Islamophobia on Social Media

Article written by Najat Alshafie in 2016

1. Introduction

Saadi’s timeless poem, Bani Adam (Adam’s sons), is posted at the United Nations (UN) entrance. He eloquently captures the essence of human rights seven centuries before the Declaration of Human Rights in 1948:

Adam's sons are body limbs, to say;
For they're created of the same clay.
Should one organ be troubled by pain,
Others would suffer severe strain.
Thou, careless of people's suffering,
Deserve not the name, "human being" (Figure 1).

From Gulistan (Rose Garden)

Figure 1 Saadi’s poem in Persian

Saadi’s (1148-1288) expressive metaphor portrays humans as one interconnected functional unity of equals that complement each other. People should have feelings for each other’s suffering; otherwise they do not deserve to be humans. This sincere call for compassion resonates the Christian second commandment (Wolf, 2017) “thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself” (Mark 12:29-31) . It also echoes Prophet’s Mohammed’s saying "The believers in their mutual kindness, compassion and sympathy are just like one body. When one of the limbs suffers, the whole body responds to it with wakefulness and fever" (Al-Bukhari 5665; Muslim 2586). Interestingly, Saadi is not remembered for being a ‘Muslim’ nor a ‘Persian’ but ‘only’ for being a great inspirational poet for ‘all people’ of ‘all times’.

Contrary to the views of Saadi, hate is destructive not only to the victims but also to the social milieu as it works on severing the bonds between people consuming them in a venomous cycle of loathing one another. Islamophobia is an expression of hate to Islam and Muslims that is reflected in hate crimes that differ in severity from verbal abuse to physical abuse but share the same malignant seeds of a malicious cancer that prey on fear and hate instigated in real life and online against Islam and Muslims and metastasize from one community to another. The media play a crucial role in manufacturing Islamophobia. Nathan Lean (2012) names such process as the “Islamophobia industry” that manufactures the fear of Muslims in the U.S. and Europe, especially by the Right movement groups, the pro-Israeli right and other influential politicians and journalists. Lean (2012) points out, “The Islamophobia industry is a growing enterprise, one that is knowledgeable about the devastating effects of fear on society and willing to produce and exploit it” (p.218).

Why revisiting Islamophobia now? My interest in the subject stems from the gravity of the current situation of Muslims living in western countries indicated by disturbing figures of escalating number of hate crimes that necessitates discussions in the academia and elsewhere, among intellectuals and ordinary people to stir up thoughts and action. Lambert and Githens-Mazer (2010) reveal that a big number of “reported and unreported hate crimes are against Muslim women” wearing the veil who “have been assaulted, abused and intimidated… in public places — streets, shopping centers, on trains and on buses invariably in view of passers and onlookers who have generally not intervened to help or defend the victims” (p. 118). This trend has risen from 2010 until now. It is reported that the number of hate crimes rose by 326% in 2015 (Harriet, 2016). The Huffington Post reported 385 anti-Muslim acts in the US in 2016 which are documented and described on its online page Islamophobia (Mathias & Abdelaziz, 2016). There were also many other incidents that happened in 2016 like attacking the immigrants’ camps in Germany and other places ref. Shockingly, a tragic attack occurred against worshippers in a mosque in which six Muslims were brutally killed by shooters who opened fire on all the people in the mosque including women and children in Canada in January 2017ref. “These figures are unacceptably high, and collectively suggest that Britain (and Europe) have become less accepting of Islam in recent years” (p. 267), comment Baker, Gabrielatos, and McEnery (2013). The rise in hate crimes, the researchers suggest, matches “the broad picture of representation of Islam in the British press: an increased focus on Islam, often placed within the context of conflict, providing implicit negative associations, with a smaller, yet vociferous, minority of journalists who seem to take pleasure explicitly stirring up hatred” (p.267). The study of online Islamophobia and the use of social media to reach and influence people is a new research area that deserves exploring. How digital platforms are misused for spreading Islamophobia and how to intervene and counter that are important questions.

I aim in this article to shed light on Islamophobia in the media in general and on social media, in particular in the western context. In the paper I will explore Islamophobia in the media with a special focus on the use of social media: Facebook, Twitter and blogs in propagating islamophobia then I will discuss some interventions. The paper consists of four main sections: Islamophobia contested, Islamophobia in the media, online Islamophobia and combating Islamophobia.

2. Islamophobia contested

Although the term Islamophobia is commonly used in the media and public discourse, there is still no consensus on one definition of islamophobia. It has been institutionalized and gained popularity after publishing the report Islamophobia: A challenge for us all of the Runnymede Trust Commission on British Muslims and Islamophobia (Runnymede Trust, 1997). In the report islamophobia is defined as “unfounded hostility towards Islam” that results in “unfair discrimination against Muslim individuals and communities, and to the exclusion of Muslims from mainstream political and social affairs” (p. 4). Islamophobia is not an “ideal” term, according to the report, but it is useful to identify “a growing danger” and to name “a new reality” and the “anti-Muslim prejudice” (p.4). The report also differentiates between closed views and open views of Islam that are grouped into eight categories. The closed views are: 1) Islam is seen as monolithic and static; 2) Islam is seen as the ‘other’; 3) Islam is seen as Inferior to the West; 4) Islam is seen as an aggressive enemy; 5) Muslims are seen as manipulative; 6) Muslims criticisms of the “West” are rejected 7) Discriminatory behavior against Muslims is defended and 8) Anti-Muslim discourse is seen as natural (Runnymede Trust, 1997).

The main contested area in the Runnymede Trust report is the particular selection of the term Islamophobia, not any other term, to refer to anti-Islam prejudices and discrimination against Muslims. In the foreword of the report, Gordon Conway, Chair of the Commission on British Muslims and Islamophobia, sets the scene for using the term Islamophobia; “We did not coin the term Islamophobia” but “It was already in use among sections of the Muslim community as a term describing the prejudice and discrimination which they experience in their everyday lives”. He adds, “Islamophobia describes a real and growing phenomenon - an ugly word for an ugly reality. Hardly a day now goes by without references to Islamophobia in the media” (p. iii). Foreseeing forthcoming criticism, the committee defends its choice, “The word is not ideal, but is recognizably similar to 'xenophobia' and 'Europhobia', and is a useful shorthand way of referring to dread or hatred of Islam – and, therefore, to fear or dislike of all or most Muslims” (Runnymede Trust, 1997).

Before the (in)famous report, Sayyid (2010) and many researchers like Faimau (2013) identifies a number of terms used in public discourse to label prejudices against Muslims such as antisemitism, Orientalism, Islamophobia and racism (cultural racism). Since publishing the report, the use of Islamophobia has become the norm then it infiltrated other contexts in Europe (Carol & Koopmans, 2013), the US (CAIR, 2010), and Australia (Kabir, 2006) and so on and now it is globally used even in some Muslim contexts like Turkey and Indonesia (Sayyid & Vakil, 2010). This means that Islamophobia is not associated with the British context anymore— albeit arising from it. As it can be seen, it would be difficult to substitute Islamophobia, an established and institutionalized term, with any other term — not impossible though—because of the power that bestowed on it coming from institutions such as academia, politics, media and society as if Islamophobia has a life of its own.

