Harvard University President Dr. Claudine Gay delivers remarks on Dec. 5, 2023, during the House Committee on Education and the Workforce hearing on the recent rise in antisemitism on college campuses. Photo: USA TODAY NETWORK via Reuters Connect
US and international media outlets have widely covered the backlash sparked by last week’s testimony of American university heads before a House committee, in which they refused to outright condemn calls for genocide against Jews.
But in their immediate coverage of the congressional hearing — i.e., before a storm erupted thanks to those unwilling to let antisemitism slide — the media were blind to what should have led their reporting and only later became a huge story.
A survey of the coverage on the day of the hearing reveals that Reuters, AP, CNN, NPR, The New York Times, and The Washington Post either ignored or buried the specific line of questioning that had pinned down the trio of presidents — Claudine Gay of Harvard, UPenn’s Lizz Magill, and Sally Kornbluth of MIT — who all evaded answering Representative Elise Stefanik (R-NY)’s simple “yes” or “no” question about whether calls for genocide against Jews violate their institutions’ codes of conduct. They all said it was dependent on the context.
These media outlets focused on other issues that arose during the hearing, and created the impression that the university presidents had to defend themselves against an attack — as it was also represented later, some might say tastelessly, by US satire show Saturday Night Live.
Reuters’ text did not include any mention of the problematic back-and-forth regarding genocide (although it later added a video clip of it). It dryly conveyed some of the presidents’ talking points in response to various questions, with some necessary background.
The agency’s reportage completely missed what should have been the headline: Heads of Ivy League universities fail to condemn calls for genocide against Jews.
The AP did the same.
So if anyone on December 5 consumed their news solely from the wire services — which are responsible for distributing accurate information to hundreds of media outlets worldwide — he or she would have no idea that America’s elite universities had legitimized calls for the slaughtering of Jews.
Two months after Hamas had carried out a genocidal attack on southern Israel on October 7, triggering the rise in campus antisemitism that the committee set out to investigate, it’s incomprehensible how journalists could have missed the very discussion pertaining to such genocide.
CNN also ignored the exchange. It did quote a similar one, regarding “Intifada” and the slogan “From the River to the Sea,” but that wasn’t nearly as poignant.
Likewise, NPR’s report mentioned the “Intifada” questions but omits the testy debate over genocide. It was also quite supportive of the leaders of the universities, who they said “have long struggled to balance free speech and student safety.”
Burying the Headline
Other media mentioned the genocide issue, but in a way that did more harm than good.
The New York Times started by presenting the universities’ presidents as victims of events, rather than leaders who carry responsibility:
From the beginning of the Israel-Hamas conflict, the presidents have struggled to balance the free speech rights of pro-Palestinian protesters with the competing claims of Jewish students, who say that some of the rhetoric has spilled over into antisemitism. And the presidents have had to handle an increase in bias attacks for both sides.
Then the Times simply glossed over the heated genocide exchange, which is briefly buried at the end of the article as if it doesn’t merit any special attention:
She asked Ms. Magill of the University of Pennsylvania, “Does calling for the genocide of Jews violate Penn’s rules or code of conduct, yes or no?”
Ms. Magill replied, “If the speech turns into conduct, it can be harassment.”
Representative Stefanik pressed: “I am asking, specifically calling for the genocide of Jews, does that constitute bullying or harassment?”
After some back and forth, Ms. Magill said, “It can be harassment.”
Representative Stefanik responded: “The answer is yes.”
The Washington Post chose to present the exchange in the middle of its piece, between lengthy paragraphs regarding other issues that arose during the hearing:
Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) asked the presidents about the limits of free speech. “Does calling for the genocide of Jews violate Harvard’s rules on bullying and harassment?” she asked.
“Calling for the genocide of Jews is antisemitic,” Gay replied. “And that is antisemitic speech. And as I have said, when speech crosses into conduct, we take action.”
“So is that a yes?” Stefanik asked.
