How Does the British Media Contribute to Anti-Semitism in Europe?

The recent terror attacks in Paris and Copenhagen have brought the need to understand the phenomenon of rising anti-Semitism in Europe just seventy years after the Holocaust into sharper focus.


Two reports published this month covering anti-Semitism in Britain during the past year note the contribution of media coverage of events in the Middle East to encouraging anti-Semitic activity.

The Report of the All-Party Parliamentary inquiry into Antisemitism (.pdf) in Britain during July and August 2014 notes that:

“…there was an overwhelming consensus amongst those that submitted evidence or gave personal testimony at the regional meetings we held, that the media, and in particular the BBC, had a role to play in whipping up anger through emotive content in the news and analysis that was broadcast.”

The Community Security Trust (CST) reveals a direct link between media reporting and antisemitic incidents in its annual report for 2014 (.pdf):

“For example, CST recorded 16 antisemitic incidents on 21 July, the day after intense fighting in the Gaza district of Shuja’iyya and also a day when media reported that a hospital in Gaza had been shelled. On 28 July, a day when media reported an explosion at the al-Shifa hospital in Gaza, CST recorded 22 antisemitic incidents in the UK. The following day, when a power station in Gaza was reported to have been hit, CST recorded 18 antisemitic incidents.”

Read the rest of the op-ed here

38 replies »

  1. A 122 page report which looks like it is well worth reading (I have only read parts). While the recent rise in anti-Semitism is to be deplored, I was heartened by this paragraph in the Final Conclusions section:

    “Not solely in relation to social media but in many aspects of public life, over the past 10 years
    and following the 2006 All-Party Report Into Antisemitism, there has been considerable
    success at establishing national frameworks for combatting antisemitism. This has put
    Britain far ahead of Europe but we cannot relax. ”

    I also note that despite the paragraph you quote above ref the BBC, the Recommendations page does not include a reference to the behaviour of traditional media. Twitter and other social media are heavily mentioned, but the report has little to say on how traditional media’s editorial content should change.

    • There is no doubt that traditional UK media ( and other EU traditional media ) plays a large role in whipping up antisemitism. Many journalists move up the career ladder from NGO/Guardian to the BBC and then on to Al Jazeera.
      Social media undoubtedly plays a role, but Al Guardians obvious antisemitism and the BBC’s pro Arab leanings can not be denied.
      One blaring case would be Jon Snow who not only makes emotive broad casts from the War Zone, but also sits on a panel with anti Israel activists. I would like to think that in other EU countries / USA this would be unthinkable. But in the UK this passes.
      Jon Snow then hides behind “the children of Gaza” and makes his own Youtube video because even for C4 his behavior can no longer be condoned.
      DINKLE, you are splitting hairs and are outing yourself as a classic antisemite who like so many goes on to tell the Jew’s “what is really going on”. Many times before have Gentiles “explained” to the Hebrews their reality. It is a shameful act.

      • Note, he feels it heartening when symbolic gestures are made like ‘nationwide frameworks”, a vague term for somthing very vague, but no concrete measures are taken. So he has nothing to fear and continues to troll.

        • Huh? – I simply pointed out that among the 34 recommendations in The Report Of The All Party Parliamentary Inquiry Into Antisemitism, there was not one that addressed the behaviour or opinion of traditional media.

          So why did I point this out. Because among its 122 pages there is actually very little reference to traditional media, ie the inquiry found some, but not much bias in the traditional media.. Yet Adam highlights the one paragraph above among all those pages. So I point out that this issue was so prevalent during the inquiry that they decide to put forward several, err one, oh, zero recommendations to combat it.


          • DINKLE,
            you always make some antisemitic claim and then back peddle. You don’t even have the spine to defend your bigotry. Pathetic.

            • Kindly point out the anti-Semitic claim in that particular post. – Go on, I’d like to see what you consider anti-Semitic.

              • The editors have already provided a definition of anti Semitism.
                Can we keep to that please .

                I trawled through the parliamentary report also . Lots of , ‘yes there are increases and we recommend setting up committees ‘ lots of describing incidents and evidence and then more ‘ we recommend setting up further research . Lots of sympathetic comments and then ‘ lets get some liaison between various institutions .
                However the tone of the report and emphasis was a recognition that something was wrong in the UK with the increase in manifestation of anti Semitism .

                By no means was this Parliamentary report the definitive and assertive statement that anti racists would have appreciated . However it was the start and another chip in the process .

                However I don’t agree with the point that if the Parliamentary report didn’t specify criticism of the media then there is nothing fundamentally wrong with the media . The report said it was an ongoing process and they looked to the editors of the main newspapers also to work out a coherent policy .

                Dinks , this site just simply highlights too much and too many for you to ignore . Yep you can mitigate some as computer error or others as human error and more as perhaps the person doesn’t know they are being anti Semitic . Even some as ‘yes that was slightly obtuse but hey ho don’t go overboard . ‘
                But the weight of evidence cannot be ignored . That was one of the conclusions of the Parliamentary report .

                You should also be worried that posters like James and Daniel Margrain cite you. They are open anti Semites and they shout their bigotry on your shoulders . I would like to see you post that you have no empathy and no wish to solicit or be associated with the support of such people .