Some of the critics of the term see Islamophobia not as a neutral word but as having a negative connation associating it with psychological ailment phobia and that will lead to denoting Islam as a religion to be feared of and a cause of fear. Faimau criticises Islamophobia because it is a kind of binary framework for representing Islam and Muslims “in a context of competing ideas such as West-rest, civilized-uncivilized and rational-irrational in which the former is considered as powerful, superior, modern and good and as representing the West and the latter as powerless, inferior, evil, barbaric and as representing ‘the other’ or, precisely Islam” (2013, p. 35). Islamophobia is a concept that comes of age, argued Klug (2012). Although Islamophobia is contested, “it functions as an organizing principle for scholarship and research” (p. 666). The term is not only common in academia but also “is motivated by circumstances in the real world” like when it was used by Kofi Annan, UN Secretary General, in his speech in 2004 (Klug, p. 666).

3. Islamophobia in the media

Religious freedom is mentioned in Article 2 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights stating that “Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status” (Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948). However, Muslim rights are violated in democratic western countries that claim embracing such rights and defend them. Ironically, the western media manufactures Islamophobia that denies Muslim rights (Lean, 2012; Meer & Modood, 2012; Safi, 1996). Constructing places of worship is one of the conflicting issues, and even having minarets is illegal in some countries. The veil is another ritual that is not allowed in some western countries like in France, in which Muslim women must take off their veil to be allowed to study at schools and universities or to enter a public beach. Eating Halal food is also a concern, students praying at school and the list goes on.

The media plays an important role in creating a certain perception/conception of Muslims as a minority in western countries because “the media both reflect and reinforce public perceptions about social groups” (Bleich, Stonebraker, Nisar, & Abdelhamid, 2015, p. 943). Consequently, “Public perceptions of different identity groups affect not only minorities, but also societies that have a stake in promoting equality and social cohesion” (Bleich et al., 2015, p. 942). The society is like a ship; if a hole is made at one end, the whole ship will shake in a state of imbalance and water will eventually drown the ship and its passengers unless someone stops the leak. One of the beneficiaries of the Islamophobic representation of Islam and Muslims in the media is the editors of newspapers that “cement their readership by providing it with a shared identity and focus” reveal Baker et al. (2013, p. 269).

The present is intertwined with the past in the Islamophobic rhetoric. This is shown in the scholarly work of Edward Said. He asserts that knowledge is power in his famous book Covering Islam (1981) and he discusses Orientalism that has negatively represented Islam in the eyes of the West in the past and at the present time. Orientalists in the past were employed by colonial governments and their knowledge served the purpose of ruling the countries under their occupation whereas orientalists now “speak for the Orient”— on behalf of the Orient— and present their views of a monolithic and hostile Islam to others mainly in the media. It is clear that the mass media constantly propagate the “reductive and monochromatic” view of Islam to convince the public that Islam and Muslims are violent by nature and they pose an imminent threat. The media has a great influence on the society, Meer and Modood (2012) explain why there is less sympathy towards Muslim victims of discrimination than other minorities in the UK. First and foremost, a tainted image of Muslims as terrorists and violent makes it hard for Muslims to be accepted socially and can escalate even more racialization. There is also a misconception about the meaning of racism. Since it is claimed that a person can choose his religion, he will not be considered one of a racial minority unlike if he is born one. The fact that a person cannot select his parents neither the society he lives in does not count under this definition of biological acclaimed racism. Another reason is that British intellectuals welcome debates about religion but not consider that discriminatory as such towards Muslims. In addition, some people are apprehensive about religion; hence, they perceive Muslims as oppressors not disadvantaged ethnic minority. Therefore, the media can desensitize the audience until they become coldhearted and indifferent towards Muslim victims. Most of the western media have biased views on Islam and Muslims who are the first to be targeted when any tragic incident occurs anywhere in the world (Kabir, 2006). Finally, it is important not to generalize and not to accuse all the media of prejudices and misrepresentation of Islam and Muslims baker. A discussion of Islamophobia in the British, European, Australian and American media is to follow.

3.1. Islamophobia in British media

Researching Muslims representation and Islamophobia in the British media context have gained wide interest among many scholars. Most of the studies revealed a similar picture of negative portraying of Muslims. Amir Saeed (2007) indicates that the British media represents British Muslims as an ‘alien other’ and that can be associated with Islamophobia, a form of racism towards ethnic minorities deviance and un-Britishness. Employing media analysis, Bleich, Stonebraker, Nisar, and Abdelhamid examine the tone of headlines of daily British newspaper when referring to Muslims from 2001 to 2012. They report that Muslims are not consistently represented negatively in the British print media headlines. Nonetheless, right-leaning newspaper headlines portray Muslims in a more negative way when compared to left-leaning newspapers. In addition, in the right-leaning media Muslims are consistently represented more negatively as compared to Jews and also depicted negatively when compared to Christians. In contrast to other studies on British media, the results of this study reveals a nuanced understanding of the way Muslims are depicted in the headlines (Bleich et al., 2015).

Another scholarly work that examines the representation of Islam and Muslims is Baker et al. (2013) employs a discourse analysis methodology of a corpus that included a collection of 200,037 newspaper articles (143 million words) from eleven British newspapers from the period of 1998 to 2009. Topkev (2014) claims that the scope and scale of the research make it the most extensive study about the representation of Islam and Muslims in the British media Baker et al. (2013) argue that the media has a powerful influence on the public and can foreshadow certain social issues according to their own agenda. Through the choice of language and the prioritization of certain news stories over others, particular perspectives towards Islam and Muslims are constructed and cultivated. The researchers find out that Islam and Muslims are mentioned mostly in the context of conflict which can cause negative association and the term “terror” occurred more than Islam in the news.

There is a difference, according to the authors, between the media including tabloids, right-leaning (religious/Christian) newspapers and Sunday editions and broadsheet, left-leaning (secular/anti-religious) papers and daily editions (Baker et al., 2013). The term terror is used by the tabloids more than twice than used by the broadsheets. The news coverage of the tabloids leans towards reporting on Muslims in the national context while the broadsheets focus on the international context and trying to present multiple views on Islam and its different branches. Although Muslims in reality represent a rainbow of different views, cultures and practices, the British media still represent Islam and Muslims in a shallow superficial generic monolithic and homogenous manner. In reporting about Muslims they are collectively demonized as violent and aggressive to the West and the commonly used description of Muslims is extremist while moderate and devout are less used in order to associate Muslims with extremism. The researchers point to two gradual major changes in the media discourse on Islam and Muslims: more personalization of the news stories and the news coverage of the local rather than the international.

There is also some reporting on other issues. Muslims on benefits is an issue usually triggered by the tabloids discussions of some individual cases but later extended to include any Muslim on benefits and that was politicized to attack the welfare policy of the Labor government (Baker et al., 2013). Newspapers column writers and letters from readers legitimatize that negative media discourse on Islam and the stereotyping of Muslims. Muslim women are a recurrent issue in the press particularly related to wearing the veil and their role in Islam while Muslim men are radical and oppressing them which reflect the oppressive and radical nature of Islam. The researchers also examined a corpus from the nineteenth century that consisted of British newspapers to compare it to the present media. Baker et al. reveal that the approach of the old British media resembles the present time media of reporting on Islam and Muslims in the context of conflict, violence and extremism. Finally, the two big events: 9/11 in the US and 7/7 in the UK caused the diversion the compass to Islam and Muslims and as such more negativisation. To conclude, positive reporting of Islam and Muslims is still rare in the British press compared to the large sum of Islamophobic content.

