Digital Occupation: Pixelated Propaganda, Censored Platforms and the Battle for Narrative in Gaza

Evolving through decades of political upheaval, military confrontations and shifting media narratives, the Palestinian-Israeli conflict stands as one of the most enduring and complex impasses of the modern era. It is fuelled by unsupported and superstitious Israeli historical assertions about land and control. Nevertheless, how individuals all over the world associate with, comprehend and perceive the conflict has been drastically modified by the rise of social media. Social media platforms including X (formerly Twitter), Facebook, Instagram and TikTok have become advanced battlegrounds, where stories are intensified, open conclusions are formed and, in some cases, realities and facts are distorted. Social media has become both a weapon for spreading deception and an instrument for democratising data within the setting of Palestine and Israel, making it more troublesome to find common ground. (1)

This study employs critical discourse analysis (CDA) alongside visual rhetoric analysis and networked propaganda theory to examine Israel’s digital propaganda during the Gaza conflict. Drawing on frameworks by Norman Fairclough, Emeritus Professor of Linguistics at Lancaster University, and Teun A. van Dijk, Distinguished University Professor at Pompeu Fabra University in Barcelona and a leading scholar in discourse and ideology, the research analyses how language, imagery and media practices reinforce power structures and shape public perception. The methodology focuses on official state communications, influencer-led campaigns, viral content (hashtags, films, etc.) and algorithmic suppression tactics. By thematically coding these elements, such as emotional appeals, mythmaking and dehumanization, the study reveals how Israel’s digital propaganda apparatus maintains narrative dominance. Data is sourced from government media, news reports, investigative journalism and academic literature.

The study tests several interconnected hypotheses: 1) Israel’s digital propaganda adapts traditional Hasbara strategies (e.g., victimhood, moral exceptionalism, etc.); 2) it relies heavily on emotional manipulation (e.g., graphic imagery, moral binaries, etc.) to override critical discourse; 3) it constructs myths and engineered “truths” to justify violence and marginalise Palestinian perspectives; and 4) social media platforms, whether intentionally or through biased moderation, amplify Israeli narratives while suppressing pro-Palestinian voices. Thus, the paper’s central hypothesis is that Israel’s digital propaganda not only reflects a continuation of traditional Hasbara strategies but also constitutes a more adaptive, emotionally manipulative and digitally embedded system of narrative control, one that is increasingly vulnerable to being challenged by grassroots media and global digital resistance. However, despite its sophistication, the propaganda faces challenges from decentralised media (e.g., citizen journalism), which exposes contradictions and reduces its effectiveness, particularly among younger audiences.

Social media thrives on immediacy, unlike from conventional media, which navigates through a framework of publication oversight. These sites have ended up being pivotal sources for prompt news, individual stories and impactful pictures. Thus, social media has undermined the superiority of conventional news outlets like daily papers, television networks and news websites in covering critical events. As a result, social media is acquiring the political and social roles that traditional media used to have exclusively, leading to the emergence of concepts like “participatory culture” and “mediated communities”. (2) Not only has reality been contested in this shifting media landscape, but also in narrative superiority, which Israel has historically attempted to establish through conventional propaganda methods.

Israel’s Monopoly over the Narrative: A Classical Propaganda Framework

Israel has fought a digital war for worldwide support and legitimacy from the early hours of its most recent full-scale conflict in the Gaza Strip. In addition to military actions and a tightening siege, Israel began a vigorous media campaign to sway international perceptions in its favour. This campaign has mostly relied on social media sites like Facebook, YouTube, TikTok and

X. Support from pro-Israel lobby groups and online activists, as well as organised messaging from official Israeli state entities like the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) and the Foreign Ministry, were all part of these efforts, which went beyond impromptu public speech. Israel’s long- standing dominance over traditional media narratives is reflected in this digital propaganda apparatus, which guarantees that the Israeli viewpoint dominates both online and offline. Meanwhile, Palestinians in Gaza have encountered significant obstacles to digital engagement.

Due to prevalent power outages and damage to infrastructure, consistent internet access is frequently unattainable, hindering their capacity to convey their lived experiences, refute Israeli assertions or elicit international empathy. The situation is further worsened by the Israeli restriction on international journalists entering Gaza, which effectively silences Palestinian voices in mainstream global discussions.

