Media is Coopting the Israel-Hamas Conflict
White nationalists to "anti-imperialists" are leveraging war for ulterior motives.
Warning: This article contains screenshots depicting racist and antisemitic content.
Media is leveraging the Israel-Hamas conflict to create a spectacle that works in contradictory ways, resulting in narrative-driven bias to promote various interests and agendas. This includes traditional mainstream media, alternative media, and social media.
Traditional media in the US is the most apparent and requires the least amount of analysis. The bias is so evident that it can make alternative and social media seem legitimate for simply providing other points of view. However, contrarianism doesn't translate to truthfulness or good faith.
A spectrum ranging from white nationalists to "anti-imperialists" share similar themes. These include but are not limited to free speech, criticism of Democrats, pro-Russian combined with anti-Ukraine messaging, and populist rhetoric devolving into antisemitism.
Readers should not confuse this with a political horseshoe theory but instead heighten sensitivity to bias, authenticity, and motives of the sources. There are examples of left-wing groups who condemn both aggression by the Netanyahu regime and fundamentalism of Hamas. Unfortunately, these sources can be drowned out by larger accounts leveraging the conflict for their own goals.
X, formerly Twitter, has come under fire since the conflict broke out. It is no secret that the platform has changed drastically since coming under the control of Elon Musk. The European Union warned Musk over misinformation about events in Gaza. If Musk does not take action to reign it in, then X could face a 6% fine or a total blackout in the EU. Research on the spread of misinformation is already underway. A study by the University of Washington found that ten large X accounts spread unverified information about the conflict. The study labeled these accounts "new elites." Along with academic research, many articles show how trolls and bad actors use techniques such as repurposing old videos to create false narratives.
Identifying bias or misinformation in traditional, alternative, and social media is only the beginning. Sources provide confusing and contradictory messaging for purposes ranging from advancing state propaganda to mainstreaming antisemitic tropes.
Regardless of differing goals, the intent is always to refocus attention away from civilians and innocents on all sides of this conflict to self-serving ulterior subjects.
Free speech and censorship are a driving force in many alternative and social media account messaging. These topics often combine with misinformation about Covid, Ukraine, and broader conspiracy.
Arguments are usually made in a contrarian manner to give an illusion of objectivity and even rebellion. The supposed fight against censorship is again coopting what should be a discussion about solidarity with victims of violence in the region. An example of this networking amongst seemingly contradictory sources is found in posts by Glenn Greenwald. Greenwald is known by many for his arguments against the US invasion of Iraq. Since the early 00s, he has moved into the ecosystem of right-wing populist rhetoric, having appeared on numerous Tucker Carlson shows and echoing conspiracies such as the existence of Ukrainian bio-labs and Covid policy outrage. Greenwald has adopted the narrative of “free speech” to counter valid concerns over misinformation on X.
His posts use emotional language and vague allegations to entice clicks while connecting violence in the region to Ukraine. More on that later. This vapid, anomalous messaging appeals to many audiences that have become disenfranchised by bias in mainstream media. For example, Neo-Nazi Andrew Anglin cited a Glenn Greenwald tweet over censorship for advancing his antisemitic agenda on The Daily Stormer's website.
The appropriation of tragedy occurring in the Middle East is not confined to a specific ideology and often has contradictory throughlines. This is because the content creators are not acting in good faith. The spectacle of media has become so convoluted that some will accept clear bias and fallacious narrative based on it stemming from a contrarian approach. Coverage of the Israel-Hamas conflict has proven to be no different.
In seeking contrarianism, many enter a rabbit hole of misinformation and propaganda. Acknowledging the reality of alternative media is distinct from the support of mainstream media. A loss of faith in mainstream media causes contrarian popularity. Bad faith actors exploit an acceptance of bias in the name of contrarianism for their own goals. This reality does not validate mainstream media.
Many of these sources show a clear pro-Russian bias. The accusation can solicit a knee-jerk reaction from those left of center because there is a general feeling in the West that some in the political establishment and media have used Russia as a boogeyman to deflect from their failings, such as in the 2016 presidential election. However, pro-Russian sentiments are emerging in reporting of the Israel-Hamas conflict.
