Abstract: While concern about antisemitism is growing, especially online, agreement about what exactly constitutes antisemitism is declining, especially when it appears in contexts other than those associated with Nazism.
Based on four empirical case studies and combining various qualitative analyses of digital content and semi-structured interviews, this thesis explores expressions of antisemitic hate speech and how the discursive boundaries of what can and cannot be said about Jews are perceived, dealt with, and experienced by different actors in the Norwegian digital public sphere. These include key political actors on the far right and the left, as well as members of the small and historically vulnerable Jewish minority. Theoretically, the thesis combines sociological boundary theory with perspectives from media studies, antisemitism studies and multidisciplinary research on online hate.
The thesis shows how the neo-Nazi organisation Nordic Resistance Movement and online debaters in various comment sections push boundaries by producing and promoting antisemitic content in both explicit and implicit ways. It also shows how “anti-Islamic” far-right alternative media and left-wing political organisations draw boundaries through comment moderation on their digital platforms. A key finding is that antisemitic hate speech is a diverse and complex phenomenon that can be difficult to identify. Finally, the thesis also sheds light on the experiences of antisemitic hate speech among Norwegian “public Jews”.
Beyond the empirical findings, the thesis contributes to media studies by proposing an analytical framework for how the concepts of boundaries and boundary-making can be used to understand different key dimensions and dynamics of the digital public sphere, in particular, how hateful content is communicated and countered, and the consequences for those targeted.
Abstract: For a well-functioning and inclusive democracy, it is crucial that minority voices can participate in public debate and express their opinions through the news media. However, media participation can be demanding, especially considering the proliferation of online hate. Based on in-depth interviews with 15 self-identified Jews who have participated in Norwegian media as Jews, this article explores the strategies Jewish minority voices employ when participating in the news media, both to position themselves and achieve their aims as representatives of a small-sized and vulnerable minority, and to deal with the risk of and experiences with antisemitism. The findings show that it can be demanding and distressing, but also rewarding to participate in the media as a minority voice, and most often the motivations and gains outweigh the risks. Although it is common to experience antisemitic hate speech in the wake of media participation, this has not led the participants to withdraw from public engagement. Consequently, this article argues that hate speech does not necessarily represent a boundary for public participation. However, participating as a minority voice requires strong motivation, emotional resilience, and the ability to focus on the positive outcomes of media participation, including the possibility of social change.
Abstract: This study explores how an extreme far-right alternative media site uses content from professional media to convey uncivil news with an antisemitic message. Analytically, it rests on a critical discourse analysis of 231 news items, originating from established national and international news sources, published on Frihetskamp from 2011–2018. In the study, we explore how news items are recontextualised to portray both overt and covert antisemitic discourses, and we identify four antisemitic representations that are reinforced through the selection and adjustment of news: Jews as powerful, as intolerant and anti-liberal, as exploiters of victimhood, and as inferior. These conspiratorial and exclusionary ideas, also known from historical Nazi propaganda, are thus reproduced by linking them to con-temporary societal and political contexts and the current news agenda. We argue that this kind of recontextualised, uncivil news can be difficult to detect in a digital public sphere.
