The Imperative for Stricter Social Media Controls in the Aftermath of the Israel-Hamas War
Author: Mohamed Hineidi (Executive Director — EMAN)
The October 7 War of 2023 marked a pivotal moment in modern history. Its impact, although premature to fully predict — is certainly an inflection point in the Israel-Palestine conflict and the effects of that conflict on both Israelis and Palestinians moving forward. Needless to say, it will have an impact on the morbid peace talks surrounding the long-standing aim of establishing a two-state solution — a solution that almost every country in the world fully endorses but has yet failed to implement. The war will likely resuscitate this proposed settlement, and it will equally have a massive impact on Israel and Hamas. In addition to this, Israel and Palestine will never be the same again, and neither will Israelis and Palestinians. More relevant to extremism and extremist narratives — for which this conflict has long been cited as a main reason by terror groups as justification to commit atrocities — this war will most likely generate further radicalisation across the world by would-be Islamists, including further radicalising many Jews living in Israel and driving more of the population towards the far-right, be it nationalist or religious or a combination of both.
In the wake of this war, social media platforms saw a surge in divisive and inflammatory content. This increase in hate speech was not just confined solely to Palestine, Israel, or the Middle East, but across the Western world, and even in non-Western countries and regions where the conflict has historically not received much coverage. Although the conflict dates back decades with regular bouts of horrific violence in Gaza since Hamas took power; this war has, by far, been the deadliest and most violent since the Nakba in 1948, particularly for Palestinians.
The conflict — which has a habit of going into sleep mode for a few years and then exploding — is now back center stage in global and Middle Eastern affairs, following Hamas’s atrocities on October 7 and the subsequent war that has ensued since then. The surge in online hate speech on social media platforms has been an extremely concerning phenomenon. There are fundamental reasons behind the extensive coverage and global attention the Israel-Palestine conflict has elicited. These include:
Historical and Religious Significance: The conflict has immense historical and religious significance for Jews, Muslims, and Christians, particularly in the city of Jerusalem, despite this current bout of conflict being in Gaza. Christian and Jewish Zionists, for instance, play an extremely important role in driving pro-Israel legislation across the Western world, while many Western and even Israeli Jews who openly oppose Israel are targeted, shunned, and demonised — sometimes vilified as ‘self-hating Jews’. Islamists, and Zionists — whether the latter are Jews, Christians, or within other religious and ethnic groups also tend to frame the conflict as a religious one rather than a conflict about displacement, dispossession, or land.
Media Coverage and Visibility: The conflict has been extensively covered by international media for decades, making it a highly visible and continually present issue in global consciousness. The media often portray the conflict in a polarising manner, which can influence public opinion and evoke strong emotional responses.
Injustice and Human Rights Issues: Many people are moved by the injustice and human rights violations of the continued Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands, including the blockade of Gaza. The constant reports of mass civilian casualties in Gaza, particularly during the October war in 2023 that has seen the killing of approximately 8,000 children and the displacement of 80 percent of Gaza’s population of 2.3 million has evoked strong empathetic responses and a desire for justice.
Political and Ideological Sympathies: The conflict is often seen as a microcosm of larger ideological struggles, such as those between nationalism and self-determination, or colonialism and anti-colonialism. People may align their views with broader political or ideological beliefs, leading to strong opinions on the conflict.
Global Diaspora and Identity Politics: Jewish and Palestinian diasporas around the world maintain strong connections to their ancestral homelands. These communities often mobilise support and raise awareness, contributing to the global resonance of the conflict.
Social Media and Online Platforms: The advent of social media has allowed for the rapid dissemination of information, images, and viewpoints, often without context or verification. This can lead to heightened emotions and polarised views, as people are exposed to vivid, and extremely graphic content that can shape their opinions.
Solidarity Movements and Activism: International solidarity movements, such as the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement and pro-Israel advocacy groups, work to sway public opinion and government policies worldwide. This activism keeps the conflict in the public eye and encourages people to take a stance.
The role of social media in amplifying hate
In the digital realm, particularly on social media platforms, this war has led to an alarming increase in hate speech, especially targeting Arab, Palestinian, and Jewish communities. The need for these platforms to implement stricter controls over such content has never been more urgent. Hate speech as a result of the conflict has led to violence, racism, and abuse against Palestinians, Arabs, and Jews across the world – with some horrific cases of deaths being reported as a result, including Jewish women in Europe and Palestinian children and students in the US. Although Islamists across the world have long spewed antisemitic rhetoric and called on Jews to be annihilated, they have continued to do so on social media platforms; i.e their rhetoric has not changed due to the nature of their framing of the conflict, which is in religious terms. However, what has proven to be unprecedented as a result of this conflict are calls for the genocide and ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in Gaza, by current Israeli government officials, but also more concerning – by Israel supporters in the US.