“When speech crosses into conduct, we take action,” Gay repeated.
Republicans also pushed the university leaders about the role of faculty.
It can be argued that both The New York Times and Washington Post, by reporting on the issue as just another item out of many, have actually contributed to its legitimization.
Apparently, antisemitism doesn’t ring loud enough to make headlines.
After the backlash
Luckily, viewers and decision-makers had more common sense than major media outlets.
The backlash started almost immediately, with heavy criticism from appalled donors, lawmakers, and alumni.
Media quickly jumped on the bandwagon and widely covered subsequent events — the public uproar, the clarifications, and the resignation of UPenn’s president Liz Magill.
But their initial fault should not be forgotten.
To be clear, a short exchange at the end of a five-hour hearing can be easily missed. But the question remains: Why wasn’t it obvious to the media? Why did it become obvious only after Jews and their supporters complained?
Would news outlets be so indifferent if the same question regarding genocide had been posed about any other minority?
Unfortunately, it may imply that antisemitism has become an accepted feature of reality, for academics and media alike. But those aiming to objectively report on that reality should take a very good look at their own blind spot before doing so.
The post Coverage of Campus Antisemitism Hearing Exposes Media Blind Spot first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
Steve Witkoff, founder of the Witkoff Group, gestures during a rally for Donald Trump at Madison Square Garden, in New York, US, Oct. 27, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Andrew Kelly
Donald Trump’s Middle East envoy has traveled to Qatar and Israel to kick-start the US president-elect’s diplomatic push to help reach a Gaza ceasefire and hostage release deal before he takes office on Jan. 20, a source briefed on the talks told Reuters.
Steve Witkoff, who will officially take up the position under Trump’s administration, met separately in late November with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Qatar’s Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani, the source said.
Witkoff’s conversations appear aimed at building on nearly 14 months of unsuccessful diplomacy by the Biden administration, Qatar, and Egypt aimed at a lasting ceasefire between Israel and Palestinian terrorist group Hamas in Gaza and the release of dozens of Israeli hostages held in the enclave.
The meetings also signal that the Gulf state of Qatar has resumed as a key mediator after suspending its role last month, the source said.
The source added that Hamas negotiators would likely return to the Qatari capital Doha for more talks soon.
BIDEN’S EFFORTS
Biden’s aides have been aware of Witkoff’s contacts with Israeli, Qatari, and other Middle East officials and understand that Trump’s envoy supports a Gaza deal along the lines the administration has been pursuing, a US official said.
The Biden administration, rather than Witkoff, retains the US lead in efforts to revive negotiations towards a ceasefire in Gaza. Hamas leaders held talks with Egyptian security officials in Cairo on Sunday.
President Joe Biden’s team has kept the Trump camp updated, but the two sides have not worked together directly, the US official told Reuters, speaking on condition of anonymity.
The Biden administration does not see a need to coordinate with Witkoff because it regards his discussions with regional players as largely an effort to learn the issues rather than negotiations, the official said.
Trump’s transition team and representatives for Witkoff did not immediately respond to a request for comment about the meetings.
Trump warned on Monday there would be “hell to pay” in the Middle East if hostages held in the Gaza Strip were not released prior to his Jan. 20 inauguration.
WITKOFF’S REGIONAL TALKS
Witkoff is a real estate investor and Trump campaign donor with business ties to Qatar and other Gulf states, but he has no prior diplomatic experience.
He met Sheikh Mohammed, who also serves as foreign minister, in Doha on Nov 22.
“Both agreed a Gaza ceasefire is needed before Trump’s inauguration so that once the Trump administration takes office it can move onto other issues, like stabilizing Gaza and the region,” said the source, who was briefed on Witkoff’s meetings and spoke on the condition of anonymity.
Witkoff met Netanyahu in Israel on Nov 23.
Qatar’s foreign ministry and the Israeli prime minister’s office did not respond to Reuters’ request for comment.
Witkoff also met families of Israeli hostages, an Israeli official told Reuters.
