Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership of the Labour Party from 2015 to 2020 represented a sharp break from the neoliberal consensus that had dominated British politics since the 1990s. Corbyn’s democratic socialist platform—promoting public ownership, wealth redistribution, and anti-imperialism—galvanised a new generation of supporters. However, his leadership was dogged by persistent accusations of antisemitism, accusations that were frequently inflated or weaponised to undermine him.
This article examines how these allegations were used strategically by his political opponents, not only to discredit Corbyn himself but also to undermine independent media outlets that supported his leadership. These outlets, including Dorset Eye, The Canary, and Skwawkbox, were targeted with spurious antisemitism accusations as part of a broader campaign to delegitimise the Corbyn project.
Corbyn’s Threat to the Establishment
When Jeremy Corbyn became Labour leader in 2015, he brought with him decades of experience as a committed anti-war campaigner and socialist. His platform of renationalising industries, opposing austerity, and supporting the Palestinian cause threatened the status quo upheld by both Labour centrists and the Conservative government. Corbyn’s policies attracted significant grassroots support, revitalising the Labour Party’s membership, especially among younger voters. However, his radical agenda also made him a target for a broad coalition of opposition forces, ranging from pro-Israel lobby groups to Labour’s own Blairite wing, as well as the Conservative Party and large sections of the mainstream media.
The accusations of antisemitism that would come to define Corbyn’s leadership had their roots in his foreign policy positions, especially his outspoken support for Palestinian rights. While Corbyn himself had a long history of anti-racist activism and explicitly condemned antisemitism, his criticism of Israel and associations with pro-Palestinian activists made him a target for those who sought to conflate anti-Zionism with antisemitism.
Labour’s Factional Infighting: Weaponising Antisemitism
Within Labour, opposition to Corbyn’s leadership was immediate and fierce, especially from the centrist and Blairite wings of the party. Many of these figures feared that Corbyn’s left-wing policies would alienate moderate voters and lead to electoral disaster. Prominent figures like Tom Watson, Labour’s deputy leader from 2015 to 2019, emerged as vocal critics of Corbyn’s handling of antisemitism. Watson, a key centrist within Labour, frequently criticised Corbyn, arguing that the party faced a “crisis for its soul” under his leadership. He pushed for stronger measures to combat antisemitism, implying that Corbyn had been too lenient.
Margaret Hodge, a Jewish Labour MP, also played a central role in amplifying the antisemitism accusations. In July 2018, Hodge famously confronted Corbyn in the House of Commons, calling him a “racist and an antisemite.” This confrontation, widely reported in the media, contributed to the perception that Corbyn himself was complicit in fostering an environment where antisemitism could flourish. Hodge’s remarks came after a heated debate over Labour’s decision to amend the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, which some members of the Jewish community saw as a refusal to adopt a widely accepted standard for combatting antisemitism.
Labour MP Luciana Berger also became a focal point in the antisemitism controversy. Berger, who was subjected to vile antisemitic abuse from some individuals, became one of Corbyn’s most outspoken critics within the party. In 2019, she left Labour, citing antisemitism as a key reason. The departure of Berger, along with other MPs who followed suit, intensified media scrutiny and public perception that Labour was institutionally antisemitic, despite the number of verified complaints being a tiny fraction of Labour’s overall membership.
Labour’s internal divisions were laid bare in the 2020 leaked report on the party’s handling of antisemitism complaints, which revealed that some senior officials actively worked to undermine Corbyn’s leadership. The report showed that antisemitism complaints were often exaggerated or mishandled by those who opposed Corbyn, using the issue as a political weapon against him. Despite Corbyn’s efforts to address the issue, including introducing reforms to speed up the investigation of complaints, the narrative of Labour being “institutionally antisemitic” gained traction.
The Role of the Media
The British media played a crucial role in shaping the narrative that Labour under Corbyn was rife with antisemitism. Right-wing tabloids such as The Sun, The Daily Mail, and The Telegraph were particularly aggressive in their coverage, frequently publishing stories that linked Corbyn and his allies to antisemitic incidents. These papers, traditionally hostile to Labour, found in the antisemitism allegations a potent weapon with which to discredit Corbyn.
Even traditionally left-leaning outlets like The Guardian and The Independent gave considerable space to reporting on the allegations. This created a perception that Labour’s antisemitism problem was far more widespread than it was in reality. In truth, an internal Labour report later revealed that antisemitism complaints involved less than 0.1% of the party’s membership. Despite this, the media’s relentless focus on individual cases and the party’s alleged failure to act decisively helped cement the image of Corbyn as someone indifferent to or complicit in antisemitism.
