participate
Contribute
participate
Contribute
participate
Contribute

Teaching Series : Identifying and Addressing Islamophobia on Social Media 

Islamophobia doesn’t always come with loud hate — often, it’s hidden in subtle, coded messages that quietly fuel division.

This teaching series is about empowering our community: understanding how religious hatred is planted, how it spreads online, and — most importantly — how we can stop it.

Using a recent Facebook post about the Pahalgam tragedy, we break down how both open and hidden Islamophobia creep into public spaces — and show what you can do to push back against it.

.

Why is this post Islamophobic ?

This post can be seen as Islamophobic for a few key reasons

  1. Implying Religion-Based Violence Without Proof: The post says, “Allegedly they asked for religion before killing.” This kind of wording links a horrific act (killing) with religion — and given the context (Pahalgam, Kashmir), it’s implicitly targeting Muslims. Even using “allegedly” doesn’t fully shield the accusation. Spreading unverified claims that tie violence to a specific religion fuels hate and stereotypes.
  2. Targeting a Muslim-Majority Region:
    Pahalgam is in Kashmir, a Muslim-majority region. Saying “All eyes on Pahalgam” along with a tragic photo heavily suggests that the post blames the local Muslim population for the violence, without evidence or context. It paints an entire community as dangerous
  3. Exploiting Emotional Imagery for Blame:
    The image of a grieving woman next to what appears to be a dead body, combined with the caption, is designed to provoke anger and sadness — and then quietly direct that anger toward Muslims.
  4. Stoking Division and Fear:
    Posts like these subtly (or not so subtly) pit religious groups against each other. They deepen mistrust, fear, and hatred by suggesting that someone’s religious identity determines whether they are violent.

Summary:
The post doesn’t just report a tragedy. It blames a whole religious group based on an unverified claim, taps into emotional manipulation, and fans communal hatred — which is why it’s Islamophobic.
This subtle but dangerous messaging invites and encourages Islamophobic thinking — and this is exactly proven by the comments that follow below.

Comment 1 : In Response to the above post

Translation

“Allegedly sister, how many centuries will you keep being foolish? Isn’t 1000 years of Hindu killings still not enough proof?
Don’t forget, Hindus have only one native land and it is shrinking by the day; the rest have been converted.
What we can do at the local level is boycott everything and anything that supports the peaceful community, i.e., do not even spend a single cent at a peaceful community business.”

Why is this comment Islamophobic ?

This comment is Islamophobic for several clear reasons:

  1. Collective Blame and Dehumanization: It blames an entire religious group (Muslims, referred to indirectly as the “peaceful community”) for historical grievances, suggesting that Muslims are collectively responsible for violence against Hindus over centuries. This tactic of blaming current individuals for ancient or historic acts is a classic form of hate speech.
  2. Demonization and Fear-Mongering:
    The language about Hindus having “only one native land” and it “shrinking by the day” paints Muslims as an existential threat, fueling fear, anxiety, and resentment. Portrays Muslims as violent by default (“1000 years of Hindu killings” narrative).
  3. Call for Economic Boycott:
    The comment explicitly urges people to boycott businesses associated with Muslims (“peaceful community”). Economic boycotts based on religion or ethnicity are a recognized form of discrimination and are illegal under anti-discrimination laws in places like New South Wales and Victoria.
  4. Use of Mocking and Derogatory Language:
    Terms like “kitni sadiyo tak murkh banti rahogi” (how many centuries will you continue to be foolish?) are mocking and intended to humiliate and belittle, creating a hostile environment.
  5. Masked Language (“peaceful community”):
    Using euphemisms like “peaceful community” to refer to Muslims tries to skirt around direct hate speech filters, but the intention and effect remain the same: to vilify.

Summary:
This comment spreads religious hatred, incites discrimination, and targets an entire community based on religion — making it textbook Islamophobia.

Comment 2 - In response to the above post

Why is this comment Islamophobic ?

This post is Islamophobic — though more subtly — for these reasons:

  1. Masked Generalization Against Muslims:
    The comment claims that “a significant number of terrorist incidents” are associated with “a particular religious background,” without naming Islam directly — but the implication is very clear. It’s a backdoor way of linking Muslims to terrorism as a pattern, reinforcing dangerous stereotypes
  2. Framing as “Data-Driven” Hate:
    Saying “I trust data” gives a false sense of objectivity. In reality, terrorism data is complex and shows that individuals from many backgrounds are involved in violence. Selectively using “data” to associate a specific religion with terrorism is misleading and fuels prejudice. Implies statistical justification for religious profiling and stereotyping.
  3. Setting Up a False Distinction:
    While the commenter says “this does not mean all followers are terrorists,” the overall message still links the religion and its followers to violence. It’s like saying, “I’m not saying everyone from Group X is dangerous, but the statistics show they usually are,” which plants fear and bias anyway
  4. Creating “Us vs Them” Thinking:
    Statements like “We are educated and open-minded enough” suggest that people who disagree are ignorant or blind — another subtle tactic to shame dissent and normalize the bias against Muslims.

    Summary:
    Even without slurs or overt hatred, this post subtly otherizes Muslims, associates them with terrorism, and presents bias as rational and data-driven. That’s still Islamophobia — just polished to sound reasonable

Final Takeaways:

✅ Islamophobia often hides behind “allegedly,” “data,” or “coded language.”
✅ Blaming an entire religion for the actions of individuals is bigotry, not analysis.
✅ Hate, whether direct or subtle, must be recognized, called out, and addressed legally and socially.

Legal Position on the Posts and Comments

1. Relevant Laws in Australia:

  • NSW:
    Under the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW), it is unlawful to publicly incite hatred, serious contempt, or severe ridicule against a person or group because of their religion.

  • Victoria:
    Under the Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001 (VIC), it is illegal to engage in public behavior that incites hatred, serious contempt, revulsion, or severe ridicule against another person or group on the basis of religion.

  • Queensland:
    Under the Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 (QLD), religious vilification is prohibited. This includes any public act that incites hatred, serious contempt, or severe ridicule because of a person’s religion

2. Application to the Posts and Comments:

  • Original Post:
    By suggesting, without evidence, that people were killed after being asked their religion (in a Muslim-majority area), the post implies Muslim culpability for violence. This incites hatred and fear toward Muslims based on religion.

  • Comment 1:
    This comment explicitly blames Muslims for centuries of violence, calls for boycotting Muslim businesses, and uses mocking language to humiliate.
    → Directly incites contempt and discrimination against Muslims.

  • Comment 2:
    Even though phrased politely, it subtly links Muslims to terrorism, implying statistical justification for religious bias.
    → Reinforces stereotypes and incites distrust and fear toward a religious group.

Conclusion:
➔ All three examples could meet the legal threshold for religious vilification under Australian law, particularly in NSW, Victoria, and Queensland.

What Can Be Done

  1. Public Education and Counter-Messaging:

    • Publish clear counter-statements showing how misinformation spreads.

    • Share this post and support Alliance Against Islamophobia awareness campaigns like  to educate our community  to spot and report Anti Muslim hate speech.

    • Provide support and solidarity to businesses and individuals affected by boycotts or harassment
  2. Filing a Formal Complaint to Authorities:

Final Word:

Freedom of speech does not protect hate speech. In Australia, religious vilification laws exist to protect communities from exactly this kind of divisive, dangerous behavior — and action can and should be taken