Pallywood and the Mainstream Media’s Antisemitism Problem

"Violence Tied to Soccer Game Prompts Dozens of Arrests in Amsterdam"

This is how The New York Times originally covered the horrific pre-planned November 2024 pogrom against Israelis in Amsterdam, who were chased through the streets and attacked by gangs of Muslim men armed with knives and other weapons.

As Congressman Richie Torres wrote on X, “There [was] no mention of the unprecedented nature of the event—a pogrom in the 21st century. No mention of its motive: antisemitism. No mention of its victims: Jews and Israelis. No mention of the response it necessitated: an emergency rescue operation by the Israeli government.

“The hollowness of the headline tells its own story about a deeper desensitization of the modern world to Jew hatred even when the hate metastasizes into violence.”

The coverage of the event by the mainstream media (MSM) was not surprising to those who recognize and comprehend the MSM’s antisemitic tendencies and bias against Israel.

The Israelis are the aggressors; the Palestinians are the victims.

This report discusses how the mainstream media in America and the West have decided to adopt the Palestinian narrative, how they adhere to it and how any deviation from it is unacceptable in the newsroom.

The report also shows how the messaging of the MSM towards Israel and Israelis has been shaped for decades by antisemitism. It explores the profound impact of “Palestinian propaganda,” AKA “Pallywood” and now “Gazawood,” on media outlets, anti-Israel organizations, individuals and social media platforms.

Finally, it shows how the MSM’s distorted depiction of events in Israel, along with the proliferation of propaganda by local pro-terror groups like Within Our Lifetime (WOL) and Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), has a direct impact on the safety and security of Jews around the world.

There are countless examples in recent decades, but the pogrom in Amsterdam is one case where anti-Israel narratives in the mainstream media resulted in serious harm to Jews in the diaspora.

Terrorists dedicated to the destruction of Israel, like Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), know that while they might not win their military battles because of inferior weaponry and technology, they can rely on the media to prop them up in the war of public opinion.

Key Findings

1. The mainstream media’s (MSM) bias against Israel stems from a decision to present the story of Israel as the aggressor. This choice is based on a desire to depict Jews behaving poorly, an explicit form of antisemitism.
2. Anti-Israel propaganda coming from Hamas and other terror organizations is utilized by the Arab world, including in America, as an effective tool to indoctrinate generations to hate Israel. This hatred has now spread to general audiences in America, specifically since October 7th, and has helped anti-Israel organizations grow in popularity.
3. Like in academia, MSM has adopted the Critical Theory model vis-a-vis the Israeli-Palestinian conflict: Israel is the oppressor; the Palestinians are the oppressed. Ergo, Israel is bad and the Palestinians are good.
4. The MSM knowingly uses staged footage provided by Palestinian sources because the fake footage, supplied by an industry referred to as “Pallywood,” supports the narrative they want to push.
5. The journalistic malpractice of knowingly using fake footage has been going on for years. Like ancient blood libels, it directly translates into violence and the loss of Jewish and Israeli life.
6. There is a correlation between anti-Israel propaganda and an increase in violence towards Jews outside of Israel. In America, physical attacks on Jewish Americans since October 7, 2023, directly correlate to propaganda videos from Hamas-controlled Gaza (AKA “Gazawood”). This phenomenon has been exacerbated by anti-Israel activists on social media, especially with the proliferation of propaganda on TikTok and Telegram.

When the MSM Turned Against the Jewish State

In the early years of the state of Israel, after its founding in 1948, the MSM depicted Israel in a positive light. In its infancy, the newly founded state was awarded underdog status, and its military successes, despite great odds, made it a marvel in the eyes of the world.

In 1972, Life magazine described Israel as “enlightened, robustly democratic and hip, a land of astonishing achievement.”

Sentiments began to shift in the ‘70s and ‘80s. “A turning point came in the 1970s when the Soviet Union began allying with the PLO and the Arab League, and they began amplifying their anti-Israel narratives as a diplomatic propaganda weapon against the Western bloc during the height of the Cold War,” according to Honest Reporting Canada.

Read more about the Soviet antisemitic psy-op branding Zionism as racism: How Antisemitic Rhetoric Became Mainstream

Around the same time, Israel’s military increased in might, surpassing that of its hostile Arab neighbors.

Veteran U.S. journalist Norman Podhoretz penned an article in Commentary Magazine in September 1983 explaining how the narrative about Israel in American mainstream media shifted significantly during the first Lebanon War.

