It’s Happening Now – Resources

Technical Info

Internet Access

• The network “itshappeningnow” has been made available (no password).
• It may get slow if everyone uses it, if you have 3G / 4G please use it.

Twitter

• SAFETY: Be aware that trolls may decide to stalk you / target you after seeing you engage with #ohpi. You may be ok with this. If not, make a new twitter account if you wish to participate.
• Please post questions, thoughts, highlights of what people say, using #ohpi
• You can also follow the OHPI account @onlinehate.
• What you post is available to the world… so do be careful!

Software

• Web based (nothing to download), but you do need to register and that will require access to your e-mail
• http://www.ohpi.org.au/fah/

Some background on online antisemitism

“Facebook is not only a potentially effective tool for combating anti-Semitism, it is also an dangerously potent tool for promoting the spread of anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism.” – Andre Oboler, “Facing up to the ‘Facebook’ dilemma”, Jerusalem Post, February 5th 2008.

“Antisemitism 2.0 is the use of online social networking and content collaboration to share demonization, conspiracy theories, Holocaust denial, and classical antisemitic motifs with a view to creating social acceptability for such content” – Andre Oboler, “Online Antisemitism 2.0. ‘Social Antisemitism’ on the ‘Social Web’“, Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, 1 April 2008

“Dr. Andre Oboler, an expert in combating online anti-Semitism, gave a straightforward presentation stressing search optimization. ‘Google, which everybody uses to search online, displays only 10 results on its first results page,’ the… computer science Ph.D said. ‘Most people never bother to click on the second page. If we optimize content to be easily picked up by Google, we will have knocked off other content.’ He explained that through Google-oriented optimization, he has had success in making Israel advocacy sites pop up in search results that could otherwise yield content which he deems anti-Semitic or anti-Zionist.” – Cnaan Liphshiz,  “Getting Google to work for us: Young innovators show how they’re changing the world“, Haaretz, 20  June 2008.

“The treatment of Holocaust denial shows that ground has been lost in the fight against Anti-Semitism 2.0… and the increasing social acceptability of racism and hate within Facebook. If service providers fail to set standards barring abusive and racist content, lawmakers must intervene. Where laws exist, such as the ban on Holocaust denial in various countries, the same rules as for copyright infringement must apply, and the company itself must be held liable if it continues to facilitate a breach of the law once the matter is brought to its attention” – Andre Oboler, “Facebook, Holocaust Denial, and Anti-Semitism 2.0“, Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, 27 August 2009

“The rise of social media over the last seven years has revolutionised communication. A pplications like Faceb ook, YouTube, Twitter, and MySpace, h ave given the online public a means of mass communication. Behind these platforms are large corporations 2 who profit from the communication they facilitate, yet take little responsibility over the content. A new approac h is needed in which c orporations that seek to profit from social media assume public obligations. This includes an obligation to take reasonable st eps to discourage online hate , a public wrong against the community” – Andre Oboler, “Time to Regulate Internet Hate with a New Approach?” 13(6) Internet Law Bulletin, 2010.

“…YouTube is now going after Palestinian Media Watch (PMW)… PMW monitors, translates and shares examples of incitement. It was PMW that exposed the use of a Mickey Mouse character inciting hate and violence on the Hamas TV children’s show ‘The Pioneers of Tomorrow’. That story created shock waves around the world, leading to discussions in the Western mainstream media and at the UN of the link between incitement in the media and terrorism. PMW’s violation appears to be that it was posting ‘hate material’. There is no doubt that it was… [however, the] material was not shared for the purpose of incitement, but to expose and counter the spread of hate. Any argument that uses free speech to prevent the exposure of hate speech is inherently deeply flawed. YouTube needs to get its act together.” – Andre Oboler, YouTube gets it wrong on online hate, Jerusalem Post, 20 December 2010 p15

“In November 2010, the Inter-Parliamentary Coalition for Combating Antisemitism (ICCA) held its second conference; parliamentarians and experts from over 40 countries attended. The conference, held at the Canadian Parliament, was hosted in partnership with the Canadian Ministry of Citizenship and Immigration. Australian involvement included Michael Danby MP, Senator Scott Ryan and four Australian experts… The Ottawa Protocol notes that the gathered parliamentarians are ‘alarmed by the explosion of antisemitism and hate on the internet, a medium crucial for the promotion and protection of freedom of expression, freedom of information, and the participation of civil society’. The statement encapsulated a number of concerns expressed at the conference. Most notable was the concern that, left unregulated, the online world may be far less free than idealists believe. Racism and intimidation can dampen participation by minority groups and damage democracy.” – Andre Oboler, “The ICCA tackles online hate” (2011), 13(9&10) Internet Law Bulletin

