Viewpoint

Algorithms, Misinformation, and the Arab-Israeli Conflict

Viewpoint by August Watters

Viewpoint articles are written by members of the SPH community from a wide diversity of perspectives. The views expressed are solely those of the authors and are not intended to represent the views of Boston University or the School of Public Health. We aspire to a culture where all can express views in a context of civility and respect. Our guidance on the values that guide our commitment can be found at Revisiting the Principles of Free and Inclusive Academic Speech.

We are bombarded daily by information, steered by algorithms that understand our views and preferences. Regarding controversial topics such as the Arab-Israeli conflict, our knowledge base, attitudes and even identities are shaped by what happens to pop up on the screen.

Ambiguous language also shapes our views, causing misunderstandings and magnifying conflict. Common words like “occupation” and “antisemitism” are interpreted differently, yet almost never defined. Meanwhile, attitudes harden as algorithms reinforce what we already “know,” and ignore the rest.

Documenting Facts. Suffering in Gaza is severe and widespread, but for specifics we must rely on unreliable statistics from Hamas. The coauthors of a recent Viewpoint opinion asked us to “be methodical in our analysis of population health while recognizing biases[…]” How might Hamas’ genocidal intent against Jews—clearly and repeatedly stated both before and after October 7—affect the credibility of Hamas’ statistics? How does such bias go unnoticed?

Defining Islamophobia and Antisemitism. These words can simply refer to prejudice: Irrational hatred and fear against Muslims and Jews. Antisemitism, however, also refers to certain tropes or conspiracy theories: Jews supposedly have too much power, or secretly control vast segments of the world. One common expression of Islamophobia and antisemitism occurs when individuals are blamed for the decisions of national leaders.

Understanding Root Causes. The most immediate cause of continued conflict in the region is likely the failure of Israeli and American peace initiatives in the last 25 years. Constructive conversations now must explore those failures in search of new solutions. Instead, as with earlier failures, many retreat into familiar myths about Israelis, Palestinians, and the founding of the modern Israeli state.

The aforementioned Viewpoint coauthors find root causes of conflict only in accusations against Israel and USA. Unmentioned are the failures of Palestinian leadership, and the influence of other powerful geopolitical actors. Inflammatory claims often go unsubstantiated by their own links. Calling out Palestinian suffering, without analysis of its various causes, assumes Israel is unilaterally to blame. For example: “Gaza has been under a 15-year Israeli blockade” links to a Human Rights Watch headline acknowledging Egypt’s partial responsibility. Human Rights Watch recognizes that two neighboring countries make their own sovereign decisions, impacting Gazans. This could lead to a substantive discussion about international culpability and constructive solutions, instead of simply blaming the “Israeli blockade.”

Additionally, depicting Zionism as a form of white supremacy, unrelated to Judaism is problematic. Approximately half of Israeli Jews are of color and 20% of Israeli citizens of Arab descent.

Finding Reliable Sources. Historians have written a wide, and often contradictory, range of views on the founding of Israel, and the dispossession of Palestinians. Studying history requires reading different, and often contradictory, primary sources, as well as comparative analysis. When someone quotes consistently only from historians at one end of the ideological spectrum, ask why.

Historian Benny Morris is perhaps the most influential historian of the conflict, because his work forced a wholesale revision of what was previously understood. He is a fierce critic of Israeli policy, but remains a Zionist.

“The demonisation of Israel is largely based on lies – much as the demonisation of the Jews during the past 2,000 years has been based on lies. And there is a connection between the two.”

—Benny Morris, historian

A fact sheet from a non-academic source, submitted by the coauthors as a historical summary, represents only a narrow slice of academic historians’ writings. Much of it (though mostly unattributed) is recognizable from a single book. It quotes, then dismisses Morris, along with overlooking mainstream historical views far more sympathetic to Israel and to Israelis. The fact sheet is structured via bullet points, a preparation tool for those arguing one side of a debate, rather than pursuing a detailed understanding of a complex topic.

Taking Action. The Israel-Palestine conflict cannot be understood outside of its greater context, the Arab-Israeli conflict. In discussing both cause and solution, the Viewpoint coauthors’ ideas are directed only at Israel. None considers that Palestinians have some agency, or the impact of other powerful geopolitical actors. Considering these very significant components of Palestinian oppression is essential to developing a nuanced view of the conflict; to prevent us from internalizing a false binary perspective that vilifies one side of a multi-dimensional conflict. Analyses that ignore Hamas, Hezbollah, Egypt, other Arab states, Iran, UNWRA, the Palestinian Authority, and others, while unilaterally blaming Israel, exacerbate conflict and contribute to antisemitic views.

Broadly ignoring various causes of Palestinian oppression, can reinforce, unwittingly or not, the classic antisemitic trope that Jews supposedly have too much power. The Viewpoint coauthors are right to call out the openly racist rhetoric of several Israeli politicians. However, the failure to consider the myriad ways that religious, ethnic, and cultural tensions continue to drive the conflict, is unacceptable.

I hope we all will seek a nuanced conversation, grounded in compassion and empathy for all whose lives have been touched by this nightmare. Inflammatory speech is free speech, but freedom comes with responsibility.

August Watters is a 2012 graduate of BU’s College of Fine Arts.

The School of Public Health hosted open sessions for our community for discussion about issues covered in this Viewpoint in spring 2024, including an open session with our Dean of Practice and one with our Dean of DEIJ. SPH also held sessions on antisemitism and Islamophobia. All sessions were open to students, staff, and faculty. For those looking for resources or support in this moment, a summary of available resources is here.

Editor’s note: SPH This Week has published two viewpoint essays by members of the BU community on Israel and Gaza. The other essay can be found here. Please contact the authors directly for any correspondence related to these published viewpoints.