3.2. Islamophobia in European media

The study of Carol and Koopmans (2013) has a wider focus than other studies as it analyses debates in the media about Muslim religious rights in six European countries: Germany, Switzerland, Holland, Belgium, France and the UK in 30 national newspapers from 1999 until 2008. The collected data demonstrates that there are big differences in public debates about Muslims’ rights in the researched countries, such as building mosques, wearing headscarves and veils for Muslim women and religious education. One issue might be controversial in one country but less or not debatable in another. This can be due to national policies and integration of immigrants’ policies. One study about British Muslims integration in the UK comes from the standpoint of the American press. Greenberg and Miazhevich (2012) explore the discursive features of a collection of articles from the New York Times over 12 years. They find out that American media seemingly perceive the integration of Muslims through a “hegemonic ideology” “in which assimilation is deemed superior to multiculturalism. This study indicates that there is a difference between British and American media due to the different sociocultural and historical contexts.

3.3. Islamophobia in Australian media

As for the Australian media, Islam and Muslims are negatively portrayed in an imbalance coverage, according to Kabir (2006), that only focuses on Islamic militants and ignore the everyday Muslim. This is similar to the British media that is discussed earlier in this section. Kabir is pessimistic of any improvement in the future since the media exploits anti-Muslim sentiment by irresponsible reporting that has negative impact on Muslims to put the blame on them for social problems. She provides an example of the Australian press coverage of the bombing of Oklahoma building in which 168 people were killed in 1995. The attack was immediately assumed to be committed by a Libyan Muslim extremists foreshadowing the religion and nationality of the attacker while later it was found that Timothy McVeigh, an American national, committed the massacre but no one in the news referred to him as Christian nor American.

3.4. Islamophobia in American media

Compared to Europe where “scholars have sustained rigorous study of Islamophobia”, the insufficiency of research on Islamophobia in the U.S. demands “long-term research on Islamophobia, its causes”, indicate Evelyn Nakano Glenn, the Director of Center for Race & Gender at Berkeley University (CAIR, 2010). CAIR’s (Council on American Islamic Relations) definition of Islamophobia is “close-minded prejudice against or hatred of Islam and Muslims” (CAIR, 2010, p. 6) which resembles the Runnymede report perspective mentioned earlier in section 2. CAIR defines “Islamophobic acts are directed at Islam or Muslims in general while Anti-Muslim discrimination is directed at a specific individual, institution or groups of individuals (CAIR, 2010, p. 6). The report names nine groups, institutions and individuals as “The Worst” Islamophobes in contrast with “The Best” group pushing back against Islamophobia. CAIR reported that on a scale from 1 (best situation for Muslims) to 10 (worst possible situation for Muslims) the state of Islamophobia stands at a 6.4 indicating the hostile atmosphere toward Muslims in the US. CAIR also adopts Runnymede’s perspective of differentiating open views from closed views on Islam and Muslims.

One of the informative books about Islamophobia in the American context is The Islamophobia Industry: How the Right Manufactures Fear of Muslims by Nathan Lean which is a book of immense importance. It reveals the systematic process of manufacturing Islamophobia in order to profit economically and politically, in mostly the American context, with some reference to the European situation, too. Nathan Lean identifies the culprits of Islamophobia industry “It grew in the pews of evangelical churches across America and found a league of promoters and funders among the pro-Israeli right. It gained ascendancy in the streets of London and Paris and the Netherlands and was pushed through the legislative machines of the European and American political systems with institutional fleetness” (p. 182).

Figure 2. A hate crime on an American Muslim taxi driver. The attackers hit the victim and called him “Taliban” and “terrorist” (CAIR, 2010).

Opposing Islam to win elections is the new Trojan horse politicians use to manipulate voters in the US and that is reflected in the media. The UC Berkeley Center for Race and Gender documents that in the 2010 US midterm campaign: “By moving the debate into national security with a focus on Islam as an ideology, the Tea Party and Republican candidates managed to avoid discussing substantive policy issues” such as “healthcare reforms, unemployment… high deficits” (CAIR, 2010, p. 57). They “crafted ads to transform Islam into a singular, monolithic, and all-encompassing ideological and civilizational threat. A “threatening” ideology called Islam was constructed as the new evil” (p. 57). The ultimate purpose of “today’s generation of Islamophobic political ads and rhetoric is to make Islam and American Muslims synonymous with terrorism and to define the religion and its adherents as threats to America’s values and freedoms” (p. 56). History repeated itself in the 2016 presidential campaign with Donald Trump’s speeches of hatred of minorities especially Muslims. Then he transformed his hate into action banning Muslims from seven countries to enter the US when becoming president, denying the fact that the US was established by immigrants like Trump’s parents amongst others.

According to the Center for Race and Gender, the manifestations of Islamophobia that appeared in the 2010 midterm elections in the media and other venues are as following: “1. Using the words Muslim and terrorist interchangeably or alternatively depicting Muslims as being ‘terrorist sympathizers’; 2. Making Islam synonymous with terrorism; referencing Islam as something foreign and to be feared, the ‘other’; 3. Politicizing the Park 51 center in New York and wrongly referring to it as a ‘Victory Mosque’ and ‘Ground Zero Mosque’; 4. Describing Islam as ‘a totalitarian, theocratic, political ideology,’ or a cult; 5. Making Shari’a into a major political issue and putting it on the ballot in Oklahoma; describing Shari’a as a ‘cancer’…; 6. Using the internet as a major hub for Islamophobia production, dissemination, and then influencing the debate in the mainstream, without fact checking or ascertaining the validity of any claims; 7. Using Muslim-sounding or Arabic names and references to mosques in ads to imply a sinister design or conspiracy related to targeted candidates; 8. Making association with mainstream Muslim groups into a point of attack… by… using ‘the un-indicted co-conspirator’ label against a number of individuals and organizations; 9. Weaving the Palestine-Israel conflict into Islamophobia production in the campaigns. 10. Returning political donations from Muslims in order that political candidates not be identified as having cozy relations with Muslims” (CAIR, 2010, pp. 57, 58). It is of great importance to analyze the Islamophobic discourse and the strategies to counteract that rhetoric. In conclusion, the picture is complex when studying how Islam and Muslims are portrayed in the media, but the online media or social media has received little attention. As mentioned here, the internet has been used as an effective tool for this kind of rhetoric and that will be discussed in more details in the following section.

3. Online Islamophobia

In the online context, we need to recognize that not everything we see is real but it is a “highly mediated, filtered and designed version of the world” (Kern, 2014). This is similar to a picture that the photographer alters by enhancements and filters. Kern indicates that digital space does not reflect face-to-face interaction because of “technological mediation”. He argues that Internet technology, is a kind of pharmakon (Greek word referring to both a poison and a remedy), simultaneously presenting promise and challenges. In recent years this is true as the Internet technology is employed to infuse the poison of Islamophobia. On the other hand, the Internet is a remedy when it is utilized for a good cause such as initiating dialogue between people of different religions and ethnic groups, sharing common interests, advocating for social justice, cultural pluralism and good conduct like collaboration and spreading love in the societies that are hit by injustice, inequality and conflict.

