Study finds antisemitic views in 20% of opinion columns in Palestinian Authority's official newspaper

Some 20% of the opinion columns in the Palestinian Authority's official newspaper contain antisemitic content, a new study by the Jewish People Policy Institute (JPPI) found. 

The JPPI study used artificial intelligence (AI) to systematically examine discourse in Al-Hayat al-Jadida (The New Life), the official newspaper of the Palestinian Authority, from January 2022 until August 2025. 

The study used AI to analyze over 2,300 opinion columns published in the paper during that time, examining attitudes within the Palestinian Authority toward Israel and the Jews. The study also examined attitudes toward Hamas, examining attitudes before and after the Hamas massacres of Oct. 7, and the resulting war. 

According to the JPPI, the research used artificial intelligence tools to measure sentiment, linguistic patterns, and identify antisemitic formulations. JPPI used the IHRA definition of antisemitism, which has been accepted by many governments and by a large number of Jewish organizations worldwide. 

JPPI said that around 20% of the articles mentioning Jews contain clear antisemitic content, ranging from denial of the existence of a “Jewish people,” to claims of Jewish control over the global economy and American elites. Some articles contained comparisons between Israel and various oppressive or colonial entities. 

While the JPPI study showed graphs representing some of the findings, it gave no specific examples or citations from the articles studied. 

Notably, while the study did find a slight change in the attitudes towards Hamas in the immediate aftermath of the Oct. 7 events, no significant change was revealed in the level of antisemitism before and after Oct. 7, 2023. 

In most of the opinion columns reviewed, Hamas was portrayed in a negative light, associated with the Muslim Brotherhood and with Iran. In the period prior to Oct. 7, 62% of the articles on Hamas were classified as “very negative,” 21% as negative, and another 5% as “somewhat negative.” About 10% of the articles were classified as “neutral.” 

During the first weeks after Oct. 7, JPPI found a temporary moderation in attitudes toward Hamas, with no articles were classified as “very negative,” and only 22% were classified as negative, while 67% of the articles were neutral toward Hamas. 

Despite that temporary moderation, most of the articles (about 67%) related to Oct. 7 present the events in a negative light. 

However, the main criticism did not focus on the massacre, but rather the claim that the attack “gave Israel a pretext” to attack, bringing severe consequences upon the Palestinians. 

JPPI found that opinion columns in Al-Hayat al-Jadida relate negatively to the possibility of an agreement with Israel, with most writers portraying Israel as an illegitimate colonial entity. 

However, in around a third of the articles (30%), attitudes toward reaching an alternative arrangement besides peace with Israel are positive. 

The study’s authors said the findings reflect the characteristics of official discourse in the Palestinian Authority, as Al-Hayat al-Jadida, effectively serves as an official press for the PA. Thus, the consistently hostile attitude toward Israel and Zionism reflect the official position of the Authority. In the same way, the harsh criticism of Hamas represents the power struggle over control of the Palestinian people between the two groups. 

JPPI President Prof. Yedidia Stern said, “The findings reveal that the PA’s official newspaper maintains an antisemitic narrative that rejects Zionism; at the same time, it repudiates Hamas and depicts it as an extreme and illegitimate actor. This discourse reflects a profound lack of trust both toward Israel and toward Hamas, which the PA views as a political rival and a threat to its status.” 

Stern continued, saying, “Antisemitism, blaming Israel, and discourse delegitimizing Zionism are not incidental – they are part of a fixed normative framing in the PA’s official press. This is a clear reflection of internal discourse that shows how far Palestinian public opinion is from being prepared for reconciliation.”