The Free Speech Union of Australia ran a pinned post on X using an AI-manipulated image of OHPI’s CEO with the caption: “Who is the Royal Commission really listening to?” The goal was to drive submissions before the deadline. The replies the post generated were illustrative.
Many exercised their “free speech” with antisemitic conspiracy theories. This is a strategically confusing approach to take for those who consider that their free speech may be being curtailed unnecessarily.
OHPI’s CEO volunteers with IEEE—the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, a global body with over 500,000 members. This role was cited to suggest hidden power and influence.
Another accused OHPI of lying about its staff numbers. Our finances are publicly available through the ACNC, and our staffing was addressed under oath in our Royal Commission submission. Nonetheless, we appreciate the compliment—a testament to our staff’s dedication.
We don’t publish individual staff details because of safety concerns, not because we have anything to hide. These safety provisions are routinely validated.
OHPI’s CEO and two Jewish board members were singled out by name. Non-Jewish board members were left alone.
An image of Jewish faces with Stars of David superimposed over them—standard antisemitic imagery, appeared in a thread about an online safety inquiry.
The phrase in the original post, “who are they really listening to?” is deliberate and hostile. It is a well-worn antisemitic trope about Jewish people pulling strings behind the scenes. This rhetoric is as vulgar as it is common on social media.
It is also worth knowing what the Free Speech Union of Australia actually is. It has no charitable registration. Its website names no executives, no board, no owners. It was set up as a private company less than three years ago and publishes no financial information. A group with that level of opacity has no standing to lecture anyone about transparency or accountability in public life.
This episode fits a pattern. Groups that campaign against hate speech regulation often generate significant hateful content in the process—and then walk away from it.
The harm lands on the people targeted. They pull back from public life, their health suffers, and their voices get quieter. Online abuse levelled at some Royal Commission witnesses highlights the ways in which a failure to regulate online hate strangles our real world capacity to speak freely.
This cost falls disproportionately on minority communities, and it is a cost that platforms and regulators are increasingly aware of.
Ongoing Institutional Response
As reported in the Australian Jewish News, Hearing Block 3 will take place in Sydney between 29 June and 10 July. It will consider the circulation of antisemitic material online, particularly through social media platforms, alongside the treatment of antisemitism in traditional news media and broadcasting.
Meta acknowledged that its moderation systems remain imperfect and stated that it had removed most of the comments. When Yahoo reviewed the content again on 12 June, further antisemitic material was still visible.
OHPI CEO Dr Andre Oboler, who is scheduled to give evidence again during the forthcoming hearings, told the Royal Commission last month that social media data indicated an approximately fivefold rise in antisemitic content from November 2023. He said the same trend appeared across every platform included in the analysis.
Join us on social media