“The current law in Australia makes race-based hate propaganda unlawful, but does not effetely tackle the online problem. Law reform may create greater liabilities for companies, or cases may establish existing liability. The development of copyright law provides a template for more technology specific remedies…  In particular, the mechanisms of the Copyright Act and the Telecommunications (Interceptions and Access) Act may suggest possible approaches government may consider to ensuring compliance with the Racial Discrimination Act in the future… Governments have a responsibility to take an active role in the online world; if they don’t, they cannot meet their wider obligations to the people they serve. The powers, rights and limitations that apply to governments and private citizens in the real world need to be reflected online.” – Andre Oboler, A legal model for government intervention to combat online hate, Internet Law Bulletin 14(2), May 2011

“The Facebook page ‘Yael Vi vat Rothschild- GIVE BACK the Shirt to Mellisa COOK’ was a valiant effort at grassroots activism. I say this not because I support the cause, but because the page administrator, having accidentally created a space of hate, took responsibility to clean it up. That’s the sort of responsible use of social media we seldom see… Page administrators, whose identity is kept secret and who are given moderation powers, also bear some responsibility… [In this case] they used their privileges to moderate comments and warned fans that they ‘will NOT accept people making fun of someone’s religion, heritage or beliefs’ on threat of expulsion. Last year, on behalf of the Global Forum to Combat Antisemitism, I sent Facebook a white paper about administrators’ responsibilities. This incident shows that such a system can provide an effective response.” – Andre Oboler, “Virtual hate poses ‘real world’ threat”, The Australian Jewish News, 10 February 2012.

“The latest outrage involves Facebook sanctioning antisemitic content by dismissing complaints against clear cases of racist hate speech. In one example a picture of a smiling Anne Frank is overlayed with the text ‘What’s that burning? Oh, it’s my family’. Anotherdepicts a computer keyboard button labelled ‘Delete Israel’ and the text ‘The much needed button’.  Other examples include Holocaust denial and blood libel. Each of these examples was reported to Facebook, and each of these complaints was resolved with the decision ‘Not Removed’. The system has no appeal process.” – Andre Oboler, ‘Facebook sanctions antisemitic content‘, Jerusalem Post, 10 September 2012

“…a major new report revealing additional blind spots in Facebook’s understanding of antisemitism. The nature of these blind spots is startling, from racist images directly based on Nazi propaganda to copies of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. The new report doesn’t just highlight mistakes; it demonstrates systematic problems and ones that couldn’t be resolved even after the issues concerned were directly brought to Facebook’s attention.” – Andre Oboler, “Facebook’s blind spot to Antisemitism“, Jerusalem Post, 25 March 2013.

“The rapid pace of technological change requires a rapid, international, and well informed response. Most significantly, it requires a response that is constantly updated and which can draw on the skills of experts with no vested interest in specific technologies. We hope this document, and the working group’s many other activities, provide a useful tool s for all stakeholders in the fight against online hate and discrimination.” – Andre Oboler and David Matas (eds), “Online Antisemitism: A systematic review“, Report of the Online Antisemitism Working Group of the Global Forum to Combat Antisemitism, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the State of Israel, 30 May 2013.

“The Antisemitic Meme of the Jew is a cartoon picture depicting a negative stereotype of a Jewish man with a black beard, long hooked nose, a hunched back, crooked teeth, and hands being wrung in glee. The image was created by a white supremacist cartoonist and has been online in neo-Nazi circles since at least 2004. The report looks at the history and significance of this image… The report also discusses the “Jewish Ritual Slaughter” page which is promoting the Blood Libel on Facebook, and the return and re-removal of the Holocaust denial page ‘The Untold History’.” – The Antisemitic Meme of the Jew, OHPI, 6 February 2014

“The anti-semitic imagery used in this conflict is beyond anything we have seen before. It looks like a deliberate social media strategy of Hamas, and one that follows perfectly from the anti-semitism in their mainstream media channels, including on children’s TV shows like Tomorrow’s Pioneers.  The treatment of all casualties as civilians, the overt anti-semitism and the comparison of Gaza to the Holocaust are part of a coherent Hamas social media strategy. The strategy has been openly promoted to activists via official Hamas channels, in Arabic of course.” – Andre Oboler, “Rise of Anti-Semitism From This War Is No Accident“, The Australian, August 11, 2014.

More can be seen at: http://www.oboler.com/?page_id=1118 and at http://www.ohpi.org.au

Antisemites monitoring this event

This is from last night / this morning: http://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/34927481/