The distinction between online and offline media is becoming unrealistic since there is a general shift from paper to screen. Newspapers, journals and TV channels have online websites and are heavily present on social media such as Twitter, Facebook, Snapchat, YouTube and Instagram to the extent that some periodicals stopped their paper version and have only virtual existence. The change also includes the audience that can conveniently access virtual platforms via digital gadgets like smartphones, tablets and laptops, that keep them instantly informed of what happens locally or internationally. This has facilitated the contribution and participation in online communities by liking, commenting, posting or reposting and so on.

McCaughey (2014), a scholar in cyberactivism claims that, “Web 2.0 has facilitated the creation and spread of content, changing social-movement activism and organizing” (p. 2). Cyberactivism can be positive when it advocates human rights, social justice and tolerance. Digital platforms and the growing affordances of social media can be utilized in achieving benevolent outcomes by activists that share their experiences and “mobilize as many people as possible (p. 2). Two prominent examples of effective cyberactivism is Occupy Wall Street protests in the US and the Egyptian uprising (Ramadan, 2012) in which “movement participants are recognizing and expressing grievances, and organizing resistance, through the information and communication technologies that are now widely available, portable, and participatory” (McCaughey, p. 2). Conversely, some media users can be influenced and mobilized for the wrong cause when they are swayed by phobias such as Islamophobia in what is called “cyber abuse”, “cyber incitement/threats,” and “cyber hate” (Awan, 2014). A related term is hate crime “which include statements or terms aimed at targeting a person or person(s) because of their particular religion, gender, race…, and ethnicity” (Awan, 2014, p. 139). Thus, in cyber hate the offender uses digital spaces to target other people whom he/she considers as a threat. Online Islamophobia research can provide us with understanding and insights of how anti-Islam and anti-Muslim prejudices are being instigated in social digital spaces and how social actors use the Internet to achieve that (Allen, 2014; Awan, 2014, 2016a, 2016b; Ekman, 2015; Lean, 2012).

“A Web of Deception: Fomenting Hate Online” is the title of the second chapter of Lean’s book (2012). He argues that the cyberspace is being negatively misused by Islamophobes to plot, plan, support each other and most importantly perpetuate their hate online and offline. Distinction between offline and online life is fuzzy since they are mostly interconnected now. It is noteworthy that the case studies in this chapter and throughout the book were almost five years earlier. Now we witness monumental leaps in advancement of social media affordances and we gained experience of cyberactivism on the web from the Arab uprisings and other movements in western countries like Occupy Wall Street (Lean, 2012). Lean (2012) asserts that the fear of Islam has been implanted in the West by beneficiaries who utilized the mass media and the Internet to accomplish their goals. He convincingly presents examples of Americans from all walks of life instigating and perpetuating this fear monster. He explains: “the Islamophobia industry had spanned several decades… Their social cancer was incubated on the Internet and metastasized in the media” (p. 182). Lean warns of the outcome because “The Islamophobia Industry groups pump through the vessels occupied by the Islamophobia industry, becoming reproduced by powerful policymakers and world leaders whose decisions, if colored by the toxic misrepresentations, have the potential to change lives in catastrophic ways” (p. 182).

4. Anti-Social media nesting Islamophobia

The period from 2003 to 2006 was a golden phase for social media that witnessed the expansion of digital platforms like YouTube, Twitter, LinkedIn, Orkut, Myspace, Flickr and Facebook which promoted social interaction and networking between users in online spaces (Page, Barton, Unger, & Zappavigna, 2014). Social media are defined as “artifacts with a networking dimension, which are designed so as to make that dimension central to their use” (Lamy & Zourou, 2013). Joosten (2012) considers social media as a form of computer mediated communication that provides synchronous and/or asynchronous communication across different times and spaces. Although social media applications differ from one another, the general characteristics that users are required to do are: “(1) construct a public or semi-public profile within a bounded system, (2) articulate a list of other users with whom they share a connection, and (3) view and traverse their list of connections and those made by others within the system” (Boyd & Ellison, 2007, p. 211). Islamophobes have made use of social media like Twitter, Facebook and blogs like in the cases of anti-mosque campaigns in the US (Lean, 2012) and the UK (Allen, 2014) and in anti-jihadist networks (Ekman, 2015). Performing faked or anonymous identities online is one of the unique affordances of social media. It would be interesting to know “whether the ease and anonymity afforded by online posting actually results in even more extreme positions being articulated” (Baker et al., 2013, p. 266) especially when readers comment on the news. Therefore, digital information and communication technology have widened our perceived affordances of action, kept us engaged and connected to others.

Social media have affordances that are the enabling features of digital technologies that people perceive, but they also have particular constraints and limitations (Page et al., 2014). It is important to note, affordances are the possibilities for action which people identify in relation to specific resources not what is primarily intended by the designer of the digital technologies (Barton & Lee, 2013). People might adjust their use of a certain technology to match their own purpose, hence creating new affordances. For instance, Facebook that was first designed for university students for social networking has become a diversified digital technology and can be used as a platform for the best or the worst such as cyber abuse of Muslims. One growing affordance is ‘the convergence of media applications’ that has made it possible to link social media sites together (Page et al., 2014). Both the affordances and constraints of social media have a great impact on the communication and interaction between people. For instance, the affordance of creating groups on social media applications like on Facebook, Telegram and WhatsApp has enabled users to participate in such groups to instigate Islamophobia and cyber hate. This kind of temporary grouping is referred to by Gee (2003) as an affinity group, “a group that is bonded primarily through shared endeavors, goals, and practices” (2003, p. 212) while the long term and more structured groups with stronger ties between the members are referred to as community of practice.

For John Esposito, professor of religion and international affairs and Islamic studies at Georgetown University, “social media provide venues for presenting alternative representations of Islam and for counteracting the negative stereotypes found in the mainstream media” (Green, 2015, p. 314). He advocates that activists should utilize digital spaces like Facebook and Twitter to spread positive views about Islam and Muslims in order to “discredit negative messaging”. But this approach might be difficult because “The Islamophobia network is quite savvy in its use of social media, and it has far greater financial resources to make use of such platforms” (p.314).

4.1. Facebook walls of hate

Facebook is a popular social media platform to connect with family and friends and share interests with other users of the space; however, some hate groups use this platform to create online communities to preach for violence sharing racist discourses that participate in creating hostile digital spaces (Awan, 2016a). Keeping an eye on the new online communities and monitoring their activities is important because the content that is published and shared might influence community peace and security. In addition, the increase in number of online anti- Muslim abuse as revealed by civil society organizations necessitates addressing the issue about online Islamophobia. Awan examined the content of 100 different Facebook pages, posts and comments and revealed that there were 494 instances of online hate speech against Muslims (see figure 3 and 4). After analyzing the data, Awan found shared features that he categorized as characteristics of anti-Muslim hate Facebook discourse. He concludes that Muslims individuals and communities are “being demonized and vilified online which had manifested through negative attitudes, discrimination, stereotypes, physical threats and online harassment which all had the potential to incite violence or prejudicial action because it disparages and intimidates a protected individual or group” (Awan, 2016a, p. 1).