US-based individuals have even written op-eds stating there are no innocent Palestinians – essentially a call and continued support to commit mass murder on an industrial scale. The op-ed example cited above was written by a person who worked in the CIA and the Department of Defence for three decades. Former high-ranking officials who are given a platform to write and disseminate their radical narratives are nurturing an extremely dangerous and toxic ecosystem that will last years, essentially since such credentials and experience (CIA, DoD, etc) may be taken by the public as credible assessment, rather than hate-fuelled bigotry. The US has taken a conservative approach to policing this hate speech on social media, bowing to demands by tech giants to prevent moderation of content, and shying away from initiating any legislation to hold tech giants accountable for illegal content and hate speech. The EU, however, has taken a different approach – taking a more stringent policy towards combatting hate speech and mis/disinformation.
To clamp down on online hate speech and radical content, the EU passed its Digital Services Act (DSA) in August this year, requiring what it terms as very large online platforms (VLOPs), including TikTok, YouTube, X and Meta and search engines such as Google to comply with regulations regarding the spread of illegal content, including hate speech. The fine for lack of compliance could be six percent of a company’s global turnover. In November this year, the European Commission launched an investigation – the second investigation since the establishment of the DSA – into VLOPs for disinformation. The investigation demanded Meta, the owner of Facebook and Instagram, to provide information regarding how it is approaching the rise in misinformation, illegal content, and hate speech on its platforms concerning the war in Gaza. The European Commission gave Meta one week to report back with its findings and threatened fines for non-compliance. A similar investigation was launched in November against TikTok and X for illegal content surrounding the war in Gaza, particularly for posting pro-Hamas misinformation.
Although misinformation still circulates amongst European social media users, the rate at which this conflict has amplified mis/disinformation and hate speech in the US is extremely alarming, particularly considering America’s continued role in the Israel-Palestine conflict as Israel’s staunchest ally, yet also holding the mantle as being the only country that could bring about a peace settlement.
Global Impact of the War and Online Hate Speech
Impacts on Communities
The repercussions of online hate speech are severe and multifaceted. The relentless exposure to hateful content can create an environment of perpetual threat and insecurity. Furthermore, the normalization of hate speech can escalate to physical violence, posing a direct threat to the safety of individuals and leading to broader social and cultural divisions.
The Role of Influencers and Personalities
Influencers and public figures with large social media followings wield significant power in shaping narratives and opinions. Their engagement with or endorsement of hate speech can have a legitimizing effect among their followers, exacerbating the spread of such rhetoric. Conversely, these individuals can also serve as catalysts for positive change, using their platforms to challenge hate speech, promote understanding, and advocate for peace and tolerance.
Responsibility of Social Media Platforms
Social media companies, as the gatekeepers of digital communication, must acknowledge their role in this issue. Their platforms, while providing a voice to many, can also be misused to propagate division and hate. Proactive measures are essential to curb the spread of harmful content and promote a healthier online dialogue.
Proposed Measures for Stricter Controls
Enhanced Content Moderation: Advanced content moderation systems, combining technology and human insight, are crucial, such as the DSA that the EU rolled out this year. Ideally, this should also be rolled out in the US.
Clear Community Guidelines: Explicit guidelines against hate speech should be communicated clearly to users.
User Education and Awareness: Educational campaigns about the impacts of hate speech can foster a respectful online community.
Collaboration with Experts and Advocates: Insights from conflict resolution, psychology, and digital rights experts, as well as affected communities, are invaluable.
Transparency and Accountability: Regular transparency reports on efforts to control hate speech are necessary for accountability.
Empowering Users: Features that allow users to report hate speech and manage their feeds can contribute to a healthier social media environment.
Conclusion
The October 7 War has highlighted the critical issue of hate speech in the digital age during times of conflict and intense polarisation. It has proven to be very simple for influencers – particularly those with many followers – to spread hate and vitriol behind their keyboards and smartphones while ignoring the ramifications of their discourse on the millions of followers they have. Inadvertently, they begin acting as hate preachers, regardless of which side of the conflict they support. Social media companies have a responsibility to ensure their platforms are not used for spreading hatred. Holding tech giants accountable, such as the DSA passed by the EU this year, is certainly a step in the right direction. However, there remains plenty of work to be done to foster a respectful and inclusive online community that is crucial for maintaining the integrity of our digital and global society.