A particularly damaging moment came in July 2019 when BBC Panorama aired a documentary titled Is Labour Antisemitic?. The programme presented testimony from former Labour officials who claimed that Corbyn’s leadership had allowed antisemitism to fester within the party. However, the documentary was later criticised for lacking balance, with many of the individuals interviewed having clear political biases against Corbyn. The Panorama episode became a major talking point in the British media and further entrenched the perception that Labour had a deep-rooted antisemitism problem.
Targeting Independent Media: Silencing Dissenting Voices
In addition to attacking Corbyn, the antisemitism allegations were used to undermine independent media outlets that supported his leadership. These platforms, often described as “alternative media,” had emerged in response to the mainstream media’s hostile coverage of Corbyn and his policies. Outlets such as Dorset Eye, The Canary, and Skwawkbox became key voices for Corbyn’s grassroots supporters, offering a counter-narrative to the overwhelmingly negative coverage in the traditional press.
- The Canary: Founded in 2015, The Canary was one of the most prominent independent outlets supporting Corbyn’s leadership. It was frequently critical of the mainstream media’s portrayal of Corbyn and Labour, offering an alternative perspective on key issues, including antisemitism. However, for its staunch defence of Corbyn, The Canary became a target of relentless attacks. Its editor, Kerry-Anne Mendoza, was accused of downplaying or dismissing antisemitism in Labour, charges that The Canary repeatedly refuted. Mendoza herself was subjected to smears, with right-wing outlets accusing her of promoting conspiracy theories. The Canary faced pressure from corporate advertisers and social media platforms, with calls for its content to be “de-platformed” due to alleged antisemitism.
- Skwawkbox: Another significant pro-Corbyn outlet, Skwawkbox, was also targeted. Run by Steve Walker, the site became known for its investigative reporting and critical analysis of Labour’s internal disputes. Skwawkbox was vocal in its support of Corbyn and frequently challenged the mainstream media’s narrative around antisemitism. However, it too faced accusations of antisemitism, with critics suggesting that its defence of Corbyn was tantamount to denying or dismissing antisemitic incidents within the party. Like The Canary, Skwawkbox was subject to attempts to discredit it, with detractors labelling it a propaganda outlet for Corbynism. This was part of a broader effort to silence independent voices that did not conform to the dominant narrative of Corbyn’s alleged complicity in antisemitism.
- Dorset Eye: Less well-known but equally important in the pro-Corbyn media ecosystem, Dorset Eye provided a platform for grassroots activists and independent journalism that supported Corbyn’s leadership. The site was known for its outspoken criticism of the mainstream media’s role in manufacturing the antisemitism crisis. Dorset Eye ran an article titled “Labour Disclosure ‘Shows Antisemitism Was Weaponised Against Corbyn’, Activists Say,” which directly challenged the narrative that Labour under Corbyn had a widespread antisemitism problem. The outlet became a target of online smears, with critics accusing it of providing a platform for antisemitic conspiracy theories. Despite this, Dorset Eye continued to advocate for Corbyn’s policies and expose the role of the media in distorting the antisemitism debate.
Fake Accusations and Attempts to De-platform
The accusations against these independent outlets were part of a wider campaign to delegitimise any media that defended Corbyn or questioned the antisemitism narrative. De-platforming efforts were particularly prevalent. Advertisers were pressured to withdraw their support from these sites, and social media platforms were lobbied to reduce their reach. In some cases, outlets like The Canary experienced temporary suspensions or restrictions on platforms such as Facebook and Twitter, limiting their ability to counter mainstream narratives.
Fake accusations were frequently levelled at these outlets, often based on distorted readings of their content or outright fabrications. For instance, articles that criticised the IHRA definition of antisemitism or highlighted the weaponisation of antisemitism for political purposes were labelled as “antisemitic” by opponents. This tactic effectively framed any defence of Corbyn or critique of Israel’s policies as antisemitism, conflating legitimate political discourse with racism.
The Conservative Party and External Political Pressure
The Conservative Party also played a significant role in weaponising the antisemitism allegations against Corbyn. Conservative leaders, including Prime Ministers Theresa May and Boris Johnson, used the issue to attack Corbyn’s credibility during parliamentary debates and in the media. Johnson, in particular, repeatedly questioned Corbyn’s suitability to lead, pointing to his alleged failure to address antisemitism as evidence that he was unfit for office.