The First Lebanon War, called Operation Peace for Galilee, took place in 1982, and was brought on by incessant attacks by the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) on northern Israel.

According to Podhoretz, the media, which previously had been pro-Israel, began to be critical of the Jewish state. It was first expressed as disappointment in Israel’s actions, then turned into condemnation of alleged atrocities committed by Israel.

Significantly, the press used inflated casualty numbers supplied by Yasser Arafat’s brother. While they were later forced to retract the information, the damage had been done.

The press began to use hyperbole, conflating the actions of the Israeli military to those of Nazi Germany, while charging the IDF with indiscriminate killing of civilians.

Thus, with the willing accomplices of the MSM, the Palestinians instituted a playlist of propaganda tactics used to libel Israel in the eyes of the world. The tactics include:

• Inflating casualty numbers
• Embedding terrorists and their infrastructure in civilian areas and institutions, e.g., hospitals and schools
• Comparing Israelis to Nazis, priming the public to later accept that Israel perpetrated a genocide
• Claiming that Israel indiscriminately bombs and/or targets civilians

During the First Lebanon War, it was discovered that the PLO stored weapons in civilian areas and hid behind Lebanese civilians. Podhoretz’s description of the use of human shields in 1982 is strikingly similar to the present-day tactics of Hamas.

Addressing the media's biased response to the war, Podhoretz wrote,

“...while reading through dozens of vitriolic attacks on Israel, I have resisted the answer that nevertheless leaps irresistibly into the mind. This answer, of course, is that we are dealing here with an eruption of anti-Semitism.” He continued, “Criticisms of Israel based on a double standard deserve to be called anti-Semitic.”

On the other side of the Atlantic, Melanie Phillips, a veteran British journalist who was working at The Guardian at the time, recalled that she first noticed the antisemitism problem in British mainstream media during the First Lebanon War.

In its coverage of the war, she noted the unjust Nazi comparisons and the double standard by which Israel’s actions were consistently judged. The pattern described by Podhoretz and Phillips has repeated itself during each subsequent flare-up in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

Ultimately, the Palestinians realized that while they were weaker militarily, they could weaponize the deeply embedded antisemitism in the West by exaggerating the crimes of Israel and provoking Israeli soldiers to respond in a way that made them look like aggressors. As one journalist put it, “In modern warfare, one picture can be worth a thousand weapons.”

What is Pallywood?

Pallywood, a term coined by historian Richard Landes, refers to the propaganda industry operated by the Palestinian Authority, Hamas and other anti-Israel terror organizations and carried out by biased and agenda-driven “journalists.”

One definition of Pallywood is “the staging of scenes by Palestinian journalists in order to present the Palestinians as hapless victims of Israeli aggression.”

Landes writes, “I coined the term Pallywood to describe the widespread use of staged scenes of Palestinians suffering violence supposedly at the hands of Israel, fabricated for global consumption.”

Landes began studying Palestinian propaganda after the Mohammed Al Durah affair in 2003 when he understood that staging fake videos had become an industry.

See below for a detailed description of the Al Durah affair

Some tell-tale signs of a Pallywood scene are fake or exaggerated injuries, cameramen on hand to capture the action before it unfolds, and ambulances ready to speed in and take “victims” away quickly.

Pallywood purports to show the suffering of the Palestinians at the (intentional) hand of Israel. Many mainstream Western journalists go along with it and share the footage on their networks. Anti-Israel activists and organizations rely on Pallywood and proliferate their videos on social media, effecting great impact.

According to Landes, the networks know the scenes are fake but do not care. As long as they tell the story they want to tell, the voracity of the footage does not matter. This stems from an agenda-driven disregard for the truth and an interest in furthering a specific narrative regarding Israel.

“In the Middle East, Western journalists have few problems with staged A-roll as long as they can cut it into believable site-bytes of Israeli aggression and Palestinian victimhood,” writes Landes.

Anyone who speaks out about the industry is marginalized and labeled a conspiracy theorist. Although faking footage is an accepted practice in Pallywood, it is hard for the average Western media consumer to believe that something like the shooting of a young boy, as in the Al Durah affair, could be faked.

Lies in the press are not uncommon in the Arab world. Jordanian journalist Rana Sabbagh noted that fake news is part of the Arab world where there is little free press.

“It’s not often these days that the Arab states can claim a world-class innovation ahead of the West. But when it comes to ‘fake news,’ writes Sabbagh, “we had it way before they did…In this region, many of us know fake when we see it. It’s built into our DNA and into the foundations of our societies.”