Figure 3: Image used on Facebook (Awan, 2016a).

Figure 4: Degrading Muslim women on Facebook (Awan, 2016a).

Another study of Islamophobia on Facebook is Chris Allen’s (2014) pilot study of a Facebook group called Stop Dudley Super Mosque and Islamic Village created in order to oppose the construction of a mosque in Dudley in the UK. The reasons for standing against building the mosque were related to a number of themes: planning and location, inclusion and public investment, identity, heritage, otherness, Islamification, and racist and Islamophobic reasons. Allen concludes that social media platforms like Facebook are valuable research methods for studying virtual Islamophobic activities. In my view, Awan’s (Awan, 2016a) and Allen’s (2014) studies reflect that anti-Muslim social actors are keen in using the digital spaces and developing strategies to take their offline fights to the online spaces and vice versa; moving back and forth between the two modes make it possible for them to reap the benefits of the two worlds and to integrate them in their anti-Muslim agenda.

4.2.Islamophobia on websites/blogs

Ekman (2015) emphasizes that negative attitudes and explicit racism against Muslims are increasingly visible in public discourse throughout Europe. Right-wing populist parties have strengthened their positions by focusing on the ‘Islamic threat’ to the West. Digital spaces, according to Ekman (2015), have become the arena to facilitate the spread of racism against Muslims in European countries and the US. He explores online Islamophobic network of three active counter-jihadist actors and analyses their discourse. The study of the US-based Jihad Watch, the pan-European Gates of Vienna and the Swedish Avpixlat website/blog entries published in 2012 reveals that Islamophobic online web pages “constitute a dynamic network with ties to different political and geographical milieus” (Ekman, p. 1). The actors advocate defending Western values as means to change public attitudes and maintain a hostile mainstream discourse through unsubstantiated claims. One claim is Muslims constitute a demographic threat and will replace the native citizens through waves of immigrants and high birth rate. When Muslim nationals demand some of their rights to practice their faith and when they integrate in the society, it is claimed that stealth Jihad is silently infiltrating and changing the mainstream. The idea of the secret plotting of Jihadi Muslims is established by Jihad Watch American blogger, Robert Spencer, in his book Stealth Jihad: How Radical Islam is Subverting America without Guns or Bombs. It is alleged that Muslims are imposing sharia law on Western societies, Islam is a totalitarian political ideology, Muslims are inherently violent, Political correctness, Left-wing and liberal politicians are aiding Islamism, Islamic multiculturalism. The study also reveals that Islamophobic rhetoric “is strengthened by xenophobic currents within mass media, and by the legitimization of intellectuals and political actors” (Ekman, 2015, p. 1)

4.3.Twitter the thermometer of Islamophobia

Islamophobia in Cyberspace: Hate Crimes Go Viral is an edited book by Imran Awan (2016b), a scholar in the field of criminology and hate crimes instigated by online Islamophobia. He launches a warning that hate can be manifested in the real world or online and this destructive power of online hate will gradually increase. Awan’s claim is confirmed by the escalating number of incidents of anti-Muslim abuse and attacks reported to the British Police and Tell MAMA organization. Alarmingly, according to Tell MAMA, the number rose by 326% in 2015 disproportionately targeting women by mostly teenagers 13-18 years of age and generally took place either in educational institutes or public transport (Harriet, 2016). Women are visible targets because of the veil. Tell MAMA pointed out that far-right extremist groups perpetuated anti-Muslim hate on social media. Fiyaz Mughal, the founder of Tell MAMA (a monitoring group of hate crime) conveyed his resentment and disappointment to MPs that Twitter did not suspend far-right extremists accounts. Shockingly, almost half a million tweets celebrated Jo Cox’ death, British MP Labor, who was killed by Thomas Mair who repeatedly shot and stabbed her amidst the EU referendum campaign in June 2016. Tell MAMA presented evidence to Twitter and since then within just two weeks, an individual extremist tweeted 2,500 tweets of hatred speech. Describing the perpetrators, Fiyaz Mughal told the Guardian, “These are individuals who regard Muslims as groomers and pedophiles and they should be deported, and if not deported, eradicated from this country”. He adds “There’s a real risk after the murder of Jo Cox to individuals in our country that organizations and corporations like Twitter simply disregard, … and it cannot continue.” A researcher at Tell MAMA, Bharath Ganesh, believed teenagers under 18 were being brainwashed on Twitter by misinformation from far-right groups in the UK, US and European countries, specifically France, Germany and Netherlands. He warned that “There’s a large transnational echo chamber forming. It appears that young people are being influenced by that rhetoric” (Grierson, 2016).

In addition, alarming figures come from a report Islamophobia on Twitter: March to July 2016 published online by the Centre for the Analysis of Social Media run by DEMOS, a British think tank group (Miller, Smith, & Dale). It reveals a general trend that following terrorist news events, anti-Islamic and derogatory language spreads like fire on Twitter attacking Islam and Muslim communities. When the ISIS attacked Brussels, a particularly high volume was recorded in March 2016. This rate dropped sharply between March and April but has increased month-on-month, with July 2016 having the highest rate of any month analyzed in that period recording 215,246 Islamophobic tweets that were sent in July 2016, an average of 6943 per day, or 289 per hour. It seems that there are systematic organized efforts to spread an explicit message that Islam and Muslims are violent and terrorists taking advantage of the tensed atmosphere. According to the same report, the vast majority of Islamophobic tweets originated from every EU country. As only tweets in English were recorded, the majority were traced to English speaking countries; however, outside the UK significant concentrations were identified in the Netherlands, France and Germany (Miller et al.). The following abusive Tweets were registered in five spikes in July 2016 as following:

July 15: the day immediately following a terrorist attack in Nice, France (21,190 tweets)

July 8: the day after the shooting of police officers in Dallas, U.S. (11,320 tweets)

July 17: the day after an attempted military coup in Turkey (10,610 tweets)

July 5: the end of Ramadan and four days after a siege of a café in Bangladesh by IS militants (9,220 tweets)

July 26: the day of an ISIS attack on a church in Normandy, France (8,950 tweets)

Another British civil service organization is Tell MAMA (Measuring Anti-Muslim Attacks) that supports victims of anti-Muslim hate and is a public service which also measures and monitors anti-Muslim incidents. Reports from this organization indicate the escalating number of anti-Muslim attacks. Statistics from the police and organizations such as Tell MAMA report a significant increase in the number of people reporting online anti-Muslim abuse to them. Copsey, Dack, Littler, & Feldman (2013, p. 21) found that: “The majority of the incidents of Muslim hate crime reported to Tell MAMA are online incidents and 300–69 percent—of these online cases reported a link to the far right,” specifically to the English Defense League and the British National Party (Copsey, Dack, Littler, & Feldman, 2013; Feldman & Littler, 2014). Tell MAMA’s figures are similarly revealing when disaggregated into online abuse and offline attacks comparing the week before and after the murder in Woolwich (figures 5, 6 and 7)

Figure 5: Pre and Post-Rigby attack hate crimes in the UK.

Figure 6: Online links to far right.

Figure 7. Number of incidents of hate crime online and offline in the UK.

