The MRC's Double Standard On Anti-Semitism

The Media Research Center was quick to label any critic of the Israel-Palestine war as anti-Semitic -- but it won't criticize Candace Owens' anti-Semitic turn and has cheered Nazi content on Substack.

Sep 30, 2024

In the immediate wake of the Hamas attack on Israel in October 2023, the Media Research Center rushed to attack anyone who dared voice anything even slightly critical of Israel as an endorsement of Hamas and liberally throwing around the “anti-Semitic” tag. For instance:

This is all utterly hypocritical, given that the MRC has never rushed to criticize actual anti-Semitism on its own side. It spent years praising Kanye West for spouting anti-abortion rhetoric and palling around with Donald Trum, but when he starting spouting virulently anti-Semitic remarks — ironically, two days after the MRC’s Tierin-Rose Mandelburg gushed, “BRB, adding Kanye West’s music to my daily mix,” in a post that aged extremely poorly to say the least — the MRC was still praising him, with Mandelburg cheering his “power moves only” and “mic freakin’ drop” after his “White Lives Matter” stunt with Candace Owens. It took 10 full days for the MRC to address West’s “death con 3 On JEWISH PEOPLE,” and even then it was buried in an article cheering West for buying right-wing social media site Parler (a deal that fell through when West’s anti-Semitism became too toxic). The MRC then tried to argue that the cancellation of West’s social media accounts somehow proved he was correct about his hatred of Jews (though the MRC deleted that post a few days later). It wasn’t until it was argued that Ye’s anti-Semitism is part of mainstream conservatism that the MRC was moved to forcefully criticize him. Still, when an MRC writer criticized Apple Music for deleting a West playlist, he couldn’t be moved to accurately describe West’s hateful remarks as anti-Semitic.

The MRC was similarly squishy about anti-Semitic remarks made by NBA player Kyrie Irving, then labored hard to distance Donald Trump from his role in having dinner with West and anti-Semitic white supremacist Nick Fuentes, despite Trump’s history of invoking offensive Jewish stereotypes. All this, of course, didn’t stop the MRC from rushing to frame Rep. Ilhan Omar’s criticism of Israel as “anti-Semitic” -- though it mostly looked the other way when Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene spouted weird things about Jewish space lasers.

Despite all this, the MRC lashed out when non-right-wing media refused to play along with its narrative. Alex Christy whined in an Oct. 14 post that the Associated Press fact-checked a viral tweet portraying old content as new:

AP fact-checker Philip Marcelo beclowned himself on Friday as he rated a claim that Hamas sympathizers chanted anti-Semitic remarks “false,” not because they didn’t—he admits that they did—but because the clip “is more than two years old.”

Under the headline, “Old video of pro-Palestine supporters shouting antisemitic remarks is being misleadingly shared,” Marcelo begins by laying out the “CLAIM: A video shows Hamas sympathizers driving through London shouting antisemitic remarks during Friday’s day of protests against Israel.”

He then responds, “AP’S ASSESSMENT: False. The widely shared clip is more than two years old. London police at the time apprehended four men in connection with the incident.”

[...]

Marcello’s X-used-to-be-known-as-X blunder aside, nowhere in those quotations does anyone mention anything about a date. It is not as if the people who demonstrated in support of Hamas on Friday have suddenly changed their tune. Quite the opposite, in fact. This is who Hamas and their sympathizers are.

Of course, the implication was that the video was new, whether Christy wants to admit it or not, and it was dishonest to suggest otherwise.

An Oct. 16 post by Luis Cornelio cheered the removal of an “anti-Semitic” video from YouTube:

YouTube, infamously known for its quick censorship of speech critical of the left, inexplicably dragged its feet to take down a sickening video from Hamas terrorist leaders calling for Islamists to rise up against Israel. It did so only after MRC Free Speech America pressed the company over its policies.

MRC Free Speech America reached out to YouTube on Oct. 12 to question whether the company allowed content that “actively calls for the mass murder of Israeli citizens?” MRC researchers launched an investigation after Hamas political leader Ismail Haniyeh helped to ignite what became infamously known as the “Day of Jihad.” Haniyeh’s anti-Semitic call to action against Israel was uttered during an interview with Qatari state-owned Al Jazeera, which the outlet — notorious for its historically pro-Hamas bent — then promoted on YouTube.

By contrast, Cornelio and the rest of the MRC have been silent about the plethora of anti-Semitic content at right-wing video site Rumble and how Rumble helps the creators of that content make money off it.