This multifaceted digital campaign signifies a continuation and evolution of traditional propaganda tactics, now tailored to the rapid and emotionally charged landscape of social media, where Israel has aimed to assert control over the narrative battlefield as decisively as it does the physical one.

From Airstrikes to Hashtags: Israel’s Propaganda Playbook

Emotional appeals and the amplification of emotionally charged materials: Israel has strategically exploited emotionally charged materials to provoke strong reactions and sway public opinion. For example, the release of the 47-minute film titled “Bearing Witness to the October 7th Massacre” produced by the IDF Spokesperson’s Unit, displayed graphic footage of the Hamas attack on Israel, including scenes of torture and disfigurement. (3) This film was selectively shown to international leaders and media to provoke empathy and justify military actions in Gaza. Moreover, the viral proliferation of the “Kidnapped from Israel” campaign served to humanise Israeli victims and garner global support. (4) These emotionally powerful visuals have been widely circulated, bolstering Israel’s narrative of victimhood and the necessity for military intervention.

The simplification of the narrative and evading the curse of knowledge: Israel’s communication approach often simplifies intricate geopolitical matters into binary narratives, making it difficult for the international community to understand the complexities of the conflict. For instance, depicting Palestinians as a monolithic group of aggressors and Israelis as uniform victims reduces the multifaceted character of the conflict to a simplistic binary.

Using repetition in accordance with Goebbels’ propaganda principles: A recent notable instance is the baseless claim that Hamas militants beheaded Israeli infants during the 7 October 2023 attack. Initially propagated by Israeli officials and subsequently supported by international media, this allegation was later discredited. Despite the retraction, the continual circulation of such claims has contributed to a distorted view of Palestinians as barbaric and inhumane. (5)

Truth engineering, mythmaking and the creation of perception: Israel has utilised mythmaking to depict Palestinians as aggressors and obscure its own responsibility. This includes initially denying accountability for civilian deaths and holding Hamas responsible instead. In October 2023, the IDF launched a Telegram channel called “72 Virgins – Uncensored”, which employed Islamophobic imagery and graphic content to dehumanise Palestinians and portray them as savage. (6) Israel has also used the term “Pallywood” to accuse Palestinians of fabricating suffering for propaganda purposes. For instance, a false assertion by Israeli diplomat Ofir Gendelman used a Lebanese film clip as alleged evidence. These strategies aim to undermine Palestinian narratives and rationalise Israeli military actions. (7)

Manipulating the lens: Israel has employed visual rhetoric as a persuasive weapon, overshadowing information and facts with emotional images and personal narratives to sway public opinion. International support is being sought through empathy-evoking media campaigns and documentaries that focus on Israeli victims. This approach prioritises emotional resonance above analytical precision. For instance, the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs published a video during the assault on Al-Shifa Hospital claiming that Hamas had used the facility for military ends. Analysts labelled the video as a component of a bigger propaganda campaign to manipulate the narrative after it was extensively condemned for seeming staged, having a questionable accent, and having scripted dialogue.

Charismatic engagement and parasocial proximity: To cultivate a sense of connection and sway public opinion, Israeli leaders and officials have spoken directly with international audiences. For example, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s social media updates and speeches try to connect with people worldwide on a personal level, portraying Israel’s actions as legitimate and in accordance with common democratic ideals. Netanyahu met with Elon Musk, the owner of X, in Israel in November 2023. (8) That meeting was a component of Netanyahu’s larger plan to directly interact with key international figures to promote Israel’s story and gain international backing. It demonstrated an attempt to present his personable and charming diplomatic style.

The Act-IL campaign, a digital diplomacy effort, has used social media to connect with global audiences by highlighting cultural similarities. (9) For example, their UK-based campaign drew attention to the suffering of Israeli children imprisoned by Hamas, likening it to that of missing British toddler Madeleine McCann. By connecting with the audience’s emotions and cultural references, this method is sought to generate empathy and encourage support.

These multifaceted strategies, which include emotional appeals, simplified narratives, direct interaction with international figures, and others, illustrate how Israel has developed a complete propaganda playbook that covers both traditional and digital media, guaranteeing that its narrative predominates in public debate on the global stage.

