Investigation into Antisemitism and Institutional Responses in Australia
Introduction
A Royal Commission into Antisemitism and Social Cohesion is currently examining the increase in antisemitic feelings and the effectiveness of safety measures following the terror attack in Bondi on December 14.
Main Body
The commission's hearings have shown that many Jewish-Australians feel less safe. Witnesses, including parents and academics, emphasized that antisemitic language is becoming more common in schools and public areas. For example, evidence showed that Nazi symbols have appeared in schools and that offensive slurs are being used by young people. Furthermore, some witnesses described the need for extra security, such as concrete barriers and private guards, as a 'tax on Jewish identity,' suggesting that the community now feels a need for constant caution rather than feeling welcome. At the same time, the commission has looked at how social media platforms spread hate speech. One witness claimed that Facebook failed to remove posts that praised the Holocaust or promoted conspiracy theories. In response, Meta asserted that its policies forbid dehumanizing speech and that it uses both AI and human reviewers to enforce these rules, although the company admitted that its system is not perfect. Additionally, the Federal Court is currently handling a case involving two academics from the University of Sydney. The legal battle focuses on whether social media posts mentioning 'intifada' and Zionism should be classified as hate speech. While the defendants argue that their posts were political critiques and a matter of free speech, the court is deciding if this language crosses the line into illegal hate speech under national law.
Conclusion
In summary, there is a documented rise in antisemitic incidents, and Australian institutions are currently struggling to balance the need for security and hate-speech laws with the right to free expression.
Learning
⚡ The 'B2 Leap': Moving from Basic Verbs to 'Power Verbs'
At an A2 level, you might say: "The company said they have rules." But look at the article. It doesn't use "say" every time. It uses Asserted.
Why this matters for B2: To reach B2, you must stop using 'general' words (say, think, do) and start using 'precise' words. This is called Lexical Precision.
🔍 Analysis of the 'Power Verbs' in the Text
| A2 Level (Basic) | B2 Level (Precise) | Context from Article |
|---|---|---|
| Say / Claim | Assert | "Meta asserted that its policies forbid..." |
| Show / Tell | Emphasize | "Witnesses... emphasized that antisemitic language..." |
| Check / Study | Examine | "...currently examining the increase..." |
| Deal with | Handle | "The Federal Court is currently handling a case..." |
🛠️ How to apply this logic
When you write or speak, ask yourself: "What is the 'flavor' of this action?"
- Is it a strong statement? Don't use say; use assert or maintain.
- Is it about making a point clear? Don't use show; use emphasize or highlight.
- Is it a professional process? Don't use look at; use examine or investigate.
Pro Tip: Notice how the article uses "crosses the line." This is a phrasal expression. B2 students move away from literal language ("is illegal") and start using idiomatic metaphors ("crosses the line") to describe limits and boundaries.