He “spoke with them about Team Trump’s efforts to try and broker the deal before inauguration,” the official said.
Sheikh Mohammed traveled to Vienna on Nov. 24 to meet the director of Israel‘s Mossad spy agency David Barnea, who has led Israel‘s talks with Qatar over the last 14 months.
“There are plans for a subsequent round of indirect talks between Israel and Hamas to take place potentially in Doha soon, but no specific date has been set,” the source said.
Hamas’ negotiating team left Doha in recent weeks, Qatari officials said, after Washington objected to their presence. That followed Hamas’ rejection of a short-term ceasefire proposal after talks in mid-October.
The source said the Hamas’ negotiators were likely to return to Doha for new talks.
TRUMP’S WARNING
Speaking about Trump’s warning on Monday there would be “hell to pay” if hostages in Gaza were not released by his inauguration, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken told Reuters on Wednesday his comment was a “powerful reflection” of the urgency for a ceasefire and hostage deal among both Trump’s Republicans and Biden’s Democrats.
“We’re going to pursue every avenue we can in the time that we have left to try to get the hostages back and to get a ceasefire. And I think the president-elect’s statement reinforces that,” Blinken said.
The post Trump’s Middle East Envoy in Diplomatic Push to Help Reach Gaza Ceasefire Before Inauguration first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
Anti-Israel demonstrators rally amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas, outside the White House in Washington, US, Nov. 4, 2023. Photo: REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz
In an era dominated by search engines and instant information, Wikipedia holds an outsized influence. For millions of users, it is often the first — and sometimes the only — source of information on global events and historical contexts. Yet, as investigative journalist Ashley Rindsberg revealed in an explosive report, a quiet yet coordinated operation has taken root among the online encyclopedia’s editors, monumentally reshaping the way the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is perceived.
In a conversation with The Algemeiner this week, Rindsberg asserted that the campaign has “actually changed what appears to be the face of not just the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but of the entire justification for Israel’s right to exist and legitimacy, which is the real aim.”
In a detailed exposé published by the American media company Pirate Wires in October, Rindsberg outlined a coalition of approximately 40 Wikipedia editors that has systematically altered thousands of articles to tilt public opinion against Israel. These individuals, acting in concert, have executed around 850,000 edits on nearly 10,000 articles on the conflict, Rindsberg said, subtly shifting the ideological foundation of content related to Israel, the Palestinians, and even broader Middle Eastern geopolitics.
Ideological Subversion at Scale
“What we’ve seen with the Palestine-Israel articles topic area on Wikipedia is a wholesale shift in the ideological underpinning of those articles,” Rindsberg said.
The report cited one prominent example:
These efforts are remarkably successful. Type “Zionism” into Wikipedia’s search box and, aside from the main article on Zionism (and a disambiguation page), the auto-fill returns: “Zionism as settler colonialism,” “Zionism in the Age of the Dictators” (a book by a pro-Palestinian Trotskyite), “Zionism from the Standpoint of its Victims,” and “Racism in Israel.”
This is one of the most intensive, important pieces I’ve reported.
It shows how a powerful group of pro-Palestine Wikipedia editors have hijacked the Israel-Plaestine discourse. But it a template for how radical ideas get milled into the mainstream by the open encyclopedia. https://t.co/0d2EbaCZkf
— Ashley Rindsberg (@AshleyRindsberg) October 24, 2024
The edits in question range from minor tweaks — removing ties between Jewish history and the land of Israel — to major alterations, such as the omission of references to the atrocities committed during the Hamas-led attack across southern Israel last Oct. 7, including, most egregiously, references of rape and other acts of sexual violence.
The group has also reportedly sanitized articles on controversial historical figures, including those with ties to Nazi Germany such as the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem Haj Amin al-Husseini, as well as diluting mentions of human rights abuses by the Iranian regime.
