The Online Hate Prevention Institute has been retained by the Royal Commission as expert witnesses. Our CEO, Dr Andre Oboler, is testifying before the Commission on May 12th.
The Australian Government established the Royal Commission on Antisemitism and Social Cohesion following the 2025 Bondi terrorist attack, in which the Jewish community were targeted in what was the most deadly terrorist attack on Australian soil.
As Australia’s highest form of public inquiry, the Commission is examining the causes and impact of antisemitism on Australian society. Its goal is to recommend practical measures to improve public safety, strengthen social cohesion, and help ensure Jewish Australians can live free from discrimination and fear.
How we categorise different forms of antisemitism
OHPI’s evidence to the Royal Commission includes analysis from our routine antisemitism monitoring project examining the different forms of antisemitism appearing across social media platforms. The monitoring classifies antisemitic content into detailed categories and sub-categories that allow long-term trends and dominant narratives to be identified across platforms and over time.
The evidence submitted to the Commission demonstrates that traditional antisemitic narratives remain the most common form of online antisemitism. These include blood libel, claims that Jews killed Christ, antisemitic slurs, dehumanising rhetoric, and conspiracy theories alleging Jewish control of governments, institutions, or world events. The monitoring also found that many forms of antisemitism relating to Israel or Zionism draw directly on these same historic antisemitic narratives and imagery.
OHPI’s monitoring is conducted by trained human analysts who assess the context, meaning, symbolism, and narrative structure of the material being collected. This allows the monitoring to identify coded antisemitic language, conspiracy narratives, visual references, and evolving forms of online hate that automated systems frequently fail to interpret accurately.
The submission to the Royal Commission includes the following findings:
“163. Looking across all of OHPI’s routine monitoring periods from November 2022 until March 2026 and at the 27 sub-categories we use for classification, we can see the following aggregate pattern across all platforms:
The most common narrative is ‘3.6’ this category captures all traditional antisemitism that is not otherwise designated to another category and is present in 51.8% of the content. The second most common is ‘4.4 Describing Israel or Israelis using antisemitic words or imagery (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel)’ which accounts for 25.0% of the content and which was just discussed. The third is ‘3.2 Promoting the idea of a world Jewish conspiracy’ which is the foundational conspiracy theory behind the Protocols of the Elders of Zion and accounts for 23.7% of all the content.
There is a significant drop to the 4th most prevalent narrative, ‘3.5 Promoting the idea of Jews controlling government or other societal institutions’ present in 13.9% of the content, and a further drop to the 5th most prevalent narrative, ‘3.1 Dehumanising Jews’, present in 8.3% of the content.
That category ‘2.1 Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion’ is present in 5.9% of the content, and ‘2.3 Calling for harm to Jewish people in general’ is present in a further 3.2% of the content, is deeply concerning.”
The submission argues that understanding the structure and prevalence of these narratives is essential for developing effective responses to online antisemitism and for improving moderation, transparency, and public policy responses across social media platforms.
OHPI LinkedIn • OHPI Instagram • OHPI Facebook • Bondi Report • Ambulance Attack Responses Report.