                • I would certainly be worried if open anti-Semitism were using me for their own aims. I haven’t read much of Daniel’s posts but will do so to see for myself.

                  In the meantime I’m waiting for Dani to point out where he thought I was being anti-Semitic in my original post.

      • There is a mutual compatibility in (neo)Zionists and anti-Semites whipping up ant-Semitism because historically both have gained politically from it. This goes right back to the days when the founders of Zionism themselves allied themselves with the most vicious anti-Semites. Herzl, for example, approached Count Von Plehve, the sponsor of the worst anti-Jewish pogroms in Russia to assist him in his political goal. Herzl and other Zionist leaders offered to help guarantee Tsarist interests in Palestine and to rid Eastern Europe and Russia of those “noxious and subversive Anarcho-Bolshevik Jews”–in other words, to get rid of the people who wanted to fight anti-Semitism rather than capitulate to it. Von Plehve agreed to finance the Zionist movement as a way of countering socialist opposition to the Tsar.

    • Dinkle:

      “I also note that despite the paragraph you quote above ref the BBC, the Recommendations page does not include a reference to the behaviour of traditional media. Twitter and other social media are heavily mentioned, but the report has little to say on how traditional media’s editorial content should change.”

      For starters these things should have stopped back in 2002 but if anything they only became too common:

      “The Guardian quoted Abu Rahma saying of the IDF: “They were aiming at the boy, and that is what surprised me, yes, because they were shooting at him, not only one time, but many times.” ”

      The Guilty until proven innocent mentality when it comes to the reporting of actions when the IDF, IAF or the Israeli Police are involved or happen to be near is something no other armed group in the world, with the exception of ISIS, is subjected to on some British traditional media outlets.

  2. Social media mirrors and reflects Arab street mob mentality across the planet at the speed of light. Here the West can see how Arab/Muslim rumors and disinformation comes about and makes its way through brains.

    Social media out of Muslim lands feeds us a constant stream of photoshopped photographs, purposefully mislabelled photographs and cartoons not seen since the Third Reich.

    What seems at first as a good tool against the Jews is actually an unobstructed view into a xenophobic culture that has all but disappeared in Western culture.

    The shocking thing is the western medias unwillingness to write about these facts. Journalists will spend years living in Arab nations producing meters of articles about ‘evil’ Israel. These hack pieces will be framed in a Leftist pseudo academic morass of antiZionism masquerading as human rights.

    I wonder if Jon Snow ever did a piece on the 30.000 murdered Kurds in Turkeys war on its own civilian population? A war that can be described as subfascist and has no end in sight.

    The UK’s media blind spot will come to haunt them as large chunks of its Muslim population radicalizes further and we can expect more massacres across the country. We live in fascinating times, with a new fascism riding over the horizon and the liberal media utterly blind to what is coming.

    There will come a moment when leaks from the internal security services will give away the desperate doings of those who keep a saturated failed liberalism free of Islamofascist carnage. The next mall massacre is in the pipeline. What will Jon Snow say ?

  3. All this becomes a sideshow as ISIS continues its barbaric tyranny across the Middle East and Africa. Israel is the only country able and willing to stop them in their tracks.

  4. As Aaron Dover points out in some detail, the CST claim that there has been a rise in anti-Semitism is a fraud:

    The unfounded scaremongering was augmented by CST’s use of a shared image of Hitler with the caption “Yes man, you were right.”

    CST’s disingenuous claims regarding what they claimed to be a rise in anti-Semitism was supplemented by the words it was “anti-Semitic reactions to the conflict in Israel and Gaza.”

    In its own way that finding is surely an indicator that Israel’s policies and actions are the prime cause of the transformation of anti-Israelism into anti-Semitism.

    More than a quarter of a century ago Yehoshafat Harkabi, a long-serving Director of Israeli Military Intelligence wrote an insighful book called ‘Israel’s Fateful Hour’, which contained his call for Israel to withdraw from the occupied territories. In this book he asserted that the biggest real threat to Israel is its self-righteousness, he wrote the following.

    “We Israelis must be careful lest we become not a source of pride for Jews but a distressing burden. Israel is the criterion according to which all Jews will tend to be judged. Israel as a Jewish state is an example of the Jewish character, which finds free and concentrated expression within it. Anti-Semitism has deep and historical roots. Nevertheless, any flaw in Israeli conduct, which initially is cited as anti-Israelism, is likely to be transformed into empirical proof of the validity of anti-Semitism. It would be a tragic irony if the Jewish state, which was intended to solve the problem of anti-Semitism, was to become a factor in the rise of anti-Semitism. Israelis must be aware that the price of their misconduct is paid not only by them but also Jews throughout the world. In the struggle against anti-Semitism, the frontline begins in Israel.”

    The point Harkabi makes is that it was Israel’s policies and actions which guaranteed that the sleeping giant of anti-Semitism would not die in its sleep and would wake up to go on the prowl again.

    It also underlines Harkabi’s point that Jews need to understand “that foreigners’ criticism of Israel stems not only from opportunism, hatred and anti-Semitism, but from what they may see as fair and moral considerations.”

  5. “I am for compulsory transfer; I do not see anything immoral in it.”

    Racist? Ethnic cleansing? Mm-mm….