask one question about the impact in Beit Shemesh on the 10th?”

Meanwhile, I saw a reply on X to a recent post of mine, with the same fake screenshot of my email exchange with Daniel: “There’s someone quoting that you replied to their email about making corrections to the below news article about all missile attacks being intercepted by Israel on March 10th. Is this actually true? Are we going to make this correction?”

By this point, it was clear to me why these people were asking about the missile impact, and I took to X and told the gamblers to get a better hobby.

This did not stop them.

A colleague makes contact

A few hours later, a colleague from another media outlet messaged me. He said that someone he knew asked him to ask me to change the report on the missile impact in Beit Shemesh, and that it would be “negligible” for me if I did make the change.

The journalist had no idea why his acquaintance was demanding the change to the article until I told him what I understood was going on. He then confronted the acquaintance, who admitted to placing bets on Polymarket and confirmed my theory. Going further, the acquaintance even offered the journalist compensation, from his winnings, if he managed to convince me to change my report.

The threats escalate

After a quiet weekend, things escalated further.

Shortly after midnight between Saturday and Sunday, I started to receive threatening messages in Hebrew on WhatsApp from someone called Haim. “You have exactly half an hour to correct your attempt at influence,” he wrote. “Despite the fact that you received countless inquiries — you insist on leaving it that way.” “If you do not correct this by 01:00 Israel time today, March 15, you are bringing upon yourself damage you have never imagined you would suffer,” he threatened, in a very lengthy message. Haim also attempted to call me via WhatsApp multiple times during the night, before sending me more messages.

“You have no idea how much you’ve put yourself at risk. Today is the most significant day of your career. You have two choices: either believe that we have the capabilities, and after you make us lose $900,000 we will invest no less than that to finish you. Or end this with money in your pocket, and also earn back the life you had until now.”

After I didn’t respond, as I was asleep, Haim sent me another series of messages: “You are choosing to go to war knowing that you will lose your life as you’ve grown accustomed to it — for nothing.” On Sunday morning, he messaged me again: “You have exactly a few hours left to fix your attempt at influencing [the market]. It would be stupid of you to ignore this.”

Hours later, more messages: “I am requesting a response from you in the next 10 minutes. We offered you to end this quietly with a profit in your pocket and everything disappears. But it seems you think you can stall for time.”

“You made a fatal mistake and you’d better respond to us.”

“I expect a response from you within 9 minutes from now.”

“We will not give up on sums [of money] like these.”

“One minute remains…”

I then received a WhatsApp message from another number, someone posing as a lawyer called Vered. I ignored the message. Then they called me, though the person on the other end sounded awfully like a young man, and not a middle-aged female lawyer.

On the phone, the “lawyer” told me that they were contacted by a company in the United States to look into my supposed manipulation on Polymarket.

I hung up and contacted the police.

Later in the afternoon, Haim messaged me again, this time with the most explicit threat yet. “You have 90 minutes left to update the lie. If you do this — you solve in a minute the most serious problem you have caused yourself in life. And you won’t remember me anymore in a week.”

“If you decide not to correct it, and leave the lie intact, you will discover enemies who will be willing to pay anything to make your life miserable — within the framework of the law.”

“And as far as I know, there are also some people who don’t really care about the law, and you’re going to make them lose about 50 times what you’ll ever make.”

“86 minutes left. You are the only one responsible for your life.”

Giving testimony to the police

My time ran out shortly before I headed to the police station to give testimony and provide evidence. The police are now investigating. In the early hours of Monday, as I ran to a bomb shelter amid yet another Iranian missile attack, Haim sent me another series of messages.

“You will pay the full price for your irresponsible act.”

“You have 9 more minutes to save your career. But not a stupid and disturbed child like you will take advantage of it.”

“I wish you not to fall asleep tonight and not any night. In any case, it’s not going to be too easy for you in the coming months.”

I did not respond.

The attempt by these gamblers to pressure me to change my reporting so that they would win their bet did not and will not succeed. But I do worry that other journalists may not be as ethical if they are promised some of the winnings.

An Israeli military reservist and a civilian were indicted last month for using classified information to place bets ahead of Israel’s war with Iran in June 2025. Similarly, journalists could easily exploit their knowledge for insider trading on the platform. I dearly hope that’s not been happening, and won’t happen, in this unnerving new arena, where reality, gambling and criminality intertwine.