How an Entry Gets In
Every entry has to pass the same three tests, and every quote is checked the same way. Here’s how it works.
The Three Tests
- 1
Someone used the word. The accuser called something antisemitic, or used words that mean the same: antisemite, Jew-hater, blood libel, Nazi. Official action counts too: a sanction, a resolution, a civil-rights complaint, a firing, framed as fighting antisemitism. “I disagree with her” doesn’t count.
- 2
What they used it on was about a government. A war, a prime minister, military aid, a court case, an occupation, a boycott of a state, a lobby, a UN vote. We read what was actually said, not who said it and not the headline about it.
- 3
Both sides are public. Politicians, officials, organizations, media figures, institutions. We don’t publish private individuals. Unnamed students or protesters appear only as a group, never by name.
All three, or it doesn’t go up.
The Source Check
- Every entry has two links: one to what was said or done, one to where it was called antisemitism. If you send us one, we find the other.
- We open both pages ourselves and find the quoted words on them, word for word. A quote someone sent us is a lead, not a source.
- If we can’t read the page (a paywall, a deleted post, a login wall) and can’t find the same words on another reputable page, the entry waits.
- No paraphrase inside quotation marks. Cuts are marked. A spokesperson’s words are credited to the spokesperson, an ad’s words to the ad.
- The date is the day the accusation was made, taken from the source.
Most of what we look at doesn’t make it. In our own review of early entries, we took several down because a quote or a date didn’t hold up. They go back up when they do.
What Keeps Something Out
The accusation was fair. If the original statement really was about Jews as Jews, such as a conspiracy theory, Holocaust denial, cheering a massacre, or blaming a synagogue for a war, then calling it antisemitic is accurate. That’s not conflation and it doesn’t go here.
It’s too mixed to call. When the same speech bundles a real slur with a policy complaint, and the accuser answered both at once, we usually leave it out. We’d rather miss an example than stretch one.
The word isn’t there. Harsh criticism of someone’s politics, with no charge of antisemitism, isn’t an entry.
We can’t verify it. Screenshots, posts we can’t open, and quotes that appear on only one low-quality site wait until there’s a better source.
It’s a private person. Even if the story is true.
It’s a request to punish someone. We don’t take “get this person fired.” We don’t publish employers, addresses, or contact details.
We already have it. One entry per incident.
The Judgment Calls
Disputed slogans. “From the river to the sea” means the end of Israel to some people and equal rights to others. We don’t rule on what a chanter meant. We do list officials who say it’s antisemitic every time anyone uses it, because that ignores the difference.
“Anti-Zionism is antisemitism.” When someone says that as a blanket rule, the rule is the entry. Some anti-Zionism really is hatred of Jews. Saying all of it is, that’s the conflation.
People with a record. If the accused has said genuinely antisemitic things elsewhere, that doesn’t make their criticism of a government antisemitic. We look only at the statement that was labeled, and we mention the rest in our notes.
Being wrong isn’t the test. A critic of Israel can have the facts wrong. That makes them wrong. It doesn’t make them a Jew-hater.
When we’re unsure, it stays out. A missing entry costs nothing. A wrong one costs the whole site.
What an Entry Means, and Doesn’t
An entry says one thing: on this date, this person or body called this statement antisemitic, and the statement was about a government. It’s a record of something said in public, with links so you can check it yourself.
It isn’t a verdict on anyone’s character. There are no scores. The number beside a name is how many entries we have for them, nothing more. “Why it’s conflation” is our opinion, labeled as ours, and the facts it rests on are in the links.
We use AI tools to help find and check sources. A quote only goes up if its exact words were found on the linked page. The site’s owner is responsible for everything published.
Corrections
If a quote is wrong, a link is dead, a date is off, or you’re in an entry and think it’s unfair, write to corrections@conflationtracker.com. Tell us which entry and what’s wrong. We check it against the sources the same way. If you’re right, we fix it or take it down.