An Antisemitic Green Party or a Broken System? - How Propaganda Damages Society

Last week, The Telegraph reported on comments made by a Green Party activist in a leaked WhatsApp group chat, under the headline: “Green activists called Jews ‘abominations’ in leaked WhatsApp chat.”

At first glance, the article appears to address the serious and growing issue of antisemitism in the UK. The chain of messages surfaced just days after a disturbing attack on four Hatzola ambulances, a Jewish volunteer-led emergency service, in Golders Green. An incident that prompted Sir Keir Starmer to reiterate that “antisemitism has no place in our society.”

This attack is part of a wider pattern of religiously motivated, antisemitic violence, both in the UK and globally.

However, the article’s intent is less about confronting antisemitism and more about politically damaging the Green Party. The headline’s use of quotation marks suggests that the activist described all Jewish people as “abominations.” In reality, the comment was directed at Jewish supremacists - not Jewish people as a whole.

This contributes to an ongoing discourse regarding the reporting of political parties. Unlike Television broadcasters, newspapers are exempt from impartiality rules and for decades the UK press has held clear political agendas.

In 2014, the Sun released the now infamous “Save Our Bacon” front page in which Labour leader Ed Miliband was unflatteringly depicted eating a bacon sandwich. The photo used quickly became an internet meme with millions poking fun at the politician for his unusual eating style. The photo is often said to have defined the 2015 labour election loss.

Photograph: The Sun

Ed Miliband, for his part, often provided opponents with easily exploitable material, which critics argue weakened his position. However, the unrelenting media pressure on left wing parties is not something limited to just Mr Milliband.

In 2018, the BBC faced criticism over imagery used in its coverage of then Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn. Including visuals that placed him alongside Vladimir Putin against a red-tinted background. Critics argued that this framing implied ideological alignment and raised concerns about the neutrality of political reporting.

Wider Media Bias

With the rise of a reimagined Green party, the group now poses a real threat to what was considered an untouchable establishment. In response, the press have begun targeting the party, releasing streams of biased reporting in a plea to politically damage the Greens.

An Informed Generation investigation found that 70% of the Telegraph's reports since the 4th of March 2026 that directly referenced the Green party in either the title or title image have contained intentionally negative wording and/or imagery.

Titles included:

“Zack Polanski is Putin's useful idiot”

“ Don’t laugh at the Green party’s chaos. Be frightened by their sinister agenda”.

While these reports may seem relatively insignificant or even comical, they represent what has been decades of unjustified political scrutiny that has not been applied equally between all parties.

The same cannot be said for the Green’s fellow populist sibling, the Reform party. The Informed Generation investigation found that just 1 of the Telegraph’s articles directly mentioning the Reform Party since the 4th of March 2026 had used intentionally negative wording or imagery.

Reports focused on the Reform Party had the titles of “Reform takes “huge step” by becoming Britain's best-funded party” or “There is only one thing stopping Nigel Farage now”.

The Green party has been framed as a threat to the establishment for years whereas Reform has been pushed as an acceptable populist force fighting for political change.

The increased political scrutiny on the Green Party has been accompanied by media outlets turning a blind eye to the actions of some Reform party members.

Earlier this year, tweets surfaced from Reform party candidate Matt Goodwin’s political aide, where he stated that “I would not touch a Jewish woman”. TIG found not a single report from the traditional right wing media that covered these tweets - The Telegraph, The Times, The Sun, The Daily Mail.

Reform candidate Matt Goodwin with aide Adam Mitula. Photograph courtesy of "Hope Not Hate"

In 2025, Jewish classmates of Reform party leader Nigel Farage came forward with claims that he would hiss at them in attempts to emulate the sounds of Nazi concentration camp gas chambers. The Telegraph's coverage of this included referring to Mr Farage's actions as simple “banter”.

The same people willing to call out those who criticize Jewish supremacists now look away when in the face of antisemitism.

Years of biased scrutiny will not go unnoticed; the effect of unregulated media has shaped what people believe is true and fair.

Referring to this partisan reporting as propaganda may seem slightly alarmist. However, looking back through history, the slow breakdown of what people understand as acceptable reporting is what can lead to sickening consequences.

The Dangers of Propaganda - The Rwandan Genocide

While the bias seen in UK reporting is far from the scale of the propaganda that has fueled previous conflicts, history shows how unregulated media can normalize prejudice and escalate discrimination.

The 1994 Rwandan genocide was not just a random act of mass violence, it was significantly driven and amplified through sustained use of propaganda.

Photograph: Getty Images

Hutu-owned Rwandan media outlets spent decades marginalising and dehumanising a Tutsi minority, circulating propaganda that urged people to “weed out the cockroaches". This relentless messaging is what facilitated a generational hatred of people sharing the same land.

The hatred fostered through propaganda culminated in the death of 800,000 Tutsi people in just 100 days, weapons and hitlists were handed out to local groups to streamline the genocide. Hutu husbands killed their Tutsi wives, priests killed those who sheltered in their churches and thousands of Tutsi women were kept, trafficked and used as sex slaves.

By no means is the bias seen in British reporting near the level of that seen in Rwanda throughout the second half of the 20th century, however the dangers of accepted lies in media has consequences that could be catastrophic. We need to learn from how unregulated media prejudices can result in discrimination on a wicked scale.

The article released by the Telegraph last week seemingly aimed to fight antisemitism, however those same people “fighting” are the people that accept and report on the lies and marginalisation that cause societal hatred.

A culture of antisemitism, islamophobia, racism, misogyny and homophobia in the UK is persisting through an acceptance within the media that those forms of hatred are okay.