Harvard University is facing backlash after two student activist groups, the Harvard Undergraduate Palestine Solidarity Committee and the African American Resistance Organization, shared an antisemitic cartoon on social media.
The image depicted a hand labeled with a Star of David holding nooses around the necks of an Arab man and Black man identified as Muhammad Ali and Gamal Abdel Nasser respectively.
Harvard University is facing backlash after two student activist groups, the Harvard Undergraduate Palestine Solidarity Committee and the African American Resistance Organization, shared an antisemitic cartoon on social media. The image depicted a hand labeled with a Star of David holding nooses around the necks of an Arab man and Black man identified as Muhammad Ali and Gamal Abdel Nasser respectively. Harvard interim president Alan M. Garber condemned the cartoon, calling it 'flagrantly antisemitic'. Another student group, Harvard Faculty and Staff for Justice in Palestine, also posted the image online.
Walter Johnson resigned as a faculty adviser to the Harvard Undergraduate Palestine Solidarity Committee (PSC) and from Harvard Faculty and Staff for Justice in Palestine after the groups faced backlash for sharing an antisemitic image.
The PSC uploaded a new version of the post with a caption stating that it contained an image not reflective of their organizational values, regretting its inclusion as it played upon antisemitic tropes.
Interim Harvard President Alan M. Garber condemned the antisemitic image in a University-wide email on Tuesday, writing that perpetuating vile and hateful antisemitic tropes or engaging in inflammatory rhetoric was not what this moment demanded of them.
Accuracy
The original antisemitic image was removed promptly but should not have been published in the first place according to PSC.
A number of student organizations took down their posts after receiving criticism for sharing the cartoon. A pro-Palestinian faculty group apologized for posting it.
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author does not disclose their sources and only quotes from one source which may be biased. Secondly, the title of the article implies that Walter Johnson resigned due to backlash for sharing an antisemitic image when it was actually his decision not to renew his term with Harvard Faculty and Staff for Justice in Palestine. Thirdly, the author uses emotional manipulation by stating that conversations about Professor Johnson's resignation were ongoing which may suggest a sense of urgency or importance without providing any context. Lastly, the article does not provide any evidence to support its claims.
The author uses emotional manipulation by stating that conversations about Professor Johnson's resignation were ongoing which may suggest a sense of urgency or importance without providing any context.
The title implies that Walter Johnson resigned due to backlash for sharing an antisemitic image when it was actually his decision not to renew his term with Harvard Faculty and Staff for Justice in Palestine.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by citing the condemnation of the antisemitic image from Harvard President Alan M. Garber and stating that it is precisely what this moment demands of us.
> Walter Johnson, a professor of History and African American Studies at Harvard University, resigned as a faculty adviser to the Harvard Undergraduate Palestine Solidarity Committee (PSC) after the group faced backlash for sharing an antisemitic image. <
> The PSC uploaded a new version of the post, writing in the caption that earlier version contained an image not reflective of their organizational values. <
Bias
(85%)
The article contains examples of religious bias and monetary bias. The author uses language that dehumanizes Jews by referring to them as a 'Jewish community' which implies they are not part of the human race. This is an example of religious bias.
> Walter Johnson, a professor of History and African American Studies, resigned from Harvard Faculty and Staff for Justice in Palestine after the groups faced backlash for sharing a post containing an antisemitic image.
The cartoon was included in a social media post Sunday by two Harvard student activist groups as part of a graphic about historical ties between the Black civil rights movement and pro-Palestinian advocacy.
Additional student groups and a pro-Palestinian faculty and staff group later posted the graphic on their own accounts.
Accuracy
The cartoon was included in a social media post Sunday by two Harvard student activist groups as part of a graphic about historical ties between the Black civil rights movement and pro-Palestinian advocacy. Additional student groups and a pro-Palestinian faculty and staff group later posted the graphic on their own accounts.
The cartoon appears to have originated from a 1967 newsletter published by the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, which is described as an organization that likened Zionism to an imperial project. The SNCC newsletter condemned what it described as atrocities committed by Zionists against Arabs.
The graphic posted by the Harvard groups noted the historical roots of solidarity between Black liberation movements and Palestinian liberation, including a statement from the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee that likened Zionism to an imperial project. The image included in the graphic was described as offensive and antisemitic.