In an article on “Jews,” for example, an editor removed the phrase “Land of Israel” from a key sentence on the origin of Jewish people. The article’s short description (that appears on search results) was changed from “Ethnoreligious group and nation from the Levant” to “Ethnoreligious group and cultural community.”
“Though subtle, the implication is significant: unlike nations, ‘cultural communities’ don’t require, or warrant, their own states,” Rindsberg wrote in his report.
The Role of Tech for Palestine
The operation has been bolstered by Tech for Palestine, a pro-Palestinian tech advocacy group. According to Rindsberg’s investigation, the group works in tandem with expert Wikipedia editors to execute coordinated editing campaigns. Editors then work in pairs or trios in a bid to evade detection, Rindsberg said in his report.
Tech for Palestine established a dedicated Wikipedia Collaboration channel designed to streamline their efforts. The initiative involved recruiting volunteers, guiding them through structured orientation sessions, and addressing challenges. The channel’s welcome message highlighted its strategic intent with a pointed question: “Why Wikipedia? It is a widely accessed resource, and its content influences public perception.”
A veteran editor known as Ïvana, whose username prominently features the anti-Israel red triangle often used to identify and target Jews, was appointed as the channel’s resident Wikipedia expert.
The editing group’s influence extends beyond conflict-related articles to include profiles of celebrities, aiming to amplify sympathetic narratives while muting criticisms of terrorist organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah.
Millions of readers are impacted. As Wikipedia articles frequently dominate search engine results, especially those of Google, the changes effectively dictate how global audiences understand the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
“Millions and millions of people are being fed information that has been essentially produced by a group of 40 pro-Palestine editors acting in a coordinated fashion,” Rindsberg told The Algemeiner.
The ramifications are vast. Wikipedia’s model of open, community-driven editing is predicated on the assumption of good faith. By altering historical narratives and omitting key details, they are not merely influencing opinion but actively reshaping reality for an unwitting global audience, and in this case, Rindsberg said, “completely altering the way the world sees the conflict as well as the region.”
After Rindsberg’s report was published, Ïvana was “summoned” — in her words — by Wikipedia’s Arbitration Committee and is reportedly facing a potential lifetime ban from the platform. Rindsberg told The Algemeiner that other investigations have also been launched as a result of the article.
The exposé was published weeks after Wikipedia editors decided that the article “Allegations of genocide in the 2023 Israeli attack on Gaza” should be renamed “Gaza genocide,” a change that appears to outwardly accuse Israel of committing genocide in the Palestinian enclave during its military campaign against Hamas terrorists.
In June, 43 Jewish organizations signed a letter sent to the Wikimedia Foundation lambasting Wikipedia’s conclusion that the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) is not a credible source for information about antisemitism and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The post Wikipedia’s Quiet Revolution: How a Coordinated Group of Editors Reshaped the Israeli-Palestinian Narrative first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
Anti-Defamation League (ADL) CEO Jonathan Greenblatt speaks during the organization’s “Never Is Now” summit at the Jacob Javits Convention Center in Manhattan in New York City, US, Nov. 10, 2022. Photo: REUTERS/Jeenah Moon
Jewish and Israeli Americans are facing “substantial discrimination” in the US job market, being filtered out of hiring pools by recruiters who identify their heritage through their last names and resumes, a groundbreaking new study commissioned by the Anti-Defamation League’s (ADL) Center for Antisemitism Research has found.
Conducted by California State University Channel Islands economics professor Dr. Bryan Tomlin, the study, titled “Jewish and Israeli Americans Face Discrimination in the Job Market,” found that job seekers with names that “sound” Jewish and resumes that “signal” a likely Jewish background needed to send 24.2 percent more inquiries to potential employers to gain an equal number of positive responses as non-Jews. For Israelis, the number was higher, with 39 percent more inquiries required for receiving equal responses.
“Without the benefit of a study of this kind, it is difficult, if not impossible, to prove adverse treatment in the labor market based on one’s religion or cultural identity,” Tomlin said in a press release. “This study shows that Jewish and Israeli Americans may be missing out on job opportunities just because of their identity, not their qualifications, and it provides a start toward quantifying some of these more subtle but still harmful symptoms of antisemitism.”
