Many British media outlets are covering the release of a new report by the Community Security Trust (CST) showing that antisemitic incidents in the UK have reached a new record high.
The Independent chose to focus its attention on the correlation between the one in ten incidents that were “examples of, or related to arguments over, alleged antisemitism in the Labour Party.”
The Independent’s article includes the following:
The CST warned that prevalence of antisemitism in public debate can cause belief that “that the taboo against expressing hostility towards Jews is weakening” adding: “The more people hear and read antisemitic comments and views, the more likely they are to have the confidence to express such views if they hold similar attitudes themselves.”
Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn was previously slammed for comments that a group of Zionists had “no sense of irony” despite “having lived in this country for a very long time.”
British Jews (and others) will nonetheless note the irony of The Independent’s choice of quotes from the CST report when they take a look at The Independent’s own comments section. There are clear examples of how that media outlet has allowed antisemitic comments and views to proliferate.
Even The Independent’s very story of the CST report includes comments that raise serious questions.
The utter gall displayed by The Independent in allowing the conversation to become so poisonous while at the same time reporting that the normalization of this discourse has directly led to record levels of antisemitism in the UK is truly sickening.
Down the sewer: Examples of hateful comments
One example draws on the antisemitic trope of dual loyalty, accusing British MPs of being in the pay of their Israeli masters:
This is just part of a longer and vicious post that essentially blames antisemitism on Jews and Israel. It’s signed by Ramzy Baroud & Romana Rubeo. Baroud happens to be a journalist and the editor of the Palestine Chronicle while Rubeo is that media outlet’s news editor.
A response to the post above shows exactly how the taboo against expressing hostility towards Jews has weakened, as the writer blames Jews for antisemitism, claiming that they are “Fifth Columnists.”
A plethora of examples can be found in an earlier Independent story focused on a meeting of Labour MPs that called the party leadership to account for not adequately tackling antisemitism within its ranks.
The same “Deanna12” poster also featured in this comments section with a similar charge of dual loyalty:
There are many posters who believe that antisemitism in the Labour Party is simply a “smear campaign.” This one doesn’t even hide his belief that it is the “Jewish lobby” (not the Israel lobby) behind it all:
Of course, it could only be Jews, Israelis or political opponents creating “false flag” operations online:
Or could it be “Netanyahu lovers… trying to interfere with UK politics?”
Let’s be clear – denying there is an antisemitism problem makes one willfully blind and potentially very stupid. It doesn’t necessarily make someone an antisemite.
But indulging in accusations of Jews and Jewish politicians being disloyal to their country or owing their allegiance to Israel is a clear breach of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance working definition of antisemitism:
Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.
The IHRA working definition’s examples are illustrative and it could be argued that the level of hostility generated by some of the online comments does indeed amount to antisemitic discourse.
It’s not about freedom of speech
Even trolls have a right to free speech as, of course, do legitimate critics of Israel and its policies. All too often, Israel’s supporters are accused of acting in bad faith and attempting to shut down the discourse, a charge that usually says a lot more about the agenda of the person making it. Turning those accused of hate speech against Jews into the victims of imaginary Jewish efforts to silence them is simply unacceptable.
No doubt, this critique will be judged by those standards by the same commenters who spend their time denying antisemitism and attacking Jews and Israel.
Not all offensive speech is antisemitic. But hate speech isn’t free speech. Those comments that have clearly breached the IHRA definition should not be left online. As for the rest, The Independent should ask itself whether the sewer is the level of discourse it wishes to see on its comments platforms.
* * *
Does The Independent deliberately cater for an audience of readers who are predisposed to hate or did the newspaper create those conditions? That’s another question. Either way, The Independent, while it certainly isn’t the only culprit, needs to take some responsibility for this distressing situation.
The Independent: Enabling UK Antisemitism in the Comments Section
Reading time: 5 minutes
Many British media outlets are covering the release of a new report by the Community Security Trust (CST) showing that antisemitic incidents in the UK have reached a new record high.
The Independent chose to focus its attention on the correlation between the one in ten incidents that were “examples of, or related to arguments over, alleged antisemitism in the Labour Party.”
The Independent’s article includes the following:
Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn was previously slammed for comments that a group of Zionists had “no sense of irony” despite “having lived in this country for a very long time.”
British Jews (and others) will nonetheless note the irony of The Independent’s choice of quotes from the CST report when they take a look at The Independent’s own comments section. There are clear examples of how that media outlet has allowed antisemitic comments and views to proliferate.
Even The Independent’s very story of the CST report includes comments that raise serious questions.
The utter gall displayed by The Independent in allowing the conversation to become so poisonous while at the same time reporting that the normalization of this discourse has directly led to record levels of antisemitism in the UK is truly sickening.
Down the sewer: Examples of hateful comments
One example draws on the antisemitic trope of dual loyalty, accusing British MPs of being in the pay of their Israeli masters:
This is just part of a longer and vicious post that essentially blames antisemitism on Jews and Israel. It’s signed by Ramzy Baroud & Romana Rubeo. Baroud happens to be a journalist and the editor of the Palestine Chronicle while Rubeo is that media outlet’s news editor.
A response to the post above shows exactly how the taboo against expressing hostility towards Jews has weakened, as the writer blames Jews for antisemitism, claiming that they are “Fifth Columnists.”
A plethora of examples can be found in an earlier Independent story focused on a meeting of Labour MPs that called the party leadership to account for not adequately tackling antisemitism within its ranks.
The same “Deanna12” poster also featured in this comments section with a similar charge of dual loyalty:
There are many posters who believe that antisemitism in the Labour Party is simply a “smear campaign.” This one doesn’t even hide his belief that it is the “Jewish lobby” (not the Israel lobby) behind it all:
Of course, it could only be Jews, Israelis or political opponents creating “false flag” operations online:
Or could it be “Netanyahu lovers… trying to interfere with UK politics?”
Let’s be clear – denying there is an antisemitism problem makes one willfully blind and potentially very stupid. It doesn’t necessarily make someone an antisemite.
But indulging in accusations of Jews and Jewish politicians being disloyal to their country or owing their allegiance to Israel is a clear breach of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance working definition of antisemitism:
The IHRA working definition’s examples are illustrative and it could be argued that the level of hostility generated by some of the online comments does indeed amount to antisemitic discourse.
It’s not about freedom of speech
Even trolls have a right to free speech as, of course, do legitimate critics of Israel and its policies. All too often, Israel’s supporters are accused of acting in bad faith and attempting to shut down the discourse, a charge that usually says a lot more about the agenda of the person making it. Turning those accused of hate speech against Jews into the victims of imaginary Jewish efforts to silence them is simply unacceptable.
No doubt, this critique will be judged by those standards by the same commenters who spend their time denying antisemitism and attacking Jews and Israel.
Not all offensive speech is antisemitic. But hate speech isn’t free speech. Those comments that have clearly breached the IHRA definition should not be left online. As for the rest, The Independent should ask itself whether the sewer is the level of discourse it wishes to see on its comments platforms.
* * *
Does The Independent deliberately cater for an audience of readers who are predisposed to hate or did the newspaper create those conditions? That’s another question. Either way, The Independent, while it certainly isn’t the only culprit, needs to take some responsibility for this distressing situation.
Related
▶ What Is the Crisis at CBS News?
▶ When Journalists Cross the Line
Shawarma, Smoothies And… Starvation? New York Times Prints Most Contradictory Gaza Claims Yet
▶ Do Women and Children Really Make Up 70% of the Gaza Death Toll?
▶ Who’s Really Blocking Aid in Gaza?