Published: 26 March 2024
Last updated: 26 March 2024
Antisemitism on social media increased five-fold following the October 7 Hamas terror attacks, according to a study conducted by the Online Hate Prevention Institute and Online Hate Taskforce and released exclusively by The Jewish Independent today.
The study gathered examples of antisemitism between October 21, 2023, two weeks after the Hamas massacre, and February 8, 2024 comparing them with antisemitism on the same platforms in the 11 months before October 7.
Researchers found an average of 145 items a day, compared with just 27 in the earlier period.
Antisemitism had increased on all 10 platforms examined but was significantly more visible on some social media sites compared with others.
Quantity of antisemitism by platform
Gab and Telegram, which have little moderation and are known as platforms for extremist and alternative groups, were predictably host to high levels of antisemitism. Les predictably, and of greater concern to the researchers, X (formerly Twitter) was just as bad.
“It is concerning that in 2024, X appears to have more in common with Gab and other alternative platforms than it does with mainstream platforms. The data suggests it may be time to stop regarding X as a mainstream platform,” researchers Andre Oboler and Jasmine Beinart observed.
The professional platform LinkedIn, where many users typically avoid politics and controversy, experienced the most dramatic increase in antisemitism, most of it Israel-related.
Comments4
Andre Oboler27 March at 07:08 am
Dennis, wearing a burka is not part of Islamic religious scripture. It is a cultural interpretation some Muslim have on what the scriptural dictate to dress modestly means. My argument is that they are entitled to adopt or reject that, and that is their business.
Religious Zionists like Rav Kook certainly did treat Zionism in religious terms. The Jewish religious calendar quite literally revolves around Israel. You are entitled to your own view of what both Judaism and Jewish peoplehood means for you, but recognise that others will have a different view and Israel will play a different role for them in their Jewish identity (both religiously and culturally).
You write, “Anti-Semitism and criticism of Israel are separate issues, and conflating them is a deliberate attempt to prevent calling attention to the realities of the situation that there are two equal claims to citizenship within Israel/Palestine.” I am uncertain how that relates to anything in the report.
The ECAJ statement in the report (page 4) explains: “This is not about criticism of Israel. It is about blatant, well established, often historic forms of antisemitism again flooding mainstream discourse.”
The foreword from David Matas (page 4) states, “Racist anti-Zionism needs to be distinguished from both ideological anti-Zionism and criticism of Israel. Racist anti-Zionism is a form of antisemitism. It uses opposition to Israeli policy or actions as permission to promote hatred toward Jews. This form of antisemitism underlies the increased prevalence of other forms of antisemitism.”
The report discussed the topic on page 126 quoting “However, criticism of Israel similar to that levelled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic” and adding “This formulation protects legitimate political criticism.” It also quotes Prof. Herbert C. Kelman who warned in 2007, “We must be very alert to the danger that legitimate criticism of Israeli policies and practices may provide the excuse and occasion for guilty-free expressions of anti-Semitism – in other words they may relegitimize anti-Semitism… under the guise of political criticism.” We give context to this showing how he was talking about “the identification of Jews as Christ-killers [which] has not lost its hold” (quoting him again).
Your concern does not seem to reflect what is actually in the report. 74.5% of the content involved traditional antisemitism unrelated to Israel. Only 37.3% of the antisemitic content involves Israel at all, but much of it also involves other types of antisemitism.
It’s not in the report, but running the number on this, I can see that only 8.39% of the data fell into any of our Israel categories without also falling into another category. This dropped to 1.35% when we focus only content that denies Israel’s right to exist e.g. by calling it a racist endeavour. It would be even lower if we limited it to this category without other Israel related categories.
Thank you for the question that led to this additional analysis.
Dennis Altman27 March at 01:10 am
This article is misleading when it claims: “Not all Muslim women wear burkas and the burka is not integral to Islam, but the association is strong enough that opponents of Islam target women in Islamic dress.
“Similarly, the vast majority of Jews are Zionists, so using “Zionists” becomes another way of targeting Jews,” the researchers wrote.
In the first case there is a religious observance which is very different to support for a national state [indeed some ultra-Orthodox Jews are also anti-Zionist]
Anti-Semitism and criticism of Israel are separate issues, and conflating them is a deliberate attempt to prevent calling attention to the realities of the situation that there are two equal claims to citizenship within Israel/Palestine.
Ruth Wilson26 March at 11:38 am
We need more articles like this. It presents information backed by sound research and provides evidence that can be used to guide and support responses to pro-Palestinian rhetoric. The concept of racist anti-Zionism will prove especially useful in addressing the discrimination that has become endemic to life on university campuses.
Miriam Feldheim26 March at 07:17 am
One thing your article has overlooked is that when a person sees anti-semitism on social media they should not comment on it or share it, even if it is to let others know it is going on. The algorithms pick up comments and sharing as interest in this type of content and then pushes it even more.