In a 1993 meeting of Hamas representatives in America wiretapped by the FBI, the attendees said that part of their plan to stop the Oslo Accords was “infiltrating the American media outlets, universities and research centers.”

A court case filed in 2024 against anti-Israel activists and organizations describes how Hamas is deliberate about spreading its web of influence to the United States through the media and acknowledges the importance of its supporters in the United States to effectuate its terrorist goals.

Gazawood

Gazawood is the latest iteration of Pallywood, capitalizing on the copious misinformation and propaganda emanating from the current Israeli-Hamas war. The term was popularized by the X account of the same name.

Post October 7, 2023, the press was rarely allowed to enter the Gaza Strip, and therefore, local Palestinians donning press vests provided the media with sought-after footage, often manipulated and staged footage, as the X account proves.

Read more about how Hamas weaponized AI in the information war

Gazawood Comes to Life in the Al-Ahli Hospital “Bombing”

Landes references the October 17, 2023, Al-Ahli Hospital incident as a recent example of highly impactful Pallywood propaganda. Up until then, the MSM seemed to be uncharacteristically sympathetic to Israel after the horrific October 7 massacre.

Landes explains that the Al-Ahli hospital incident played a critical role in restoring the “Palestinian grievance narrative.”

The incident involved a Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) rocket intended for Israel which fell short and landed in the parking lot of the Al-Ahli hospital in Gaza. Hamas immediately blamed Israel and reported to the media that a genocide had occurred, with hundreds killed and injured. Al Jazeera spread the story, followed by CNN’s Anderson Cooper, who joined in spreading the false narrative, adding his own editorial of horror and condemnation.

All through the night, CNN ran the chyron: “Hundreds Believed Dead In Gaza Hospital Blast.” The Western media jumped on the implausible figure of 500 dead that was immediately made available by Hamas sources.

The footage aired by CNN contained close-ups of running around, rushing and carrying bodies (none appear bloody or wounded). A Gazan man interviewed by Al Jazeera immediately declared it a genocide.

According to Landes, this was the result of a Pallywood crew that quickly mobilized. Since the blast did not create much destruction or death, footage to make Israel look bad needed to be fabricated.

Even though Israel provided proof that the rocket originated in the Gaza Strip and evidence of the event in the daytime showed minimal damage only to the parking lot, the MSM eagerly reported Hamas’ version of the event which perfectly aligned with their agenda: Israel is always at fault for Palestinians dying.

BBC journalist Jeremy Bowen, who reported that the entire hospital had been flattened, said later in an interview, “I don’t regret one thing in my reporting.” When asked about his inaccurate reporting, he admitted, “I don’t feel particularly bad about that.”

Even though Israel was able to prove the truth behind the incident, the damage had been done. The false narrative rekindled the flames against Israel on campuses and streets worldwide just 10 days after the October 7 massacre.

Impactful Pallywood Constructs

Mohammed Al Durah

On September 29, 2000, one day after the beginning of the Second Intifada, a boy from the Gaza Strip, Mohammed Al Durah, was filmed getting shot in a crossfire between Israeli and Palestinian forces at the Netzarim Junction. The video portrayed the boy dying in the arms of his father and triggered massive outcry across the world.

After conducting an extensive review of the incident, the IDF concluded that Al Durah was either hit by a Palestinian bullet or possibly not killed at all.

Landes explains the events at the Netzarim Junction that day. Groups of Palestinian men and youth had gathered, staging various incidents. They were throwing rocks at Israeli soldiers to evoke a response. There were apparent shootings between Israeli soldiers and Palestinian security forces among a number of staged events. Landes details each staged item of the scene in a documentary, showing how the shots fired toward Al Durah do not appear to be coming from an Israeli position.

France 2, a French TV station, aired the footage of the incident obtained from the original photographer, who can be heard shouting that the boy was dead before he was hit. In a fact scrutinized for many years, including in a court case, the boy moves after he’s supposed to be dead.

According to a first-hand report by Landes, who saw the extended footage and spoke to the journalists, France 2 knew the killing was fake and did not care.

The event is monumental, not because of the uniqueness of the staged scene but because it resulted in the death of many Jews.

“It became an instant global sensation, enraging the Muslim world and provoking angry protests where Western progressives and militant Muslims joined to equate Israel to the Nazis,” Landes explained. “Ironically, for the first time since the Holocaust, ‘Death to Jews’ was heard in the capitals of Europe. From that point on, for many, Israel was to blame for all violence, [Israel became] a pariah state.”

