Israel-Hamas War: One year of conflict and the double-edged sword of social media

As of today, October 7, 2024, it has been one year since the onset of the Israel-Hamas war, triggered by a large-scale attack by Hamas on southern Israel that resulted in around 1,200 Israeli fatalities and the capture of approximately 250 hostages. The ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas has brought to the forefront the significant role of social media as both a tool for communication and a battleground for narratives. The events of the past year have seen a profound impact on public perception, international relations and the dissemination of information.

Misinformation and disinformation

Social media platforms, especially X (formerly Twitter), Facebook and Instagram, became channels for rampant misinformation during the conflict. A report from the US-based Global Disinformation Index noted that in the early weeks of the conflict alone, 75 per cent of social media posts contained misinformation, often leading to widespread confusion and panic.

More from World

Nepal's new PM pays homage to people died during the Gen Z protest in her first national address This Week in Explainers: How recovering from Gen-Z protests is a Himalayan task for Nepal

Numerous instances of false narratives circulated online. For example, misleading videos purported to depict military actions that were later confirmed to be unrelated to the ongoing conflict. Claims such as “Israel just blew up the third oldest church in the world” regarding the Saint Porphyrius Orthodox Church were debunked by church officials, who confirmed that the structure remained intact. This highlights the critical challenge that misinformation poses not only to public perception but also to the credibility of news sources.

Emotional landscape of propaganda

Both Israel and Hamas have employed social media as a powerful tool for propaganda. The Israeli government conducted targeted advertising campaigns aimed at shaping international public opinion. Reports indicated that Israel’s Foreign Affairs Ministry created a series of graphic ads showing the brutalities committed by Hamas, with ads reaching millions in Europe​. These ads often portrayed Hamas as a terrorist organisation equivalent to Islamic State, aiming to evoke strong emotional responses from viewers.

Impact Shorts

More Shorts

‘The cries of this widow will echo’: In first public remarks, Erika Kirk warns Charlie’s killers they’ve ‘unleashed a fire’

Trump urges Nato to back sanctions on Russia, calls for 50–100% tariffs on China

On the other hand, Hamas utilised social media to showcase the civilian toll of Israeli military actions, framing its narrative around the humanitarian crises in Gaza. This tactic is part of a broader strategy where emotional manipulation through shocking visuals has become commonplace, with the goal of mobilising public sentiment in favour of one side or the other.

Challenges in content moderation

Social media companies faced immense challenges in moderating content related to the conflict. A report indicated that Google had to remove numerous ads from its public library due to violations against violent content. Platforms like Facebook and Instagram have grappled with managing the vast amounts of user-generated content, often struggling to keep up with the scale of misinformation.

For instance, during the conflict, there were calls for stricter regulations on social media to combat the spread of harmful misinformation. Fact-checking organisations and independent journalists endeavoured to debunk false claims, but the sheer volume of content made it difficult to ensure accuracy​.

User engagement and polarisation

The dynamics of user engagement on social media have contributed to the polarisation surrounding the conflict. Social media algorithms often prioritise emotionally charged content, leading users to be exposed predominantly to viewpoints that reinforce their existing beliefs. A study by the Pew Research Center found that 62 per cent of Americans felt that social media increases political polarisation, which can also be seen in the context of international conflicts​.

During the Israel-Hamas conflict, social media users from both sides shared and reshared misleading or false narratives, accusing the other side of staging propaganda. This cycle of misinformation and reinforcement of existing biases complicates the public’s understanding of the conflict, leading to a skewed perception of reality.

Role of fact-checking

In response to the flood of misinformation, fact-checking initiatives gained traction. Organisations such as PolitiFact and FactCheck.org have worked tirelessly to verify claims and debunk false information circulating on social media. These efforts are crucial not only for maintaining journalistic integrity but also for empowering the public with accurate information to foster informed discourse about the conflict.

However, despite these efforts, the effectiveness of fact-checking remains limited by the speed at which misinformation spreads. Social media users may be quick to share sensational stories without verifying their authenticity, perpetuating a cycle of misinformation that can have real-world consequences.

A battlefield for narratives

The past year has demonstrated that social media is not just a tool for communication; it is a battlefield for narratives that significantly influences public perception and international relations. The interplay between misinformation, propaganda and emotional engagement creates a complex environment where facts are often overshadowed by sensationalised narratives.

As both Israel and Hamas continue to leverage social media in their campaigns, the need for media literacy and critical engagement with online content becomes increasingly important. The challenge lies not only in combating misinformation but also in fostering an informed public that can discern fact from fiction amid the chaos of digital information. The Israel-Hamas conflict serves as a stark reminder of the power of social media in modern warfare and the imperative for responsible communication in a digitally connected world.