First Article talking about this:
Second article:
"FRIDAYS FOR FUTURE" UNDER PRESSURE
Middle East conflict drives wedge in climate movement
Statements by the environmental organization "Fridays for Future" ("FFF") on the Middle East conflict are currently polarizing on social media. In a posting on Thursday, the international "FFF" organization spoke of a "genocide" against Palestinians and did not spare criticism of Israel and the media. The postings also have divisive potential within the movement: "FFF Austria" once again distanced itself from the statements to ORF.at, while "FFF" initiator Greta Thunberg protested for Palestine on Friday.
Online since yesterday, 23.04
The international grouping spoke online of being "brainwashed" by Western media that were not telling the whole story, and called Israel an "apartheid system." It said there were no two sides, but an "oppressor" as well as "oppressed." "FFF Austria" distanced itself from the international organization's statements in a posting on Thursday.
Also to ORF.at, "FFF" press spokeswoman Klara König spoke out "clearly" against anti-Semitism on Friday and distanced herself from the statements of the international organization. The current events in the Middle East would shake the many young members of the movement, one is against violence, terror and discrimination.
S | A
Reference to "decentralized movement
They also ask for understanding that it is a broad and decentralized movement without "clear structural anchoring" and regulated voting procedures, as far as the online presence is concerned. As a first consequence, they have already publicly distanced themselves from the statements.
One wants to concentrate now further on the core competence of the movement and go for a preservation of the bases of life on the road. When asked by ORF.at whether a reorientation or better coordination of communication in social networks is planned, it was said that "everything is currently being discussed again internally".
In August, the German daily newspaper "Jüdische Allgemeine" had already published research on the movement's accounts due to anti-Israel postings. According to the information, the contents of the account of "FFF International" were played by almost a dozen activists. None of them is nationally known or elected for their function. Among them, in turn, are "only a handful of people" with an "almost fanatically anti-Israel attitude" that determines the account's positions on the Middle East.
Thunberg goes on strike in front of Swedish parliament
Meanwhile, Swedish climate activist and "FFF" initiator Thunberg again spoke out in support of Palestinians on Friday. "Justice for Palestine," read a sign the 20-year-old held during her Friday climate protest outside the Swedish parliament in Stockholm. As a picture shared by Thunberg on social media showed, several of her fellow protesters also held up signs expressing solidarity.
Last week, a call by Thunberg for a strike in solidarity with the Palestinians had already caused a stir. On social media, Thunberg wrote: "Today we are striking in solidarity with Palestine and Gaza. The world must raise its voice and demand an immediate ceasefire, justice and freedom for Palestinians and all civilians affected."
Critics complained in particular that Thunberg did not separately mention the 1,400 people killed in the large-scale attack by Islamist Hamas on Israel two weeks ago. In addition, there had been criticism of a cuddly toy seen in the picture, which allegedly resembles an anti-Semitic symbol. Thunberg wrote in a new post that she had not been aware of the similarity. "We are of course against any kind of discrimination and condemn anti-Semitism in any form."
S | A
Protest researcher identifies "massive potential for division"
Thunberg's statements nevertheless also caused outrage in Germany. The German climate activist Luisa Neubauer, when asked about the Israel statements in the German climate scene, said that one was part of a "structurally anti-Semitic society", blurred responsibility, writes the "Welt", for example. The climate movement should initiate a debate about anti-Semitism within its own ranks.
The president of the Central Council of Jews in Germany, Josef Schuster, went a step further in an interview with Germany's Bild newspaper. "I expect Luisa Neubauer and 'Fridays for Future Germany' to really disengage, to change the name of the organization and to break off all contacts with 'Fridays for Future International,'" Schuster demanded.
"On the one hand, you always benefit from being a global movement, from being very diverse and positioned in different countries," Jannis Grimm, a protest researcher at Freie Universität Berlin, told NDR radio about the controversy. But he said that goes hand in hand with the fact that everything also falls back on regional offshoots. "And there can now be as much distancing, even honest distancing from these words: The branding effect still remains. And that has massive divisive potential."
moha, ORF.at/agencies
S (German) | A
Second article:
Fridays for Future Accused of Spreading Hamas Propaganda: A Digital Dilemma
By BNN Correspondents•52 seconds ago
Fridays for Future Accused of Spreading Hamas Propaganda: A Digital Dilemma
Amid the churning currents of the digital age, the climate change movement Fridays for Future, helmed by Greta Thunberg, has been swept into a maelstrom of controversy. It stands accused of propagating Hamas propaganda through an Instagram post – a pamphlet concerning the Israel-Hamas conflict that some perceive as a resonator of anti-Semitic undercurrents and conspiracy theories.
The document allegedly brims with anti-Jewish clichés and levies allegations of genocide against Israel, accusing it of atrocities against Palestinians. The Instagram post also lambasts Western media, decrying its supposed bias towards Israel.
Visual Misinformation in the Age of Social Media
This accusation against Fridays for Future lays bare stark questions about responsibility and accountability in the age of digital media. In this era, social media users wield considerable power to influence the content they consume and share, thereby bearing an ethical burden for their interactions with visual misinformation and disinformation.
This responsibility is particularly glaring in situations fraught with the rampant spread of falsified imagery, such as the Israel-Hamas conflict. Misinformation, distinguished from disinformation by its lack of deceptive intent, proliferates as rumors and false reports blanket the digital landscape at warp speed.
It is incumbent upon social media users to discern the motives behind the creation and circulation of information and critically appraise the content they ingest.
The Role of Algorithms and User Behavior
Algorithms, the unseen puppeteers of social media platforms, play an instrumental role in shaping what content users encounter. Users may not have complete control over the content they see, but their online behavior – liking, tagging, commenting, and watching – can steer their digital experience. Conversely, disengaging from violent content can reduce exposure to misinformation and disinformation.
However, the labyrinth of visual misinformation and disinformation cannot be navigated by algorithms and user behavior alone. Users must also strive to verify images before sharing them with others.
While tools like Google’s reverse image search can help trace images to their original contexts, they have their limitations and cannot be applied universally. It is up to individual users and social media platforms to shoulder the responsibility of verifying images, investing in robust content moderation practices, and promoting transparency.
Regulating Social Media Platforms
The rampant spread of visual misinformation and disinformation during conflicts underscores the need for more stringent regulation of social media platforms. Although major platforms like Facebook and Instagram have community guidelines prohibiting incitement to violence and sharing of graphic content, enforcing these guidelines consistently is a formidable challenge.
The lack of federal regulation exacerbates the problem, leaving platforms to self-regulate. The European Union’s Digital Services Act, which mandates large platforms to employ robust procedures to tackle systemic risks and abuse, is a beacon of effective regulation.
Platforms like Twitter and Meta (owner of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp) have drawn criticism for their handling of content moderation during the Israel-Hamas war. The opacity of these platforms’ algorithms and content moderation practices hampers efforts to measure the extent of the problem and hold them accountable.
Addressing the issue of visual misinformation and disinformation demands a multi-faceted approach: users must critically evaluate the content they consume and share; social media platforms must invest in robust content moderation practices and transparency; and regulators must ensure that platforms are held accountable. The goal is a more truthful future, where users are better equipped to navigate the complex digital landscape.
S | A