The Structure of Israel’s Propaganda: National Myth and Victimhood

Israel is the only victim: Israel’s narrative frequently emphasises its right to self-defence while downplaying or ignoring Palestinian pain, often portraying itself as the only victim of the conflict. For example, Israeli authorities, such as Netanyahu, referred to Palestinians in Gaza as “children of darkness” in the wake of the Hamas assault on 7 October, in contrast to Israelis who they refer to as “children of light”. This rhetoric justifies massive military operations in Gaza by portraying Israel as a morally superior victim under assault. (10)

The “Chosen Nation” narrative: This propaganda apparatus frequently portrays Israel as uniquely entitled or exceptional while highlighting the country’s divine or historical claim to the land. The idea that only Jews have the right to self-determination in Israel was codified, for instance, by the “Basic Law: Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People”, which was passed in 2018. By sidelining the rights of Palestinian citizens and bolstering a narrative of Israel as the divinely chosen nation, this legislation makes Jewish exceptionalism an official policy.

The systemic dehumanisation of Palestinians: The Israeli narrative has used dehumanising words and pictures to explain military operations and silence Palestinian points of view. Israeli officials have likened Palestinians to vermin to be exterminated, using words like “cockroaches” and “microbes”. Israeli authorities have traditionally portrayed Palestinians as subhuman through animal metaphors. For example, Menachem Begin referred to them as “beasts walking on two legs” during a Knesset address. Nobel laureate Shmuel Agnon called Arabs “resembling dogs” and “without dignity”. (11) Ironically, Nazi propaganda historically portrayed Jews as subhuman by using animal analogies. Der Stürmer, a Nazi publication, printed caricatures of Jews with exaggerated features that resembled vermin. Joseph Goebbels, who associated Jews with a danger to society, referred to them as “subhumans” (or untermenschen). As a result, Nazi propaganda justified the persecution of Jews by depicting them as “parasites”.

In Israel’s public diplomacy campaigns, which aim to influence international opinion and defend its policies through tactical framing via Hasbara, these deeply rooted narratives of victimhood and exceptionalism play a pivotal role.

Hasbara, the Tactical Framing of Israel’s Public Diplomacy

During the recent Gaza conflict, Israel continued its public diplomacy efforts through Hasbara tactics, which included the weaponisation of accusations of antisemitism, perpetual threat framing, the depiction of international solidarity as a Muslim cause, and the “parade of enemies” strategy.

The weaponisation of antisemitism accusations: Israel has long attempted to suppress dissent by blurring the line between legitimate criticism of its policies and antisemitism. Just because of their critical coverage of Israeli conduct in Gaza, human rights groups such as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and even the United Nations have been labelled antisemitic according to the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition. This strategy seeks to delegitimise critiques by presenting them as stemming from hatred rather than genuine concerns.

Perpetual threat framing: Israeli authorities have depicted Hamas as an existential danger to Israel, advocating for global backing. By portraying Hamas as a savage foe, such framing aims to gain worldwide sympathy for Israel’s stance and legitimise military action. Importantly, this rationale has been used to justify the murder of hundreds of innocent Palestinian people by claiming that a Hamas official or militant was embedded among them, converting entire residential areas, hospitals and schools into targets for so-called “precision” strikes.

Depicting international solidarity as a Muslim cause: In reaction to worldwide demonstrations and denunciations of its violent conduct, Israel has used strategies to portray international support for Palestinians as a sectarian Muslim issue, overshadowing the larger, multi-religious and multi-ethnic solidarity movements. For instance, Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz utilised social media to target nations recognising Palestine, posting videos connecting cultural symbols from countries like Spain, Norway and Ireland with Hamas, thereby attempting to undermine their support.

“Parade of Enemies”: Netanyahu has stated that Israel is fighting on seven different war fronts, all driven by the objective of “defending ourselves against barbarism”. Israel’s strategy depicts a wide alliance of foes – such as Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran – as an existential danger, stirring nationalist feelings and providing justification for military activity. Thus, while Israel’s official discourse relies heavily on historical grievances, moral exceptionalism and systematic dehumanisation to shape global perceptions, these narratives are increasingly being challenged by grassroots media and citizen journalists who offer alternative, often suppressed, perspectives, setting the stage for a broader battle of narratives in the digital age.