Tomlin amassed his data by sending 3,000 “email inquiries” to companies across the US which posted job listings on Craigslist.org between May 2024 and October 2024. He wrote as a “Kristen Miller” — a traditional Western European name which functioned as the control— or Rebecca Cohen and Lia Avraham, signaling Jewish and Israeli origin, respectively, or what Tomlin described as “the Jewish and Israeli treatments.” Each applicant was given similar qualifications and other indicators of merit, including a bachelors degree in literature, fluency in foreign languages, and relevant job experiences.
However, their job experiences and academic concentrations differed. For example, the Western European control, “Kristen,” reported emphasizing English literature in her undergraduate studies, while the latter two reported studying Jewish and Israeli literature. Additionally, Kristen listed a “Martinelli’s Italian Diner and Deli” as a “previous restaurant experience,” while Rebecca and Lia listed an “Eli’s Jewish Diner and Deli” and “Zev’s Israeli Diner and Deli.” Similar cultural markers were included in other categories.
The results were striking. The Israeli and Jewish treatments “experienced a decrease in positive response rates relative to the control,” resulting in the study’s main finding that “to receive the same number of positive responses as the Western European Treatment, the Jewish Treatment must send 24.2 percent more inquiries, and the Israeli Treatment must send 39.0 percent more inquiries.”
It continued, “The results of this analysis suggest that antisemitism is not limited to the readily identifiable verbal/physical space as identified by the ADL and the FBI, but also exists within the labor market, as well. However, because this study focused on the market for administrators, the extent to which these results can be applied to other markets is not known, and it would be helpful if future research were to test for antisemitism in other industries as well. Moreover, given the results of this study, further investigation of potential adverse treatment of these protected groups in other markets (non-labor) is warranted as well.”
“This is groundbreaking evidence of serious antisemitic discrimination in the labor market,” Greenblatt said in a statement. “On top of increasing antisemitic incidents and growing antisemitic beliefs, this landmark study illustrates the very real need for employers to take anti-Jewish and anti-Israeli prejudice more seriously to have a workplace that works for everyone.”
Founded in 1913, the Anti-Defamation League is among world’s best known Jewish civil rights organizations.
In October, the ADL issued a report describing the punishing wave of over 10,000 antisemitic incidents that hit the American Jewish community in the year following Hamas’s Oct. 7 massacre across southern Israel. Having tracked antisemitic incidents that occurred over the next 12 months, the report showed a 200 percent increase from the previous year, noting that 30 percent of them took place on college campuses and another 12 percent happened during anti-Israel protests. Another 20 percent targeted Jewish institutions, including nonprofit organizations and houses of worship. Of these, 50 percent were bomb threats.
The last quarter of the year proved most injurious, the ADL noted, explaining that after Hamas’s Oct. 7 onslaught, 5,204 antisemitic incidents rocked the Jewish community. Across the political spectrum, from white supremacists on the far right to ostensibly left-wing Ivy League universities, antisemites emerged to express solidarity with the Hamas terror group, spread antisemitic tropes and blood libels, and openly call for a genocide of the Jewish people in Israel.
Such incidents occurred throughout the US. In California, an elderly Jewish man was killed when an anti-Zionist professor employed by a local community college allegedly pushed him during an argument. At Cornell University in upstate New York, a student threatened to rape and kill Jewish female students and “shoot up” the campus’ Hillel center. In a suburb outside Cleveland, Ohio, a group of vandals desecrated graves at a Jewish cemetery. At Harvard University, America’s oldest and, arguably, most prestigious university, a faculty group shared an antisemitic cartoon depicting a left-hand tattooed with a Star of David dangling two men of color from a noose.
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
The post Jewish, Israeli Americans Face ‘Substantial Discrimination’ in US Job Market, New ADL Study Shows first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login