Trolls and bad-faith actors benefiting from X's lack of content moderation, fact-checking, and Musk's boosts will attack celebrities or high-profile accounts to increase their messaging. Attacking activists and Democratic politicians serves the same purpose while bridging ideological gaps between conservative and leftist audiences. This behavior is not limited to X but is on many platforms, including white supremacist sites and 4chan.
These posts can sometimes be from allegedly independent accounts but often come from employees of Russian state media, such as Fiorella Isabel and Anya Parampil, who mimic the language of those genuinely concerned about Palestinian people. In reality, the Russian government is more than eager to divert Western attention away from the ongoing invasion of Ukraine. What is presented as humanitarianism is actually advancing foreign policy.
RT affiliate and adjacent accounts are all over X and cross-pollinate with various "socialist," "anti-imperialist," and third-party messaging. Many of these accounts end up criticizing Western support for Ukraine, which is in line with Russian foreign policy aims.
Criticism of Ukraine via the Israel-Hamas conflict often comes from populist rhetoric regarding funding. Accounts manipulating the situation present a false dichotomy, such as solving domestic poverty or aiding Ukraine in self-defense. It can also be openly antisemitic. White supremacist attempts to portray Zelensky, who is Jewish, in antisemitic tropes is nothing new. Cross-pollination of accounts also occurred the last time Zelensky visited the United States.
A 4chan discussion board exists that lays out these goals in plain language. Sites like 4chan don't provide a façade of legitimacy or care about Palestinians when opining on the conflict. A reminder at the top of a "pro-Palestinian" thread states that NATO, America, and Ukraine support Israel. This camp is juxtaposed with Russia, China, Afghanistan, Serbia, Iran, and Syria, which oppose Israel. The Assad regime is portrayed as a victim, while support for Israel is equated with unwanted immigration to the West. This might sound unclear, but it lays out a template that’s shared across the media spectrum.
Many on the left recognize that allegations of antisemitism have silenced valid criticism of the Israeli government. Criticizing the government of Israel is not antisemitic. However, the complicating factor is that antisemites leverage the conflict for their agenda and sometimes coopt messaging from pro-peace and anti-colonial groups. An article entitled "Blood-Guzzling Jew Monsters Continues to Target Humanitarian Aid in Gaza" by Andrew Anglin accuses "Jews" of committing genocide and suggests that the US is "winding down operations in the Ukraine," which is good because "Russia is going to need to move in to protect people in the Middle East." The article feigns concern over Palestinian lives to promote the destruction of Israel for purely antisemitic reasons. The article’s title itself plays off of Blood Libel.
Anglin's rhetoric is brash and more direct than most messaging that you'll find on social media platforms. Mainstream audiences are not seeking out his style of content. Due to his audience's insular nature, there isn't a need for facades.
Anonymous posters on 4chan boards openly discuss coopting of pro-Palestinian and anti-Israeli messaging. In other words, even if some groups are using charges of antisemitism to deflect legitimate criticism of the Israeli government, it doesn't mean there aren't those out there leveraging the situation for their antisemitic goals as well.
Two main themes in far-right posts are the destruction of Israel and the threat of refugee migration to the West. Justification for the destruction of Israel has morphed from simple antisemitism to coopted language, such as “ending the Zionist settler state.” The root cause of potential refugee migration is portrayed not because of an Israel-Hamas conflict but instead a plot by Jewish people to destabilize predominantly white Christian nations.
The right’s experiment with coopting pro-Palestinian messaging in bad faith exists across platforms. White nationalist Nathan Damigo posted the pro-Palestinian slogan "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free!" on his Telegram channel.
Similar messaging can, unfortunately, be found on authoritarian leftist accounts. Anti-Semitic conspiracies are presented as anti-imperialism surrounded by old Russian Soviet aesthetics.
If this topic is meandering and needs clarification, then your observation would be accurate. The goal is not a uniform, coherent message from these various sources. Confusion is itself part of the overall goal. However, the connecting thread is a media template used to manipulate the conflict between Israel-Hamas for self-interested messaging as opposed to solidarity with victims of the conflict. Lack of critical analysis, sloganeering, and obvious bias make alternative media no more reliable than mainstream media. Conversely, a lack of critical analysis and obvious bias in mainstream media enables contrarian narratives that drive people to seek alternative forms of media in the first place. With greater accessibility to information, individuals need to utilize media literacy skills and critical thought to navigate the spectacle.