In the same line of enquiry involving Islamophobia on Twitter, Awan (2014) studies Twitter Islamophobic activity in the aftermath of the Woolwich terrorist attack in May 2013 in the UK (figure 8). He examines 500 tweets from 100 different users of Twitter to study how Muslims are being viewed and targeted online. He argues that online Islamophobia needs to receive the same level of attention as street level Islamophobia because both of them jeopardize the society cohesion.

Figure 8. Twitter Islamophobic picture posted by the English Defense League (EDL) Awan (2014).

5. Combating Islamophobia

Combating Islamophobia is a long process. It can take many shapes and forms. In this section I will present comprehensive measures to defend Muslims and to face Islamophobia in the media and online.

5.1. Raising awareness of citizens of the world

Combating Islamophobia is a long process should be the priority on every citizen of the world agenda, Muslim and non-Muslim individuals, organizations and governments because we are brothers and sisters in humanity sharing one world — one body like in Saadi’s metaphor. From my personal experience, although I have heard about discrimination against Muslims in many occasions from Muslim students in western countries or the media — one tragic case was about a Saudi female student who was killed in Essex in the UK— I did not realize the gravity of the situation until now when I started researching and reading thoroughly about the topic for the purpose of writing this article which is a shame as a Muslim academic. As a researcher, I could not keep up with the magnitude of information and the distressing reports of what is happening in the daily life of ordinary women and children. When they leave home are they going to be save in the street, school, workplace or on the bus? Are they going to be saved from verbal or physical abuse face-to-face or in the media or on social media? Would it be possible for them to practice their faith in and outside home such as eating Halal food, praying at the call for prayer, women wearing modest clothes and covering their hair, finding a place for worship?

There is so much ignorance that words fail to describe and that the world does not know about to start the one-thousand-mile journey— or maybe in some cases pretending not seeing something relieved from doing any action. How are we going to combat a ghost or a shadow, something we do not fully know, understand or feel its daunting presence? I believe that what we see from checking the escalating figures of abuse and assaults to Muslims is just the tip of the iceberg. Much more effort is needed and digging to realize the true dimensions of the problem of all forms of Islamophobia, online and in real life and how they influence each other. Safi (1996) points to the ineffective Muslim response to the distortion of Islam by global media due to either insufficient economical resources and/or weak political will. Furthermore, there is a lack of vision of the necessity of establishing mass media by Muslims for the public sphere that is directed to global societies and not only to Muslims. Thus, Safi calls for the use of technology and arts by Muslims to change the stereotypical images of Muslims and distorted views of Islam. Electronic media, in particular, have great effect in inducing change in societies but these effective tools have not been utilized for promoting Islam and fighting Islamophobia. However, fortunately this has changed during the last years especially after the uprisings in many Arab countries—any opener of the need to go online to discuss Muslim issues and interact with Muslims. I observe when I surf Twitter, Facebook and Instagram, that there is an increasing awareness of the importance of online media by Muslims and policy making bodies, journalists, sheikhs (religious clerks) and even ordinary individuals. They all have established presence on social media, some of which is for promoting a positive image of Islam and Muslims and discussing Muslims’ issues.

5.2. The role of the media to counter Islamophobia

Baker et al. (2013) put the responsibility on the media and hold them accountable, which is important in my view, because through the eyes of the media we see the world. Baker et al. identify some good practices in the British media and encourage their further development, and promote more balanced coverage including extending the range of contexts in which Muslims are depicted like in culture, art, architecture, poetry, music, film, fiction, education, business and travel, besides reporting about Islam in countries that are not involved in war and other conflicts. They also advice covering human interest stories, for example, Muslim men and women who make valuable contributions in their communities (Baker et al., 2013). One step forward is The Huffington Post’s initiative of dedicating a webpage called “Islamophobia” to register the offences on Muslims and to change the stereotyping of Muslims. It encourages American Muslims to take action either by reporting hate crimes or doing projects that unite Americans or spread tolerance (Mathias & Abdelaziz, 2016). The ‘Islamophobia’ page contains three sections: a timeline that lists the offences organized chronologically and provides explanation of the incident with sometimes a picture of the incident or the offender when available like for public figures; blogs written by the readers commenting on the newspaper’s article and videos sent by ordinary Muslims and non-Muslims to the Newspaper and the content of both the blogs and videos have a message against Islamophobia (see figure9).

Figure 9. The Huffington Post Webpage Islamophobia.

At the bottom of the webpage and after scrolling down for so many pages to reach the beginning of the timeline, there are four phrases presenting three steps for action (figure 10). However, it would have been much better if this hidden part were shown at the top of the webpage to be noticed by the readers/viewers. Each phrase for action is cross linked to a certain organization. “Stand up for your Muslim neighbors” is cross reference to CAIR; “Visit your local mosque” to WHY-ISLAM organization; and “Write your local lawmaker today, and tell them to fight Islamophobia linked to the House of Representatives website.

Figure 10. The Huffington Post Webpage Islamophobia.

5.4. What experts recommend

It is disheartening to realize that “Islamophobia is one of the most acceptable bigotry in the West today” as emphasized by Green (2015, p. 311). To combat Islamophobia, Green interviewed eight influential scholars who are prominent in challenging Islamophobic discourse in public circles such as Keith Ellison, John Esposito, Ingrid Mattson, Eboo Patel, Tariq Ramadan, and others. They put forward some suggestions to combat Islamophobia as following:

(1) speaking out whenever and wherever Islamophobia occurs, (2) targeting and discrediting the individuals and institutions that benefit financially and politically from spreading misinformation about Islam, (3) cultivating interpersonal and interfaith relationships between Muslims and non-Muslims, and (4) educating the public about Islam, particularly its diversity and the common ground it shares with the West and other religious traditions” (Green, p. 312).

I totally agree with them but I believe that where we are now is because we are consumers of media and have not become producers yet. Hence, it is time to be more involved and become producers of media, news and entertainment. We need to encourage and support Muslims specializing in non-traditional fields of knowledge like journalism, media studies, cinema, theatre, acting, digital technology and computing, web design, graphic design photography, motion pictures, video games and so on. Art can influence people because its message transcends the local sphere to reach the world through image, colors and beauty. We need to produce artwork that touches the heart and intrigue the mind.

In CAIR’s informative report Same Hate New Target, some of the recommendations for Muslim individuals to act upon are associated with the media negative influence: “Confront Islamophobia in the news and entertainment media”; “Write a letter to the editor” and related to online Islamophobia: “Addressing Islamophobia on the Internet in particular” (2010, p. 41). CAIR also provides a practical method to deal with online Islamophobia including the following:

1. Leverage social media (i.e. Facebook, Twitter) to network and promote a positive and accurate image of Islam and Muslims. Use your talent to start a blog to increase knowledge and familiarity with Islam and Muslims. Produce short educational videos and post them on YouTube. Responding to insulting chain e-mails or online comments with accurate and balanced information about Islam can help stop the cycle of misinformation.

2. Gauge the influence of the source of Islamophobia on the internet. Many obscure individuals or organizations are desperate to get the publicity a controversy would bring them. We should try not to give them more publicity than they can get on their own. In many such cases, the best response is not to react at all.

