Key Takeaways:
-
X’s new geo-location feature is exposing major inconsistencies in online identities, revealing that many high-influence accounts posing as Americans, Gazans, or local activists are posting from entirely different countries.
-
These discrepancies highlight how easily fabricated or coordinated anti-Israel narratives can masquerade as “authentic” eyewitness testimony, making it nearly impossible for Western audiences to distinguish real voices from orchestrated propaganda.
-
The episode underscores a larger truth: online identity is now a strategic tool of persuasion, and without skepticism and verification, deceptive actors can shape global opinion on Israel and Gaza with manufactured credibility.
Credibility matters. In the digital battles over Israel and Gaza, people trust what they believe are first-hand accounts. A U.S.-based activist speaking from their campus. A Gazan journalist posting footage from beside the rubble. A Palestinian citizen who claims to be reporting in real time. These identities shape how information is understood and how moral authority is assigned. This is why the rollout of the new geo-location feature on X (formerly Twitter) has generated so much discussion. It goes to the heart of the question that sits beneath every post: who is actually speaking.
Within hours of the feature launching, users began noticing discrepancies. Accounts that had presented themselves as American progressives suddenly appeared with Turkish or Pakistani SIM locations. The Iran Updates X account has over 4,500 followers and appears authoritative, yet it shows as posting not from Iran, as its name and framing imply, but from Bangladesh.
‼️PAY ATTENTION‼️
This is the PAID cyber army of the terrorist Islamic Republic trying to silence the voices of REAL Iranians.
They’re from Pakistan & Bangladesh.
This is how Islamic colonizers are destabilizing western civilization and turning you against your own countries. pic.twitter.com/U2Bgvwabd5
— Goldie Ghamari | گلسا قمری (@gghamari) November 22, 2025
Similarly, Martin, a supposed American convert to Islam, was shown to be in West Asia. For many users, these were a clear indication that something in the online ecosystem was not what it seemed. It raised the unsettling possibility that Western audiences were engaging not with authentic local voices but with something far more orchestrated.
The psy-op to push Islam in the West is wild. https://t.co/W1PmfQhLsb
— Bonchie (@bonchieredstate) November 23, 2025
The issue is not confined to accounts in the West. Some of the most emotional and widely shared content online comes from people who claim to be reporting directly from Gaza. The new geo-location feature introduced by X has complicated that picture. The problem is not limited to isolated cases. One example is a user called @MMaryamfam, whose bio states, “I am Maryam, a 7 year old from Gaza. Please save me and my family.” Her posts have been read by thousands of Western users who assume they are reading the words of a trapped child. Yet the account is shown as posting from Qatar.
“I am Maryam, a 7 year old from Gaza. Please save me and my family🙏🤍🇵🇸”
Account based in: Qatar
Connected via: United Kingdom App Store pic.twitter.com/LrGZsqqXe7
— Max 📟 (@MaxNordau) November 22, 2025
Another case highlighted in a widely shared thread by @niohberg showed an account purporting to be a user called Mahmoud from Gaza but posting through a Polish SIM. Mahmoud describes himself as “a holocaust survivor” and shares dramatic real-time footage that is taken at face value by many Western audiences who assume they are watching a direct witness to the war.
You’re not hearing shit, you’re in Krakow. https://t.co/771oMtdCjs pic.twitter.com/kXYzJoN0CO
— 𝐍𝐢𝐨𝐡 𝐁𝐞𝐫𝐠 ♛ ✡︎ (@NiohBerg) November 23, 2025
These digital discrepancies do not prove that either individual is physically outside Gaza. Gazans often rely on foreign eSIMs. However, the contradictions reveal a deeper and more troubling problem. It is extremely difficult to verify the authenticity of supposed first-hand accounts, yet these posts shape global perceptions in real time. When an account presenting itself as someone from Gaza turns out to be posting from another country, Western audiences are left with no reliable way to distinguish genuine voices from coordinated messaging or propaganda. The emotional power of these posts means they are amplified at extraordinary speed, often without any scrutiny. This creates an information environment where highly charged narratives can spread unchecked, where fabricated or staged material can masquerade as testimony, and where the line between lived experience and orchestrated influence becomes almost impossible to draw.
Even accounts that appear to speak from inside American institutions raise questions. AG Hamilton documented cases where profiles claiming to be run by Americans were instead posting from Canada, the UK, North Africa and Saudi Arabia. Taken on its own, any one of these examples can be explained away. In the context of several such discoveries in the same weekend, it suggests that identity is being presented far more strategically than many users realize. It also highlights how easily narratives can be shaped by actors who may not be who they claim to be, yet whose messaging is treated as authoritative simply because of how they introduce themselves.
It turns out that a bunch of accounts that post about American politics all day aren’t actually American…
This feature will be helpful. It also lists accounts suspected of using a VPN to get around the country identification.
(H/t @MaxNordau) pic.twitter.com/eNdmEw5vsc
— AG (@AGHamilton29) November 22, 2025
All of this raises an uncomfortable truth. Identity online has become an instrument of persuasion. When a post appears to come from an American college organizer, it carries a certain authority. When that same post originates from elsewhere, it reads very differently. When a video is framed as a live update from Gaza, it affects viewers in a particular way. When it appears to be transmitted through a European SIM, its authority becomes more complicated. The credibility of the messenger is now as contested as the message itself.
The geo-location feature does not solve the problem. What it does is shine a light on it. It forces all of us to ask more serious questions about authorship and authenticity. Who is speaking? From where? And for what audience? These questions will not always have simple answers. But in a conflict where narratives move faster than verification, and where identity itself carries enormous persuasive weight, asking them is essential. This controversy should drive clarity. It must be used to recognize that digital identities are often far less stable and far less authentic than they appear. If we care about truth and about protecting public debate from manipulation, we cannot simply take online identities at face value. We must pay attention to the structures that shape what rises, what spreads, and what is believed. Only then can we begin to disentangle authentic testimony from the flood of content designed to influence, provoke, and mislead.
Liked this article? Follow HonestReporting on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and TikTok to see even more posts and videos debunking news bias and smears, as well as other content explaining what’s really going on in Israel and the region. Get updates direct to your phone. Join our WhatsApp and Telegram channels!