Landes describes the incident as the “first postmodern blood libel.”

The alleged death of Al Durah had a lasting impact on the Arab world. His image became iconic and the emblem of the Second Intifada on Al Jazeera and Palestinian TV, and led to riots across Israel.

His name became a rallying cry against Israel in the Arab world and used to instigate violence toward Jews:

• Al Durah’s picture was projected behind Daniel Pearl when he was killed
• His memory was invoked by Osama bin Laden in a jihadist screed against America
• His name was referenced in the lynching of two Israelis in Ramallah

In America, the Al Durah hoax was used to ignite anti-Israel activism:

• The New York-based pro-terror group Within Our Lifetime (WOL) used his image in social media to promote martyrdom

• Anti-Israel activist Baha Salamah’s post on X illustrates the enormity of the impact of this incident: "This photo shakes me every time. I remember coming home from 1st grade when my mom was watching this on tv. I learned what Israel was then."

• Bilal El-Yousseph, a gun enthusiast and anti-Israel activist, who spread hatred of Israel and led multiple anti-Israel demonstrations, wrote: “16 years ago on this day twelve-year-old Mohammed al-Dura and his father Jamal plead for their lives with Israeli #Occupation soldiers the answer to their pleads was captured by #Frenchnews station and this #injustice #inspired me to be the #activist I am today.”

• Outspoken antisemitic, anti-Israel activist Abdullah Elagha, an engineer from Denver, CO, wrote: “its been 21 years since the murder of Mohammed Al-Durah by the Israeli occupation. he was barely older than I was at the time. these haunting images radicalized an entire generation of Palestinian youth. we will never forget Mohammed and we will never stop fighting in his name.”

• Linah Alsaafin, a senior producer with Al Jazeera, who has praised terrorists and supported terror organizations, posted: “16 yrs since murder of 12 yr old Mohammed Durra by Israeli soldiers in Gaza.Footage of him crying out behind his dad's back seared into mind.”

• The DC, Maryland and Virginia chapter of the Palestinian Youth Movement (PYM) wrote on social media: “This image became the defining image of the Second Intifada, sparking international outrage and awakening the global consciousness.”

• Mohammad Alizadeh, who has expressed support for terror organizations and for the destruction of America, wrote on X: “when i was 7 the first bit of news i really grasped was the idf murdering muhammad al-dura. that and reactions to 9/11 shaped how i understood the world.”

The Al Durah hoax impacted impressionable minds, specifically Arab media consumers, and caused irreparable damage. It also became a blueprint for propagandists on how to spread their message and create desired attitudes among Arab audiences.

Melanie Phillips Exposes Pallywood Lie of Mohammed Al Durah

Battle of Jenin

Another Pallywood fabrication took place in April 2002 when the IDF entered the Palestinian-controlled city of Jenin to take out terror cells responsible for a myriad of attacks against Israeli civilians during the Second Intifada.

During the operation, Israel reported 46 Palestinian deaths. All but three of whom were combatants. Twenty-three IDF soldiers were killed.

Yet, Palestinian sources claimed 700 Palestinians were killed, a number the MSM was happy to report and label a “massacre.”

The lie accomplished its mission: inciting hatred of Israel and further casting the Palestinians as victims.

As noted by Honest Reporting, “British journalists took seriously Yasser Arafat’s claim that the ‘massacre’ of Palestinians in Jenin could only be compared to the World War Two Nazi sieges of Leningrad and Stalingrad” despite the fact that 800,000 Russians died during the 900-day siege of Leningrad and 1.3 million in Stalingrad.

Commenting about the coverage of the events in Jenin, the media watchdog organization CAMERA stated, “The fact that the American media (with a few exceptions) seem either unwilling to critically evaluate their facilitating of Palestinian misinformation or unaware of their complicity in the phenomenon underscores the importance of a serious presentation of the nature and scope of the problem.”

One journalist writing in the Guardian regarding the media’s overblown response to the incident commented, “In line with the prevalent tradition, the liberal British press has made an extensive and creative use of figurative language in its reports, which betrayed both bias and an attempt to elicit emotional response from the readers which could be translated into increased sales circulation.”

A 2002 propaganda film Jenin, Jenin, was made by Mohammed Bakri to commemorate the fictional massacre. Despite the debunking of the PLO’s statistics, the fabricated events in Jenin are still used by anti-Israel organizations and pro-terror organizations like WOL and Samidoun to inspire hatred towards Israel and promote “resistance,” i.e., justification for terror.