The Conservatives’ electoral strategy in the 2019 general election heavily focused on the antisemitism controversy. Campaign ads and leaflets repeatedly referenced Labour’s perceived antisemitism problem, and Conservative candidates used the issue in debates to undermine Corbyn. This tactic was part of a broader strategy to cast Corbyn as an extremist whose policies, such as nationalisation and wealth redistribution, were dangerously out of touch with mainstream voters.
In addition to the Conservatives, external pro-Israel lobbying groups were also deeply involved in the campaign to discredit Corbyn. The Al Jazeera documentary The Lobby (2017) exposed how the Israeli Embassy in London had worked to influence British politics, including efforts to undermine pro-Palestinian politicians close to Corbyn. The documentary showed an Israeli diplomat discussing efforts to “take down” specific UK politicians, revealing the extent of external involvement in shaping the antisemitism narrative against Corbyn.
Voters Were Deceived
The targeting of independent media played a key role in shaping public perceptions during Corbyn’s leadership. By undermining platforms like The Canary, Skwawkbox, and Dorset Eye, the mainstream media and Corbyn’s political opponents succeeded in limiting the reach of alternative narratives. These independent outlets were crucial in providing a counterpoint to the overwhelmingly negative coverage Corbyn received from established media, but their voices were drowned out by a concerted campaign of smears and de-platforming.
One of the most significant aspects of the antisemitism controversy surrounding Corbyn is how British voters were systematically misled about the scale and nature of the problem. Through a combination of media distortion, political opportunism, and external influence, the narrative of Labour as an antisemitic party was crafted and relentlessly promoted. This false narrative had a direct impact on voters’ perceptions of Corbyn and Labour as a whole.
In the run-up to the 2019 general election, polling showed that the issue of antisemitism had significantly damaged Corbyn’s standing with voters. Many believed the exaggerated claims, with some even equating criticism of Israeli government policies with antisemitism—a conflation that was carefully promoted by those opposed to Corbyn. Despite Corbyn’s consistent public statements condemning antisemitism and Labour’s efforts to strengthen internal disciplinary procedures, the media focus on isolated cases led many voters to believe the problem was endemic.
A leaked Labour Party report in 2020 revealed that many of the antisemitism complaints had been manipulated or exaggerated by factions within the party itself, particularly by those opposed to Corbyn’s leadership. This included instances where complaints were intentionally mishandled to embarrass the leadership and feed into the media narrative. The report showed that senior officials within the party had worked against Corbyn in the 2017 election, actively undermining Labour’s electoral chances. Voters were not only misled by the media and political opponents but also by individuals within the Labour Party who had a vested interest in Corbyn’s downfall.
The impact on voters was profound. The antisemitism allegations helped alienate key sections of Labour’s traditional base, particularly Jewish voters and others who were concerned about racism. It also tarnished Corbyn’s broader appeal, contributing to his portrayal as an unelectable figure. The media’s focus on the issue during the 2019 general election campaign, combined with relentless Conservative attacks, supposedly led to Labour’s worst electoral performance since 1935.However, as the following data reveals he still got more votes than Miliband in 2015, Brown in 2010 and Blair in 2005.
Conclusion: The Weaponisation of Antisemitism
The accusations of antisemitism against Jeremy Corbyn were not simply about addressing genuine concerns of racism within Labour. Instead, they became a powerful tool to discredit Corbyn’s leadership and prevent his radical agenda from reaching power. These allegations were amplified by the mainstream media, weaponised by internal Labour factions and external political actors, and used to target independent media outlets that defended Corbyn and provided an alternative narrative.
The smearing of independent outlets like Dorset Eye, The Canary, and Skwawkbox was a crucial element in this campaign. By delegitimising these platforms and accusing them of promoting antisemitism, Corbyn’s opponents succeeded in narrowing the space for critical journalism and silencing dissenting voices. In doing so, British voters were deceived, and the opportunity for a genuinely transformative political movement was thwarted.
References
- The Canary, Skwawkbox, Dorset Eye: Key independent media outlets targeted with antisemitism smears.
- The Guardian and The Independent: Reporting on Labour’s internal divisions over antisemitism.
- Labour’s 2020 leaked report on antisemitism complaints.
- BBC Panorama (2019): Documentary criticised for its portrayal of antisemitism in Labour.
KEEP US ALIVE and join us in helping to bring reality and decency back by SUBSCRIBING to our Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCQ1Ll1ylCg8U19AhNl-NoTg AND SUPPORTING US where you can: Award Winning Independent Citizen Media Needs Your Help. PLEASE SUPPORT US FOR JUST £2 A MONTH https://dorseteye.com/donate/