Narrative Wars: The Rise of Citizen Journalism and Western Media Bias

The Gaza war has been the subject of extensive criticism in the Western media for its institutional biases, which frequently showcase an Israeli point of view while downplaying or ignoring Palestinian voices and agony. CNN and BBC are examples of outlets that have been criticised for reinforcing stereotypes and restricting empathy by framing the conflict with minimal historical context or humanisation of Palestinian fatalities. (12) In contrast, social media sites like TikTok, Instagram, X and Facebook have become effective citizen journalism tools, providing real-time, unfiltered information and personal experiences from people on the ground. By allowing underrepresented voices to circumvent traditional media gatekeeping and connect with global audiences, especially younger people, who are increasingly dependent on digital material to understand current affairs, these platforms are undoubtedly transformative. International solidarity has been galvanised, activism has been encouraged, and global awareness has been altered by viral hashtags like #FreePalestine, live-streamed videos and firsthand accounts.

However, despite its ability to promote grassroots narratives and encourage worldwide interaction, social media also has issues that make it less trustworthy, such as misinformation, algorithmic suppression and content moderation. Collectively, these factors indicate a changing media environment in which traditional news outlets and decentralised digital platforms are vying to influence how the public views the Gaza war.

The Double-Edged Sword: Restrictions on Social Media as a Propaganda Arena

Undoubtedly, social media platforms have become vital for sharing perspectives on the genocide in Gaza, but they face criticism for biased content moderation. Practices like shadow banning, account suspensions and algorithmic censorship have disproportionately affected pro-Palestinian content, raising concerns about censorship and the erasure of Palestinian voices. Studies, like the Centre for Media Monitoring (CfMM) report, have shown that Israeli opinions are still favoured even online, appearing nearly three times more frequently than Palestinian ones on television and internet news. Furthermore, digital advocacy has been weakened, and worldwide solidarity has been hindered by the suppression or limitation of popular hashtags like #FreePalestine. (13)

Differences in Narrative Visibility

Under the pretence of content moderation, social media platforms suppress pro-Palestinian discourse, employing tactics that curtail free expression and hinder global awareness of the current humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza and the occupied territories. This, in turn, reduces users' capacity to share narratives and document human rights abuses. One of the most popular strategies is to delete any posts – whether they be images, videos or written text – that mention Palestine or show support for Palestinians. These removals frequently take place without obvious reason, raising significant worries about censorship and the decline of free expression, according to Human Rights Watch and Global Voices.

In addition to removing material, platforms often suspend the accounts of Palestinian journalists and activists, restricting their audience reach and impeding their capacity to promote awareness. Additional limitations include turning off interactive elements like comments, likes and live streaming, which further reduce visibility and engagement. Furthermore, shadow banning, in which content is covertly downranked, reduces the visibility of posts and diminishes the effectiveness of advocacy campaigns.

Account access limitations and algorithmic bias are also important factors. It has been reported that platforms alter their algorithms to flag or deprioritise Palestinian material, which lowers its visibility and slows worldwide awareness. Restricting who can follow or engage with pro- Palestinian profiles also hampers users’ capacity to expand their audience. Together, these mechanisms hinder the dissemination of Palestinian narratives, suppress free expression and pose significant obstacles to activists trying to document and share the everyday experiences of Palestinians. To guarantee that Palestinian voices are not muted online, human rights organisations are calling for increased accountability and protections for digital rights. (14)

Nonetheless, and while digital platforms have been criticised for suppressing pro-Palestinian content, the very efforts to control the narrative have inadvertently exposed the limitations and contradictions of Israeli propaganda, leading to a significant shift in global perception.

The Backfire Effect: When Israeli Propaganda Backfires

At times, Israeli propaganda campaigns, especially during the Gaza war, have backfired, leading to increased public doubt and greater support for Palestinians. Prominent individuals such as American actors Ben Platt and Hannah Einbinder, both queer and Jewish, publicly condemned Israel’s conduct, portraying it as inconsistent with Jewish principles. Their remarks indicate a wider change among famous people, as they reconsider their position on the dispute.