An Oct. 28 column by Jeffrey Lord, headlined “The Rise of Anti-Semitism In America, Again: What The Media Elite Forgets,” which is largely a tangent about the Nazi-linked German-American Bund in the 1930s, which unsurprisingly had an anti-Semitic component. Lord declared that “history records the American people of the day were seriously appalled by all of this. They were informed by the media of the day.” What Lord forgets is that anti-Semitism in America didn’t begin or end with the German-American Bund — no less than Henry Ford was virulently anti-Semitic to the point that he published newspapers to spread that hate — meaning that the Bund had a ready audience for that part of its agenda.

As all this was going on, there was more hypocrisy: The MRC desperately tried to ignore that Elon Musk endorsed an anti-Semitic tweet and even tried to insist that it wasn’t a reflection of how Musk actually feels. No liberal would get such a wide benefit of the doubt from the MRC, and it has denounced non-conservatives as “anti-Semitic” for less. The MRC ultimately called on right-wing Jewish commentator to try and play cleanup and insist that Musk really Isn't as anti-Semitic as he acts.

Looking the other way is a MRC staple with Musk; last year, it got touchy when it was pointed out that critics of George Soros like Musk -- who likened Soros to Marvel comics villain Magneto, who like Soros has a Jewish background -- were leaning into anti-Semitism with their attacks. Of course, the MRC has used anti-Semitic tropes to smear Soros for years (as well as against former CNN chief Jeff Zucker). Indeed, so desperate is the MRC to protect Trump that it actually tried to argue that anti-Semitism didn't qualify as hate speech.

The MRC also tried to look the other way when Robert Kennedy Jr. -- whose presidential campaign it had been ironically supporting when he was running as a Democrat -- claimed last year that the COVID virus was "ethnically targeted" not to infect Jews. It first tried to play whataboutism by portraying a comment by a Democratic congresswoman as anti-Semitic -- in fact, it was merely critical of Israel -- then labored to counterfactually distance Kennedy from Republicans at an upcoming House hearing, even though they were the ones who invited him to take part. That was followed by cheering that Republicans had "not caved to the left’s pressure" and disinvited him from the hearing over his anti-Semitic remarks. One MRC writer conceded that "There is no doubt that RFK Jr. is a kook and that his latest comments about COVID being 'ethnically targeted to protect Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese people is just the latest example of that" -- even while deflecting criticism of him.

Silent on Candace Owens’ anti-Semitism

The MRC has long been a fan of right-wing provocateur Candace Owens — in no small part because she sticks to right-wing narratives while her occasional social media bans for saying offensive things and spreading conspiracy theories feeds into the victimhood narrative. A sampling of Owens being invoked by the MRC over the past few years:

Additionally, the MRC’s former “news” division CNSNews.com was a huge fan of Owens, to the point that it falsely proclaimed her as the “founder” of the so-called Blexit movement though she merely co-opted it from the actual founder. However, CNS studiously ignored the numerous controversies Owens has been involved in — as has the MRC. In October 2022, the MRC was cheering Owens palling around with Kanye West, with Tierin-Rose Mandelburg gushing, “Ye and Candice Owens are freakin’ savage” — and this was two days after West made blatantly anti-Semitic remarks (which the MRC was extremely slow to condemn because he had been a spouter of right-wing narratives).

After the start of the the Israel-Hamas war, Owens was taking increasingly anti-Israel stances, to the point that her boss at the right-wing Daily Wire, Ben Shapiro, criticized her, culminating in a Twitter war with Shapiro in which Owens heavily alluded to anti-Semitic tropes and stated that “Christ is king” (Jews don’t believe in the divinity of Jesus). She made more anti-Semitic allusions in a later interview with Tucker Carlson.

The MRC has been completely silent about all of this. Instead, it continued to promote Owens as she fed into its victimhood narrative.

A Dec. 20 post by Jorge Bonilla accused NBC of “displaying a deceptive edit of a Candace Owens video on the history of slavery” in a report on how right-wing PragerU is sneaking into schools. A Jan. 6 column by Jeffrey Lord touted a quip by right-wing podcaster and ex-Fox News host Megyn Kelly that Owens should be the next president of Harvard, adding:

Owens, of course, has made her career as a conservative activist and pundit and not as an academic, and scholar. So this would not happen.

But just suppose for a moment that Owens had in fact spent a career as an Ivy League academic. Would she ever have been chosen to be President of Harvard?

To say hell would freeze over would be to laughably understate the reaction a Professor/Dr. Owens nomination would receive.

