At The Telegraph, support for Israel is now mandatory
The new owners have made support for Israel a core principle
The Daily Telegraph is being acquired by a German-based media giant - and now its journalists are formally expected to support Israel.
The culture secretary, Lisa Nandy, has cleared the takeover by Axel Springer SE. Its CEO, Mathias Döpfner, has written to Telegraph staff “outlining his commitment” to the paper.
An employee at The Telegraph has sent me that letter. It is deeply revealing.
Döpfner insists that the values of The Telegraph and the publishing house founded by late tycoon Axel Springer - dubbed ‘Germany’s Rupert Murdoch’ - are aligned. They are, he says, “Freedom, free markets, individual freedom and freedom of speech.”
He goes further. Axel Springer, he explains, is “guided by a clear editorial compass.” Its employees are rooted in its Essentials - “core values to which we are firmly committed.”
There is, he adds, “no such thing as neutral journalism”: only journalism that is “pluralistic and surprising, fair, and fact-based.”
And yet, having invoked “freedom of speech” as a foundational principle, he insists these Essentials are not partisan - but rather “define a socio-political framework within which maximum journalistic freedom and intellectual independence can flourish.”
“We support the right of Israel to exist”
Döpfner then sets out those ‘Essentials’:
We stand for freedom, freedom of expression, the rule of law, and democracy.
We support the right of Israel to exist and oppose all forms of antisemitism.
We advocate the transatlantic alliance between the United States and Europe.
We uphold the principles of a free-market economy.
We reject political and religious extremism, as well as all forms of discrimination.
Note where “we support the right of Israel to exist” sits: second.
“Freedom” - within limits
Döpfner emphasises that editorial independence will be protected, including from pressure by politicians, celebrities, or advertisers. “I value debate in the spirit of pluralism and freedom of expression,” he writes.
But the description of the Essentials is, frankly, Orwellian.
It is not reconcilable to argue that these tenets create the conditions for “maximum journalistic freedom” while simultaneously requiring adherence to a political position on a specific foreign state.
Out of 193 UN member states, only one is singled out in this way.
No state has a “right to exist” under international law. Peoples have a right to self-determination - a right denied, in this case, by Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestinian land, and by subjecting its people to apartheid, colonisation and genocide.
A Telegraph journalist put it to me bluntly:
To be firmly told by our new parent company-to-be’s CEO that the second most important guiding principle is affirming the right of a country committing genocide and ethnic cleansing is more than a little concerning. It also raises the question of how any reporting from the paper can be considered factual if that is our core principle.
As they note, this principle comes before any explicit rejection of discrimination.
What “Israel’s right to exist” means in practice
In practice, the phrase “Israel’s right to exist” has been repeatedly deployed by Israel’s cheerleaders across the West to justify Israel’s crimes - from occupation and colonisation to apartheid and, now, mass destruction in Gaza.
It is also telling what is not said. The Essentials do not prohibit racism in general, despite later rejecting “all forms of discrimination”. There is no explicit rejection of Islamophobia, for example, or anti-Arab racism.
Instead, “oppose all forms of antisemitism” is fused directly with “support the right of Israel to exist.”
That conflation matters.
Because we know that defenders of Israel have repeatedly blurred the line between antisemitism and opposition to the actions of the Israeli state.
So how, exactly, might Axel Springer SE interpret “oppose all forms of antisemitism”?
“Free Palestine” is a “pro-Hamas topic”
There are very strong clues, let’s put it that way.
The late Axel Springer himself declared:
It is the task of our generation to stand firmly by Israel’s side, even if this causes difficulties for our policies elsewhere.
He further added:
The country does not need encouragement, but advocacy, wherever and whenever it can be provided – in the European Community, in the United Nations, in diplomatic relations, at work, in the family.
He described this as a “German duty”.
In June 2021, when emoloyees complained about the Israeli flag being raised at company headquarters, Mathias Döpfner responded:
I think, and I’m being very frank with you, a person who has an issue with an Israeli flag being raised for one week here, after antisemitic demonstrations, should look for a new job.
He was referring to demonstrations against Israel’s assault on Gaza that May.
In October 2023, a Lebanese employee at Welt TV - part of the Axel Springer empire - was dismissed: he says it was after he challenged the outlet’s pro-Israel positions. Axel Springer SE refuse to comment on “individual personnel matters.”
In an internal email which was leaked that year, Döpfner reportedly summarised his political worldview with the phrase: “Zionism über alles” - “Zionism above all.”
He has penned repeated pro-Israel polemics. “Will we stand with Israel against the enemies of freedom despite the risks, or will we allow fear and opportunism to prevail?” he wrote in October 2023, demanding “massive, unstiting political, financial and military support”.
On a podcast for his employees, Döpfner claimed “a majority on Instagram, on other social media, and in particular on TikTok, took sides for the Hamas’ actions.” He argued that “an almost global wave of Anti-Semitism suddenly showed its ugly face”, which he described as a shock, despite knowing “that it is here and there, well hidden or presented in a politically correct manner as Anti-Zionism or “Woke-ism” or whatever.”
And he said something deeply revealing about TikTok:
“Concretely, more than 4 million posts until today have been published under the hashtag of #FreePalestine or other kind of pro-Hamas topics. And only 50,000 something, 53,000 posts basically standing by Israel.”
