Dateline Jerusalem — It is well known to those living in Israel that there is bias in world media against Israel. Pro-Israel websites mysteriously find their way into my spam/junk email folders. Major internet service-providers and web-browsers censor and filter content. Although social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter have guidelines determining who can use their sites, anti-Israel bias appears to determine the censorship, allowing almost free rein to terrorists and hate mongers to vent their vitriolic voices against Israel. “Cyber jihad” has become difficult to control, especially when the anti-Israel bias of some social media platforms allows anti-Israel sentiment to remain on their pages and hashtags. Social media also is used by terrorists against the United States.
According to a study at the University of Haifa, terror groups use social media platforms to recruit members and spread their hateful messages. The study claimed 90 percent of organized terrorism on the internet is via social media. A U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs report says the internet is one of the “primary drivers” of the terrorist threat. Officials asked Twitter to shut down an account used by the jihadist terrorist group Al-Shabab.
Young Palestinians incite their friends to perpetrate terrorist attacks, show provocative videos encouraging terrorist attacks, and even have instructions for terrorists such as “How to Carry Out a Terrorist Attack” all on Facebook, says Shurat HaDin-The Israel Law Center. The Center, involved in a class action lawsuit against Facebook, decided to prove anti-Israel bias with an experiment. Shurat HaDin claims Facebook allows itself “to serve as a tool for terrorists to transmit their rabblerousing messages to their followers.”
Want Proof?
Last week, Shurat HaDin tried to prove that Facebook failed to prevent or halt incitement against Israel on its pages, but stopped incitement against Palestinians. In the experiment, it established two Facebook pages, “Stop Palestinians” and “Stop Israelis,” almost identical in inciting, hateful content. Both pages were reported to Facebook, seeking removal. Facebook immediately took down the fictitious “Stop Palestinians” page for “containing a credible threat of violence” which “violated our community standards.” Facebook allowed the “Stop Israelis” page to continue. Even though the content virtually was identical, Facebook judged that the page was “not in violation of Facebook rules.”
For an additional six days, the anti-Israel page remained on Facebook. Finally it was taken down after an outcry from social media users and when news of the experiment was plastered across Israeli media outlets. The lawsuit against Facebook is not claiming incitement by Facebook. It merely sought an injunction that would require Facebook to have stricter monitoring of violence-inducing content against Israel. The experiment proved there is a double standard.
Why are social media platforms so popular with terror groups? Obviously because they are allowed to freely disseminate their messages in an inexpensive, quick, unfettered manner. Social media has become a successful means for recruitment to a vast worldwide audience. In democratic countries like the U.S. and Israel, the media is open, protected by “free speech.” However, a U.S. Supreme Court case, Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project, held that peaceful speech can be criminalized if coordinated to support a foreign terrorist organization. Speech that might be protected under the First Amendment can be included in criminal prosecutions because coordination can be inferred just from the nature of the speech and because it was posted in a forum visited by terrorist-friendly users.
There must be social media guidelines that curb or censor speech inciting terrorism.
L’hitraot. Shachar