Deception
(90%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the title of the article implies that Harvard student and faculty groups are being denounced for antisemitism when in fact it was only two specific student activist groups who posted a graphic on social media which included an offensive cartoon. Secondly, the author does not disclose any sources or provide any context about why these particular organizations were chosen to be condemned. Thirdly, the article quotes several people making statements about the cartoon being despicable and inarguably antisemitic without providing evidence for their claims.
The title of the article implies that Harvard student and faculty groups are being denounced for antisemitism when in fact it was only two specific student activist groups who posted a graphic on social media which included an offensive cartoon. This is deceptive because it creates the impression that all students and faculty at Harvard are responsible for this action.
The article quotes several people making statements about the cartoon being despicable and inarguably antisemitic without providing evidence for their claims. This is deceptive because it creates the impression that these opinions are based on factual analysis when in reality there may not be any evidence to support them.
The author does not disclose any sources or provide any context about why these particular organizations were chosen to be condemned. This is deceptive because readers have no way of knowing if there was a specific reason for choosing these groups, or if they were simply selected arbitrarily.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several examples of inflammatory rhetoric and appeals to authority. The author uses the phrase 'despicably' in a subjective manner without providing any evidence or context for their opinion. They also use quotes from other sources as if they are their own opinions, which is not appropriate. Additionally, there are no formal fallacies present in this article.
The cartoon is despicably, inarguably antisemitic,
Bias
(85%)
The article contains a statement from Rabbi David Wolpe that the cartoon is despicably and inarguably antisemitic. The author also quotes several other individuals who condemn the cartoon as being offensive or hateful. Additionally, there are statements from Harvard student groups stating their disavowal of anti-Semitism and removal of posts containing images that played upon such tropes.
Antisemitism has no place in the movement of Palestinian liberation
Is there no limit?
Perpetuating vile and hateful antisemitic tropes, or otherwise engaging in inflammatory rhetoric or sharing images that demean people on the basis of their identity, is precisely the opposite of what this moment demands of us.
Harvard University is again embroiled in a controversy over antisemitism on campus
student groups and a faculty group shared an antisemitic cartoon
the cartoon depicted a hand labeled with a Star of David holding nooses around the necks of an Arab man and Black man, who were identified as Muhammad Ali and Gamal Abdel Nasser respectively
Accuracy
The cartoon depicted a hand labeled with a Star of David holding nooses around the necks of an Arab man and Black man
Incidents of antisemitism have risen on college campuses where the war in Gaza is a heated topic
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author claims that the cartoon was shared by two student groups and reposted by Harvard Faculty and Staff for Justice in Palestine without disclosing any sources or providing evidence to support this claim. Secondly, the author uses sensationalist language such as 'flagrantly antisemitic' when describing the cartoon, which is not supported by factual information provided in the article. Thirdly, the author quotes a statement from Harvard interim president Alan M. Garber condemning the cartoon without providing any context or background on why he made this statement.
The author claims that two student groups shared an antisemitic cartoon but does not provide evidence to support this claim.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains an example of a dichotomous depiction. The cartoon depicted in the article portrays Jews and Arabs as opposites with nooses around their necks. This is a clear example of black-and-white thinking where there are only two sides to consider, which oversimplifies complex issues.
The hand labeled with a Star of David holding nooses that were tied around the necks of an Arab man and a Black man.
Bias
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Annabelle Timsit has a conflict of interest on the topic of antisemitism at Harvard University as she is reporting on an investigation into allegations that they are not doing enough to combat it. The article also mentions Alan M. Garber and Claudine Gay who have been involved in this issue.
Annabelle Timsit reports on the House Committee on Education and the Workforce's investigation into allegations of antisemitism at Harvard University.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Annabelle Timsit has a conflict of interest on the topic of antisemitism at Harvard University as she is reporting on an investigation into allegations that they are not doing enough to combat it. The article also mentions Alan M. Garber and Claudine Gay who have been involved in this issue.
Annabelle Timsit reports on the House Committee on Education and the Workforce's investigation into allegations of antisemitism at Harvard University, where she is reporting from.