“Free Palestine”, he argued, was a “kind of pro-Hamas topic”.
Conflating antisemitism with critique of Israel
When Israel launched its first war on Iran last June, Döpfner declared it was “surprising that Israel is not being celebrated worldwide for its historic, extremely precise and necessary strike.” Instead, he claimed:
the public response is dominated by anti-Israel propaganda. The intelligence and precision of Israel’s actions are not admired but are instead used here and there to perpetuate blatantly antisemitic stereotypes. This attitude is characterized not only by racist undertones, but also by a strange self-forgetfulness.
In other words, he directly conflated critique of Israel’s war with antisemitism.
A few months ago, he quoted claims about atrocities committed on October 7th which included: “A first responder testified before the Knesset that he had seen the severed skulls of three children.” The claims that Israeli children were beheaded have been comprehensively debunked.
He went on to write that:
justified criticism of decisions made by an Israeli government is mixed with deep-rooted hatred of Jews and that, as a result, instead of an obvious global wave of compassion and solidarity, a global wave of cold-heartedness and increasingly aggressive anti-Semitism has emerged.
The piece further criticised the German government - Israel’s most loyal European defender - for “massively” restricting arms sales to Israel. Tellingly, he said that decision meant that “From now on, unconditional support for Israel’s right to exist is effectively subject to conditions.” He described the recognition of Palestinian statehood “as a reward for the barbarism of Oct. 7.”
Last October, Al Jazeera published an investigation into German tabloid Bild, a cornerstone of Axel Springer SE, headlined ‘The Story of Israel’s Propaganda Machine Specializing in Anti-Palestinian Incitement’.
Al Jazeera reported that the newspaper had suggested that a Palestinian journalist killed by Israel was a “terrorist”, denied famine in Gaza, and published a lengthy report it claimed had been found on the computer of late Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar. It transpired that the document was old, not authored by Sinwar, and had reportedly been leaked by Benjamin Netanyahu’s office.
The newspaper, reported Al Jazeera, had also “consistently demonised pro-Gaza demonstrators in Germany, labelling them as “mobs”, “Israel-haters”, and “anti-Semites”.”
BILD has described student protesters in the US as “Judenhasser-Studenten” (“Jew-hater students”) - even though they included Jewish students.
What happens to Jewish critics of Israel in Germany?
We should also note the atmosphere in Germany, in which antisemitism is widely conflated with critique of Israel, to the extent that Jewish people there have been repeatedly denounced, deplatformed, and arrested.
Alex Springer SE’s outlets have repeatedly singled out Jewish critics of Israel.
Die Welt newspaper argued that Jewish American photographer Nan Goldin “misused the opening of her retrospective at the Neue Nationalgalerie to level serious accusations against Germany and Israel – supported by pro-Palestinian activists.”
Another article attacked Deborah Feldman, a Jewish American-German writer who has spoken out about how the German government ignores “the way dissenting Jews in Germany are being thrown under the same bus as they are in Israel.”
Her political views are close to conspiracy theories: in Germany, one is not allowed to say what one wants, the police are infiltrated by right-wing extremists, and the Federal Republic is preventing "peace" in the Middle East (anti-Semitic subtext: because it obeys the all-powerful Israel lobby). This is roughly the worldview of the author, who years ago also had a Netflix hit with her autobiographically inspired bestseller "Unorthodox".
In other words, falsely suggesting a Jewish writer holds antisemitic views because of her opinions about Israel.
Rewarded by Israel
Last October, the Israeli President Isaac Herzog presented Döpfner with the Israeli Presidential Medal of Honor - alongside Miriam Adelson, the Israeli-American business tycoon who donated $100 million to Donald Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign.
Israel’s justification for Döpfner’s award was that he “is a brave voice against antisemitism and a staunch supporter of Israel. He has demonstrated unprecedented solidarity with Israel during the current war.”
Herzog incited genocide back in October 2023, when he declared of Gaza:
“It’s an entire nation out there that is responsible. It is not true, this rhetoric about civilians who were not aware and not involved. It is absolutely not true.”
Notably, Axel Springer SE has a business empire in Israel. That includes acquiring Israeli classifieds platform Yad2 for €165 million in 2014. Yad2 is involved in Israel’s property market, and reportedly advertises properties in illegal settlements in the illegally occupied West Bank.
What this means for the Telegraph
To be clear, the Telegraph has already had a partisan pro-Israel orientation, publishing multiple pieces justifying Israel’s genocidal onslaught against Gaza.
But this takeover embeds pro-Israel bias into the newspaper’s very fabric. Its new owners are zealously pro-Israel, and have repeatedly conflated antisemitism with critique of Israel.
They claim that “freedom of speech” is a core value.
The truth is that Israel’s supporters in the West have launched the biggest assault on free speech since the height of McCarthyism.
We can see where the Telegraph’s new owners stand on that.
I would not wipe with this racist rag. Why would anyone? It leaves the presses already smeared with toxic shit.
We should mention that this is an open admission of bias. We should be asking the BBC to declare in writing that this is their policy too, despite it allegedly being a British state broadcaster- not an Israeli state broadcaster. Why do the BBC broadcast almost exclusively from Jerusalem on Middle East affairs? Don't they trust Arabs?