A Jan. 11 post by Tom Olohan touted an appearance on Owens’ podcast by Vivek Ramaswamy, who helped him spread a conspiracy theory about a purportedly impending “central bank digital currency” that will be imposed on the U.S.:

Both [co-host Tim] Pool and Owens were quick to supply examples of how a CBDC could expand government censorship and control in the U.S. Owens pointed out that in many ways the “digitization of everything” which took place during COVID-19 had continued after the pandemic. Owens said that she “felt it was very much because they did want us to move in this direction as a society.”

None of these writers mentioned Owens’ anti-Semitic leanings.

The MRC’s NewsBusters Twitter account also tweeted out a Jan. 10 image of Owens featuring the quote “Why is everyone so sensitive? What if everyone just shut up and stopped crying?” with the added message “Mood for 2024.” It too failed to mention Owen’s anti-Semitism; apparently, hating Jews is the MRC’s mood for 2024.

The silence continued months later — even as it continued to defend her. In a June 7 post, Alex Christy complained that MSNBC commentator Elie Mystal said that “Candace Owens exists” because “There's a lot of money in telling white folks what they need to hear,” huffing in response: “What is MSNBC, if not a vehicle for liberal white people to be told what they want to hear (albeit by a diverse collection of talking heads)?” No mention of Owens’ virulent anti-Semitism.

Supporting Nazis on Substack

Meanwhile, the MRC’s flip-flop on Nazi references is complete — from complaining when others make them to smearing people it doesn’t like as “digital brownshirts” ... and now to defending Nazi content online. Luis Cornelio wrote in a Dec. 22 post:

A co-founder of Substack rejected efforts that seek to punish egregious content that is otherwise protected by the First Amendment, delivering a rebuke against widespread censorship plots to thwart free speech.

Substack co-founder Hamish McKenzie authored a Dec. 21 article announcing that the newsletter and article-hosting platform would not demonetize nor de-platform “fringe voices.” The move came in response to over 200 Substack authors pressing the platform on why “Nazis” are allowed to publish content. However, McKenzie wrote that he — along with Substack co-founders Chris Best and Jairaj Sethi — “have been listening to all the views being expressed” concerning “fringe voices on the platform (and particularly, in this case, Nazi views).” McKenzie further wrote that censorship will not make the “problem go away—in fact, it makes it worse.”

McKenzie added, “We believe that supporting individual rights and civil liberties while subjecting ideas to open discourse is the best way to strip bad ideas of their power. We are committed to upholding and protecting freedom of expression, even when it hurts.”

[...]

Substack’s free speech position directly contrasts those of writers who issued a “collective letter” posing the following question to the company’s founders: “Why are you platforming and monetizing Nazis?”

The concerned Substack writers cited a report by The Atlantic accusing Substack of becoming a “home and propagator of white supremacy and anti-Semitism.” The Atlantic named as examples in its allegations AndKon’s Reich Press and white supremacist site White-Papers, both of which have amassed a scant few dozen likes on some of their posts.

McKenzie declared that he does not agree with the views spewed by these alleged “Nazi” Substacks, but he rightly cautioned that censorship is not the proper solution.

Note that Cornelio put “Nazi” in scare quotes, as if that isn’t what these people are. He then quoted his boss trying to justify all this:

MRC Free Speech America Vice President Dan Schneider hailed Substack’s move: “Nobody despises Nazis more than I do, but I cherish free speech even more. Hamish is spot on; the way to defeat terrible ideas is by rebutting them with better ones, not by using fascistic censorship tactics.”

But Nazism has already been defeated — an entire world war was fought to do so. And Schneider doesn’t seem to understand that another way to defeat terrible ideas is to deny them prominence on a mainstream platform like Substack. (Also, Schneider doesn’t “cherish free speech” enough to cease blocking ConWebWatch from following the MRC’s @FreeSpeechAmer Twitter/X feed.)

Schneider and Cornelio also avoided discussing what may the bigger issue: Nazis are making money posting their content on Substack. Like others on the platform, writers keep most of the money generated through Substack. Some Substack users have left the platform or threatened to do so over this extreme “free speech” attitude.

The MRC hasn’t written anything on the controversy since, even after Substack relented and removed five of the offending accounts (though there are many more).

The MRC's Double Standard On Anti-Semitism

The Media Research Center was quick to label any critic of the Israel-Palestine war as anti-Semitic -- but it won't criticize Candace Owens' anti-Semitic turn and has cheered Nazi content on Substack.

Silent on Candace Owens’ anti-Semitism

Supporting Nazis on Substack

Discussion about this post