Similarly, actresses Nicola Coughlan, Susan Sarandon and Cynthia Nixon are among those who have expressed support for Palestinian rights, calling for a ceasefire and humanitarian assistance. Their remarks have emphasised the gap between official Israeli rhetoric and the sentiments of famous celebrities, which have also resonated with audiences worldwide. (15)

Israel’s efforts to influence international narratives through digital manipulation and paid influencer campaigns have also elicited criticism. According to reports, influencers were paid to create pro-Israel material or withdraw their support for Palestine, and some rejected the offers and condemned them publicly. Hashtags like #HAMASisISIS and pre-made material spread to social media influencers, supposedly including celebrities like Kim Kardashian and Gal Gadot. Additionally, leaked papers revealed a secret initiative, financed by Israel’s Ministry of Diaspora Affairs, to sway American legislators using artificial social media accounts, AI-generated material and fake news sites. This initiative, which raised significant worries about foreign interference and ethical breaches in democratic processes, was directed specifically at important politicians, particularly Black Democrats, to ensure ongoing support for military aid to Israel. (16)

Legislative measures matching pro-Israel agendas have escalated discussions on free speech and civil liberties in the United States. Laws penalising persons or groups who back boycotts against Israel have been enacted in more than 30 states, often necessitating loyalty oaths to conduct business with the state. Critics of these actions, which include a high-profile lawsuit involving the Arkansas Times, claim that they violate First Amendment. (17) Collectively, these legislative measures and propaganda campaigns have ignited public discussion and, in several instances, strengthened pro-Palestinian activism. Such tactics have revealed the dangers of coercive information strategies, and rather than suppressing dissent, have ultimately increased scrutiny of Israel’s behaviour while promoting the Palestinian story on the international stage.

The Erosion of Israeli Media Dominance and the Collapse of Israel’s Narrative

The Hamas assault on 7 October represented a watershed moment in the Israel-Palestine conflict, both in terms of violence and in the shift of international narratives. Israel was unable to dominate the media landscape in the manner of past wars, losing control of the narrative in the conflict’s early days. Its initial reaction was chaotic, and its propaganda campaigns, which targeted both Western liberals and right-wing Evangelicals with very different messages, seemed disingenuous and contradictory. Liberal audiences were not persuaded by progressive images, such as TikTok films of Black and female IDF soldiers. The Israeli government’s decision to replace its public relations manager highlighted its inability to re-establish control over public perception.

Critical academic and activist voices that revealed deeper structural problems caused further harm to Israel’s credibility. Israeli actions in Gaza were described by historians like Raz Segal as a “textbook case of genocide” due to the rhetoric and military behaviour that matched UN criteria. International condemnation was further fuelled by “Breaking the Silence”, a group of former IDF soldiers that released a statement exposing Israel’s deliberate ethnic cleansing of Gaza. (18) By exposing institutional problems inside Israeli society, these revelations undermined official narratives and added to the increasing disillusionment with Israel’s public diplomacy and its enduring attempts to present itself as the conflict’s moral participant.

Conclusion

The current genocide in Gaza marks a turning point in Israel’s global image, highlighting an increasing divide between its official narrative and the reality seen by the international community. Israel has encountered unparalleled doubt and condemnation, even with massive media campaigns and diplomatic persuasion. A key disagreement lies in the disparity between Israel’s precise military capabilities, as evidenced by well-publicised targeted killings such as that of Hamas leader Ismail Haniya in Tehran, and the widespread devastation in Gaza. This raises an urgent ethical dilemma: why is Israel’s campaign in Gaza causing mass civilian deaths and destroying infrastructure if it can carry out precise strikes overseas? For many Western observers, the extent and indiscriminate nature of the devastation imply a policy of collective punishment rather than strategic necessity, which exacerbates moral indignation and weakens Israel's assertions of self-defence.

This growing disillusionment is reflected in Israeli debate as well. Former Prime Minister Ehud Barak’s candid statement, that he too might become a “terrorist” if he were a Palestinian, provides a unique insight into the internal recognition of the despair that Palestinians experience. Similarly, prominent Israeli journalist Gideon Levy has highlighted the near-complete absence of Israel’s political left, which formerly served as a counterweight championing Palestinian rights and a two-state solution. Today, the hardline nationalist consensus that prevails in Israeli politics marginalises disagreement and isolates the nation both domestically and internationally. A new wave of international awareness is emerging that increasingly questions traditional alliances, challenges impunity and repositions the Palestinian struggle within wider discussions about justice, human rights and accountability. This wave is supported by academic studies, soldier testimonies and grassroots documentation.