For instance, Samidoun screened the film in New York at the end of August 2023 to “highlight Palestinian Resistance.”

March of Return

In May 2018, Hamas instigated the “March of Return.” Tens of thousands of rioters from Gaza attempted to breach Israel’s border and harm Jews in the nearby communities. The riots at the fence continued for 18 months.

While the protests were portrayed as “mostly peaceful” by the media, in actuality, they were extremely violent.

Activist Ahmad Abu Ratima, one of the organizers and spokesman for the March of Return, wrote on his Facebook page that the purpose was “a mass infiltration,” first into the Israeli border communities and then the interior. "...Even if some people are killed during the actual breaching … it will be a reasonable price to pay,” he concluded. (Some consider it a precursor to October 7).

Posts on social media urged Gazan protesters to "murder, slaughter, burn and never show them any mercy" if they successfully infiltrated.

Approximately 189 Gazans were killed by the IDF in the course of defending the border. Hamas official, Mahmoud Al-Zahhar admitted that calling the March of Return protests "peaceful resistance" was to "deceive the public."

On May 14, a particularly violent day, 62 protesters were killed. Hamas political bureau member Saleh Bardawil later admitted that 50 were members of Hamas.

Then Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar, who went on to become the mastermind of the October 7 massacre, said that Hamas fighters "took off their military uniforms” and joined the marches.

The MSM reacted by emphasizing how the Israelis were killing Palestinians.

In a film made about the protests, Behind the Smoke Screen, French-Israeli filmmaker Pierre Rehov highlighted the strategy used by Palestinian propagandists: to attract the spotlight, depict the Jews as murderous and portray the Palestinians as innocent.

The film shows how protesters did everything possible to provoke Israeli soldiers to shoot them, including trying to cross the border under the cover of the thick black smoke generated from burning tires.

The organizers’ goal was for Palestinians to be killed so that their deaths would reach the pages of the MSM newspapers. They correctly assumed that the media would be willing participants in their ruse.

In an article for Al Jazeera, Diana Buttu, a Palestinian lawyer, revealed the impact of the protests. “... while the protests have not achieved their stated goals, their influence on shifting public opinion has been important … we are seeing a sea change,” she wrote.

Importantly, the March of Return has been memorialized by pro-Palestinian propagandists as the quintessential attempt of Palestinians to “peacefully” attain their “freedom.”

They paint the failure of these “peaceful protests” solely as the fault of Israel. Thus, since peaceful protest has failed, “resistance” (i.e. terror) is justified to free the Palestinian people from “occupation.”

Canadian journalist Aaron Mate and other enablers of Hamas, use the March of Return to this end:

Similarly, anti-Israel activist Norman Finkelstein uses the March of Return as a justification for Hamas terror:

Palestinians in the U.S. commemorate the March of Return annually on March 30, as “Land Day,” and use the anniversary to decry the “evil zionists” and further justify violence towards Jews and Israelis.

The Media: Willing Participants in Spreading False Information in the Current Conflict

In the war following October 7, the MSM has repeatedly quoted casualty numbers provided by the Gazan Health Ministry. These inflated numbers have been a driving source of hate towards Israel globally. Anti-Israel protesters regularly proclaim Israel is committing genocide based on these inaccurate figures.

“Hamas’s strategy is to provoke a response from Israel by attacking from behind the cover of Palestinian civilians, thus drawing Israeli strikes that kill those civilians, and then to have the casualties filmed by one of the world’s largest press contingents, with the understanding that the resulting outrage abroad will blunt Israel’s response,” says former AP journalist Matti Friedman. “This is a ruthless strategy, and an effective one. It is predicated on the cooperation of journalists.”

The common practice of the media to spread such misinformation, despite its questionable sources, points to a bias in the media itself against Israel and its desire to paint Israel as the oppressor. Journalists who have worked in MSM have spoken about witnessing this one-sided storytelling first-hand, concluding that it is steeped in antisemitism.

Antisemitism at MSM Outlets

Associated Press (AP) – Matti Friedman

Friedman worked for AP in Israel for several years. He said:

“In my time in the press corps I saw, from the inside, how Israel’s flaws were dissected and magnified, while the flaws of its enemies were purposely erased. Over time, I came to understand that the malfunctions I was witnessing, and in which I was playing a part, were not limited to the AP.

