(JTA) — Earlier this month, a pro-Palestinian activist named Helyeh Doutaghi was suspended from her job at Yale University and banned from campus over alleged links to a fundraising group that supports a Palestinian terrorist organization.
The trigger, according to the New York Times, was a report in an ostensible news site called Jewish Onliner.
The name was new to us here at the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, and to many others in Jewish journalism. And, as it turns out, the people behind the site don’t see themselves as journalists reporting the news, even if they are pleased to be making it.
That revelation came to us after following digital breadcrumbs to identify a person involved with Jewish Onliner, which was registered as a website on Dec. 12.
The website’s registration shields the identity of its owner. And the site does not disclose its staff or have bylines on its articles, which it says use AI to focus on “combating antisemitism, exposing anti-Israel movements, and dissecting the radical forces undermining the values of the Western world.” But we tracked someone down.
The person affiliated with the site, who confirmed their involvement, is a recent immigrant to Israel from an English-speaking country with training and experience in open-source intelligence and counter-terrorism. The person said the team is multinational and not affiliated with the Israeli government. (The government is reportedly investing in AI-driven efforts to fight antisemitism.)
And the person agreed to answer questions via email on condition of anonymity, citing the threat of antisemitism.
The subsequent exchange addresses questions about how Jewish Onliner picks its targets, the role artificial intelligence plays in its work, why its content should not be considered journalism, the cost of anonymity and how the initiative is funded. The person said they drafted their responses in consultation with the rest of team behind Jewish Onliner.
At a time when small groups are having an outsized impact on U.S. policy — as Betar and the similarly anonymous Canary Mission have done when it comes to identifying pro-Palestinian student protesters whom the Trump administration subsequently seeks to deport — the exchange offers unusual insight into how one of those groups says it operates. We are publishing it here, lightly edited for length and clarity.
JTA: Why is anonymity so important for this project?
Jewish Onliner: The reason for the anonymity is pretty straightforward — and unfortunately necessary in today’s climate, where antisemitism has reached truly disturbing levels (as I’m sure you’re all too familiar with).
Given the nature of the initiative and the kind of work we’re trying to do here — often reporting on individuals and organizations with troubling connections — keeping things anonymous is the best way for all of us on the team to stay protected and avoid potential personal risks.
But honestly, part of it is also that we’re not really in this for the spotlight. We’ve got a solid team with strong tech skills, and we care deeply about where things are heading. Our focus is just on doing the work — digging into the issues that matter to the Jewish community and shedding light where it’s needed, whether that’s on antisemitism, anti-Israel campaigns, or the broader forces threatening Western values.
Would you consider what you do journalism? I ask because journalists rarely conceal their identities while reporting on issues that could put them at risk. The theory is that anonymity would hurt the credibility of the reporting. What do you think about that?
That’s a fair and thought-provoking question you raised.
After discussing with the rest of the team, we agreed that what we do doesn’t align with traditional journalism, nor would we characterize the initiative as a media outlet. The team is intentionally trying to carve out a different lane altogether.
What feels unique about our model is that it isn’t structured like a typical newsroom — there are no rigid roles like reporters or editors. Instead, each person handles every part of a project: conducting OSINT [open source intelligence] research, analyzing the findings, and writing the piece. AI tools also play a significant role in enhancing and accelerating the work (we’re also constantly working to improve our technology and add new abilities).
The reports we’ve produced often don’t fit neatly into conventional journalism. They are almost entirely based on verifiable OSINT and include in-depth analyses as well. Much of the content connects directly to US-designated terrorist organizations, some of which continue to operate freely on American soil. Given that the same individuals who conduct the research also publish the findings, the team ultimately decided that anonymity was the best approach to mitigate the added risks.
We’re fully aware that anonymity may cause some to view our work with skepticism — that’s a tradeoff we’ve considered carefully.
Ultimately, the team felt the work should speak for itself. And for those willing to engage with it, we believe the value is clear.
Do you reach out to the targets of your investigation for comment? In my world, journalism, it’s considered absolutely essential to try to get comments from whoever you’re writing about — for fairness and to reduce the chance you’re making a mistake.
As I mentioned, we don’t see ourselves as journalists or a media outlet. We’ve described ourselves as a “hub for insights, actionable intelligence, exposés, and essential updates,” and I think that description fits us well.