We need to keep in mind that social media is a two-faced coin. There is a big challenge anti-Islamophobia activist will encounter in the online arena. Espisto points out, “It will take more financial resources, more networking, and more sophisticated coordination among anti-Islamophobia activists to challenge the persistent anti-Muslim rhetoric coming from the Islamophobia industry” .

3. If the Islamophobic content comes from an influential source, document it and report it to CAIR.

Minorities should be protected from all forms of abuse and the legalization of laws to protect Muslims and identify anti-Islam and anti-Muslims acts as hate crime and punish the offenders should be part and parcel of combating Islamophobia. In this respect, the Runnymede report (1997) discusses actions in the legal arena. One of them is to use a legal term such as religious and racial violence for assaults on Muslims because the attacks are in their essence targeting a religion and its believers. Using the term discrimination can be also effective in cases Muslim are denied their rights or not giving fair opportunities in education, employment and public participation.

Academia has a big impact on the society; consequently, academics, researchers and intellectuals can lead the way in combating Islamophobia. Edward Said and many other scholars and their contributions in dissecting and analysing all forms of prejudices and discrimination towards humans such as ethnic, religious, gender and so on shine the path for other scholars to follow their steps. Varisco (2011) explains what kind of action is possible online citing examples from his own rich digital experiences. He eloquently pinpoints to the role of professionals:

Cyberspace is by nature politically uncorrect. There are no doubt as many offensive sites readily available with the proper (or improperly typed) URL as there are valuable resources for personal or professional use… we as academics have no choice but to reach beyond the tower, since the Ivory Tower of our academic heritage is no longer isolated. Every time we log on, the tower's walls disappear. Those who take the chance and free float into www-land do so no longer clothed in the cloaking device of professional ivy expertise. When the classroom expands to an infinitely expanding network, we will soon be laughed at as intellectual emperors with no clothes or else far too clothes-minded in our old ways. Most of us do not desire to be missionaries for Islam or any of the cultures we study, although we have little choice but to hack through (in the positive cybernautic sense) the piles of propaganda and mounds of misinformation. If remaining neutral in this process is nothing more than locking ourselves out of the positive force of moral engagement with the issues we study, we will continue to draw salaries, stimulate student here and there, and do little else to escape the cell made for us (p. 191).

5.3. Leading by example

ISIS and Takfirist now and Taliban before have congested the media, especially virtual space with videos of torturing and killing innocent people; thus, it is the prerogative and responsibility of every Muslim to present the true face of Islam that is moderation. In the religious practices of Islam, moderation is an inseparable notion. Both the Qur’an verses and the Prophet’s sayings and doing reflect that from the beginning of Islam. Tariq Ramadan states, “The overwhelming majority of scholars and of Muslims around the world (whether Sunni or Shia, irrespective of legal school) have promoted and followed the path of moderation and flexibility in the practice of their religion” (2012, p. 148). In the context of the ritual of fasting the holy month of Ramadan when someone is travelling, it is indicated in Qur’an that (Allah desires ease for you, and He does not desire for you difficult and a traveler can be excused from fasting) in chapter 2, verse 184. Not only Takfirist convey a wrong picture about Muslims and Islam, others are to be blamed, too, especially the rich class that enjoys spending their holidays abroad. Their extravagant lifestyle is appalling and represents a negative image of Muslims on one hand and the ordinary people who sometimes create mischief and chaos wherever they go on the other hand. Let us as Muslims be transparent and do not lie at ourselves. Criticizing bad conduct and behaviors is a way to reform the individual and the society.

What I Believe is a book written by Tariq Ramadan, a Muslim scholar, in 2010 that suggests remedial solutions from an insider’s perspective to exclusion and stigmatization of Muslims and Islamophobia. Ramadan writes about his beliefs and experiences of living in the west. He argues that western Muslims should become an integral part of the western societies and that can only be accomplished through “long-term, demanding, dialectical approach developed at the grass roots” (p.29). In order for Muslims to be fully integrated in the western society they need to be proactive and avoid thinking or acting as victims or accept marginalization. They need to contribute and take part in social and volunteer activities. In the interview with Green, Ramadan persuades Muslims, “We must be visible and involved in anything that has to do with society—in education, in the economy, in the environment. We must be at home; we must contribute and be a part of the social fabric”. He adds, “The time of integration is past”. “Now is the time of contribution, to be of added value,” he insists (Green, p. 312).

The Islamic perspective of using the Internet is presented by Sheikh Panahian (2016), an influential Iranian public speaker and religious scholar, in one of his articles on his Arabic website. The Sheikh himself has a prominent presence on social media through an Arabic YouTube channel with 5.8K subscribers; two Telegram channels (Persian 88.3K and Arabic 7.5K), a Facebook page (Arabic) liked by 15.3K; two Instagram accounts (Arabic 8.1K and Persian 30.2K) and two websites (Arabic and English) all promoting Islam and good practice. I especially liked the video clips on YouTube because they are effective messages, short (maximum 5 minutes) and has good visual effects enhancing it and making it interesting. Sheikh Panahian enumerates the benefits of the Internet as: “the accessibility and easiness of searching for information, satisfying our needs and the speedy transfer of information and the promotion of ethical values in an effective manner and other benefits which make it the duty of the believers to call for the righteousness and promote it” (I translated this text from Arabic to English but the original article is in Persian). He considers the Internet as a test, “We have a heavy responsibility on our shoulders because of the Internet, either to be rewarded (by Allah) trying to surpass the efforts of our predecessors or we are drawn more to sins. It is clear that virtual space will expose us to new challenges, but at the same time provide us with new possibilities for the good of the individual and society”. Sheikh Panahian explains that there are two important aspects of the Internet that we need to consider: First, to be observant of piousness, so our souls will not be influenced by this corrupted environment since one of the properties of virtual space is the big extent of moral corruption. The second matter is not to forget time and other duties when using these digital devices and when surfing the Internet. Since the Internet is reachable and available at any second, it can disrupt our lives because of curiosity and other desires”. Lastly, he urges: “It is compulsory and urgent to establish a national (independent) infrastructure for technology and communication but not accomplishing that until now is a true catastrophe”.

5.5. Final thought

It is not easy to define, identify, tackle and resolve a complex multidimensional phenomenon like Islamophobia that has historical, political, religious, economic, cultural and social roots. In my view, there are multi-Islamophobias, not one; each context has its own Islamophobic manifestations, characteristics and remedies. What works for one might not work for another depending on the severity of the situation, social actors and their strategies, characteristics of Muslim community, national and international circumstances and so on. Taking that heterogeneity into consideration does not exclude homogeneity. There is also synergy between communities; positive results in one place can induce positive repercussions in another and lead. Dropping one stone into the water will produce minimal waves, but dropping many stones in the water and synchronizing them will move all the stagnant water and induce a big tide. Each one of us can make a difference but all of us can defy all the odds and challenges (figure 11); “while everyone is essentially different, in a number of basic ways our similarities outweigh our differences” (Baker et al., 2013, p. 270).

Figure 11. Community joining forces and protesting against Islamophobia (CAIR, 2010).