“I saw that they were rather part of a broader problem in the way the press functioned, and in how it saw its job. The international press in Israel had become less an observer of the conflict than a player in it.

“It had moved away from careful explanation and toward a kind of political character assassination on behalf of the side it identified as being right. It valued a kind of ideological uniformity from which you were not allowed to stray.

“What presents itself as political criticism, as analysis, or as journalism, is coming to sound more and more like a new version of a much older complaint – that Jews are troublemakers, a negative force in world events, and that if these people, as a collective, could somehow be made to vanish, we would all be better off.”

The Guardian – Melanie Phillips

When Phillips came across antisemitism for the first time at the Guardian during the First Lebanon War, she spoke out about the double standards applied to Israel at the publication and was reprimanded. She felt that as a British Jew, she was being told that she was not allowed to defend Jewish people.

Phillips specifically invoked the Al Durah hoax and how this image was used to incite the mass murder of Jews. She saw the original footage in the French court and said that the reporters didn’t care that it was fake. She explains that they only care about the broader truth, which is that Israel is the aggressor.

Phillps also describes how the media is full of lies that the Arabs provide, especially the BBC in her native UK. She notes how people have been brainwashed by antisemitic discourse, while at the same time, are in denial about their antisemitism.

NPR and CNN – Josh Levs

Journalist Josh Levs writes about the anti-Israel bias in the media.

“For decades, many news organizations have framed their coverage of the Middle East, either consciously or unconsciously, with an anti-Israel bias,” says Levs. “Many even have rules to enforce this bias. I know because as a journalist at two of them (NPR and CNN), I saw these rules in action.”

Levs described specific terminology that MSM journalists are allowed or not allowed to use. For instance, Hamas is rarely referred to as a terror group.

NPR – Uri Berliner

Berliner served as an editor at NPR for many years. In April 2024, he publicly resigned from NPR and went to work at the Free Press after writing a hit piece on NPR, “I’ve Been at NPR for 25 Years. Here’s How We Lost America’s Trust.”

In the article, Berliner presents a network driven by a specific progressive agenda with a list of unwritten subjects journalists are to pursue: “supposed racism, transphobia, signs of the climate apocalypse, Israel doing something bad, and the dire threat of Republican policies.”

He explains that during Israel’s current war with Hamas, NPR’s approach is “highlighting the suffering of Palestinians at almost every turn while downplaying the atrocities of October 7, overlooking how Hamas intentionally puts Palestinian civilians in peril, and giving little weight to the explosion of antisemitic hate around the world.”

The Washington Post

Journalists Zach Kessel and Ari Blaff interviewed military experts and analyzed the Washington Post’s coverage of the current Israel-Hamas conflict. According to Kessel and Blaff, the Washington Post and its extreme anti-Israel bias resulted in the violation of “traditional journalistic principles that have shaped coverage of foreign conflicts by American newsrooms for decades.”

The paper, relying on Hamas sources, misreported events in Gaza and spread antisemitic conspiracy theories, such as the IDF stealing organs from Hamas fighters.

The authors note that many Washington Post reporters covering the conflict began their careers at the antisemitic outlet Al Jazeera, including the paper’s Middle East editor, Jesse Mesner-Hage, who spent more than a decade at Al Jazeera.

One military expert, Douglas Feith, who served as undersecretary of defense for policy in the George W. Bush administration, said, “The Washington Post, claiming to be an upholder of humanitarian law and claiming to be sympathetic to the Palestinians, is actually rewarding a Hamas strategy that’s catastrophic for the Palestinians …They’re rewarding this perverse determination by Hamas to maximize Palestinian civilian casualties to win condemnation of Israel.”

What Can You Do About the Rise in Antisemitism Since October 7?

Since October 7, 2023, Jews in America and worldwide have experienced unprecedented harassment and attacks. As explained in this report, the current hostile environment is directly connected to the false narratives and images that the MSM and anti-Israel activists parrot from Hamas.

The situation is intolerable, but what can we do about it? Here are a few ideas on how to combat the anti-Israel and antisemitic messaging:

• Use alternate news sources like The Free Press and The Washington Free Beacon for less biased Israel coverage
• React on social media when MSM news outlets post biased and/or incorrect information and tag the media outlet
• Write letters to the editor pointing out biased reporting
• Share content that tells the truth about Israel
• Report biased posts to your social media platforms
• Follow Gazawood's account on X to stay up to date on the staged clips being promoted by Hamas supporters
• Cancel subscriptions to MSM outlets and write them a letter telling them why

Profiles