But surely you have concerns about basic fairness and getting the story right. Is it truly possible to be fair while making accusations against named people anonymously and without giving them a chance to defend themselves?
Our anonymity is absolutely fair, because the facts speak for themselves. In the case of Yale, it was Samidoun — the terrorist organization outlawed by the United States, Canada, Germany, and Israel — that identified her as part of their network. [JTA: The US government last year declared the Samidoun Palestinian Prisoner Solidarity Network ”a sham charity” that raises money for the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, which has been designated as a terrorist organization by the United States since 1997.] Yale reviewed this fact, understood its irrefutability, and acted in whatever way it saw fit. The evidence was indisputable and spoke for itself.
[Doutaghi’s lawyer did not respond to an inquiry from JTA. She addressed the situation in a series of statements posted to her account on X. Her statements reject the accusations against her as a smear intended to suppress pro-Palestinian activism. “I am being targeted for one reason alone: for speaking the truth about the genocide of the Palestinian people that Yale University is complicit in,” Doutaghi’s statement says.]
What can you say about who runs and funds Jewish Onliner? The reason you cited for anonymity is the safety of the individuals involved — that doesn’t sound like a reason to keep the identity of any institution that may be behind the initiative anonymous.
It might surprise you to learn that JO is actually a pretty low-cost initiative, so saying that it has “funders” might be a stretch.
We’re a small group of tech-savvy OSINT experts who decided to take action for the Jewish community and broader Western values. The minimal support we’ve received comes from a few concerned individuals who wanted to help us get started, but they’re busy with their own lives, jobs, and families.
Also, for what it’s worth, since we’ve seen this silly rumor floating around: No, we are not affiliated with, connected to, or supported by any government.
I also want to challenge you on that. The rumors that you are supported by the Israeli government hardly seem “silly.” The Israeli government has publicly said that it is spending millions on online influence campaigns, which reportedly make use of AI technology. Jewish Onliner would seem to fit the bill. Do you really fault people for concluding that you might be a government outfit?
As for the Israeli government, we have no idea what they may or may not be doing with any technology — and frankly, we don’t much care.
Not every civilian-run initiative addressing antisemitism using AI is tied to the Israeli government. Sometimes, believe it or not, people just care about these issues and want to try and help.
How many people are involved? What are their backgrounds?
As a matter of policy, the team has decided not to disclose any personal information related to its members. That said, we’re a multinational group of people hailing from multiple countries.
How do you pick your projects?
It’s generally a matter of what interests the members of the team and where we see an opportunity for impact. There’s no structured method. That said, we do focus on certain areas that we feel are particularly important, such as campus issues.
Are there no other Jewish groups doing what you do? What gap are you filling and how did you identify it?
We’re not aware of any Jewish groups pursuing a similar initiative, as what we’re doing is quite experimental and involves a lot of trial and error. Every Jewish group is doing critically important work in their own fields, whether in the media, on campuses, at the UN, in the arts, and more. We believe the gap we’re filling is one of education for our community on topics that are typically overlooked by traditional media, providing a more direct, independent, and up-to-date approach.
Why not just do the research and provide your findings to media outlets that are friendly to your cause? Why publish on your own?
We’re exploring ways to leverage AI to optimize the dissemination of crucial information to the Jewish community. The team believes that relying on outside entities for support would complicate our ability to innovate with the technology we use at a rapid pace.
The Yale case was very high profile. Is that JO’s biggest achievement? What are the projects you’re most proud of so far?
As for our projects, the Yale story blew up far bigger than we expected. We didn’t anticipate it having that kind of impact, and it’s been quite humbling. Beyond that, we exposed Francesca Albanese’s planned involvement at a terror-tied Montreal conference, which prompted her withdrawal. Another story we’re proud of was our investigation into an ICRC official in Gaza with connections to terror groups — this is important for understanding the concerns around aid groups working in Gaza that claim to be impartial.
We’re pretty broad in our focus, looking at everything from campus issues to terror-linked nonprofits to what’s happening on the ground in Gaza.
By the way, some people think that the name “Jewish Onliner” is inspired by the media outlet Jewish Insider or even meant as a critique of Jewish Insider. Is that correct at all?
No, not a critique at all! The team are huge fans of Jewish Insider! They just thought the name would fit because our content is geared for people who are VERY, VERY online. (The phrase “terminally online” comes to mind.)