I conclude quoting Nathan Lean (2012) who advocates for the eradication of discrimination and promotion of civil liberties of minorities, including Muslims:

Muslims and Islam are not to be feared, nor are blacks, Jews, Catholics, or any other group that faces systematic discrimination. Rather, there is great urgency to resist and counter those whose aim it is to chop up humanity into different minority blocks, pitting them against one another, and gambling with other people’s freedom for the sake of politics or profit. With the forward progression of time, the battle will become more difficult, the stakes higher, the dangers of escalation more real, and the prejudices more deeply engrained. Only by protecting one another from the fracturing of societies, only by refusing to fall prey to this vicious and ceaseless movement to antagonize, isolate, and persecute Muslims in the United States, Europe, and everywhere around the globe, will this fear factory, the Islamophobia industry, be rightfully, forcefully and finally stamped out (p. 184).

References

Allen, C. (2014). Anti- Social networking. SAGE Open, 4(1). doi:10.1177/2158244014522074

Awan, I. (2014). Islamophobia and Twitter: A typology of online hate against Muslims on social media. Policy and Internet, 6(2), 133-150. doi:10.1002/1944-2866.POI364

Awan, I. (2016a). Islamophobia on social media: A qualitative analysis of the Facebook's walls of hate. International Journal of Cyber Criminology, 10(1), 1-20. doi:10.5281/zenodo.58517

Awan, I. (Ed.) (2016b). Islamophobia in Cyberspace: Hate Crimes go Viral (Vol. p.p1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px Times}): Routledge: New York

Baker, P., Gabrielatos, C., & McEnery, T. (2013). Discourse analysis and media attitudes: The representation of Islam in the British press: Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Barton, D., & Lee, C. (2013). Language online: Investigating digital texts and practices: Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.

Bleich, E., Stonebraker, H., Nisar, H., & Abdelhamid, R. (2015). Media portrayals of minorities: Muslims in British newspaper headlines, 2001–2012. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 41(6), 942-962. doi:10.1080/1369183X.2014.1002200

Boyd, D. M., & Ellison, N. B. (2007). Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 13(1), 210-230. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00393.x

CAIR. (2010). SAME HATE, NEW TARGET: ISLAMOPHOBIA AND ITS IMPACT IN THE UNITED STATES 2009-2010. Retrieved from http://www.cair.com/images/pdf/2010-Islamophobia-Report.pdf

Carol, S., & Koopmans, R. (2013). Dynamics of contestation over Islamic religious rights in Western Europe. Ethnicities, 13(2), 165-190. doi:10.1177/1468796812470893

Copsey, N., Dack, J., Littler, M., & Feldman, M. (2013). Anti-Muslim Hate Crime and the Far Right. Retrieved from

Ekman, M. (2015). Online Islamophobia and the politics of fear: manufacturing the green scare. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 1-17. doi:10.1080/01419870.2015.1021264

Faimau, G. (2013). Socio-cultural construction of recognition: The discursive representation of Islam and Muslims in the British Christian news media (1st ed.): Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Feldman, M., & Littler, M. (2014). Tell MAMA Reporting 2013/14: Anti-Muslim Overview, Analysis and ‘Cumulative Extremism’ Retrieved from https://www.tellmamauk.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/finalreport.pdf

Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy (1st ed.): New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Green, T. H. (2015). The fear of Islam: An introduction to Islamophobia in the west: Minneapolis Minnesota: Fortress Press.

Greenberg, D., & Miazhevich, G. (2012). Assimilationism vs. multiculturalism: U.S. identity and media representations of British Muslims over a 12‐ Year span. Communication, Culture & Critique, 5(1), 75-98. doi:10.1111/j.1753-9137.2011.01117.x

Grierson, J. (2016). Twitter fails to deal with far-right abuse, anti-hate crime group tells MPs. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/dec/13/twitter-fails-deal-farright-abuse-tell-mama-extremism-commons

Harriet, S. (2016). Incidents of anti-Muslim abuse up by 326% in 2015, says Tell MAMA. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/jun/29/incidents-of-anti-muslim-abuse-up-by-326-in-2015-says-tell-mama

Joosten, T. (2012). Social media for educators: Strategies and best practices: San Francisco, CA : Jossey-Bass.

Kabir, N. (2006). Representation of Islam and Muslims in the Australian Media, 2001–2005 1. Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs, 26(3), 313-328. doi:10.1080/13602000601141281

Kern, R. (2014). Technology as pharmakon : The promise and perils of the Internet for foreign language education. Modern Language Journal, 98(1), 340-357. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.2014.12065.x

Klug, B. (2012). Islamophobia: A concept comes of age. Ethnicities, 12(5), 665-681. doi:10.1177/1468796812450363

Lambert, R., & Githens-Maze r, J. (2010). Islamophobia and anti-muslim hate crimes: UK case studies 2010: European Muslim Research Centre and University of Exeter 2010.

Lamy, M.-N. l., & Zourou, K. (2013). Social networking for language education: Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Lean, N. C. (2012). The Islamophobia industry: how the right manufactures fear of Muslims: London: Pluto Press.

Mathias, C., & Abdelaziz, R. (2016). Islamophobia. The Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://testkitchen.huffingtonpost.com/islamophobia/

McCaughey, M. (2014). Cyberactivism on the participatory web: New York: Routledge.

Meer, N., & Modood, T. (2012). For "Jweish" read "Muslim"? Islamophobia as a form of Racilisation of ethno-religious groups in Britain today. Islamophobia Studies Journal, 1(1), 34-53.

Miller, C., Smith, J., & Dale, J. Islamophobia on Twitter: March to July 2016. Retrieved from https://www.demos.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Islamophobia-on-Twitter_-March-to-July-2016-.pdf

Page, R., Barton, D., Unger, J. W., & Zappavigna, M. (2014). Researching language and social media: A student guide. New York: Routledge.

Panahian, S. A. (2016). Our perspective on virtual space. Retrieved from http://arabic.bayanmanavi.ir/post/184

Ramadan, T. (2012). The Arab awakening: Islam and the new Middle East: London: Allen Lane.

Runnymede. (1997). Islamophobia: A challenge for us all. Retrieved from http://www.runnymedetrust.org/publications/17/74.html

Saeed, A. (2007). Media, racism and Islamophobia: The representation of Islam and Muslims in the media. Sociology Compass, 1(2), 443-462. doi:10.1111/j.1751-9020.2007.00039.x

Safi, L. M. (1996). Islam and the global challenge: Dealing with distortion of the image of Islam by global media. Islamic Studies, 35(2), 191-202.

Said, E. W. (1981). Covering Islam : how the media and the experts determine how we see the rest of the world: London : Routledge.

Sayyid, S. (2010). Out of the devil's dictionary. In S. Sayyid & A. Vakil (Eds.), Thinking through Islamophobia: Global perspectives (pp. 5-18): New York : Columbia University Press.

Sayyid, S., & Vakil, A. (2010). Thinking through Islamophobia: Global perspectives: New York: Columbia University Press.

Topkev, A. (2014). Discourse analysis and media attitudes: The representation of Islam in the British press. In (pp. 1-2): Routledge.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights. (1948). Retrieved from http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/.

Varisco, D. M. (2011). Climbing the virtual minbar of cyberspace. Review of Middle East Studies, 45(02), 182-191. doi:10.1017/S215134810000241X

Wolf, E. (2017). True love. In: The Christian Science Monitor.

Accessed 20 Mar. 17