Listen to the article
X’s Location Tags Unmask Network of Fake Gaza Accounts Shaping War Narrative
In a surprising development, X’s newly implemented location transparency requirement has revealed that numerous accounts claiming to report from Gaza are actually posting from locations across Europe, North America, and Turkey. This discovery has significant implications for how information about the Gaza conflict has been shaped and consumed since October 2023.
The platform’s “About This Account” feature, introduced in late 2025, now displays geographic location data for all users. Almost immediately, it exposed a network of influential accounts that had presented themselves as on-the-ground witnesses in Gaza while operating thousands of miles away.
Open Source Intelligence analyst Eitan Fischberger documented this phenomenon in a detailed thread posted on November 22, highlighting several prominent accounts that had built substantial followings by posing as either local Palestinian voices or American observers in Gaza.
“These accounts maintained credibility by repeating familiar themes and amplifying one another to create the appearance of consensus,” noted Fischberger, who urged followers to share only verified examples of location discrepancies.
The impact of these misrepresented accounts has been far-reaching. During critical breaking news cycles, Western media outlets frequently cited these accounts as primary sources, treating their posts as authentic eyewitness reports. This tendency to incorporate unverified social media content accelerated during periods of limited media access to Gaza, creating an information vacuum these accounts readily filled.
Nongovernmental organizations incorporated claims from these accounts into emergency situation reports, while some U.S. lawmakers amplified their content in congressional speeches and policy proposals. Representative Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) notably reshared a miscaptioned photo from Syria labeled as evidence of “Gaza genocide” before deleting it after the error was pointed out.
“The result was a commentary environment in which unverified accounts—sometimes operating thousands of miles from Gaza—shaped the discourse more than professional reporting,” explains media analyst Rebecca Stern, who studies information flows during conflicts. “This creates serious concerns about how public perception and policy are being influenced.”
Analysis of the exposed accounts reveals several common patterns. Many repeatedly shared identical videos or images from unrelated conflicts, with some recycling footage from Syria or earlier regional tensions. These accounts typically focused on emotionally charged themes—hunger, displacement, and bombardment—designed to provoke immediate moral reactions from Western audiences.
The mechanism through which these accounts gained influence reflects broader vulnerabilities in today’s media ecosystem. Newsrooms facing pressure to provide rapid coverage during crises increasingly draw material from social media before completing verification processes. When these claims enter mainstream conversation through credible channels, corrections rarely reverse their influence on public opinion.
“Once a narrative takes hold, especially when it aligns with preexisting expectations, it becomes extraordinarily difficult to dislodge,” says Dr. Michael Hoffman, who researches misinformation patterns at Northwestern University. “The emotional framing often overwhelms concerns about metadata or source credibility.”
The policy consequences have been substantial. Unverified social media posts have been cited during congressional debates on foreign aid, sanctions, and ceasefire resolutions. Governments have incorporated this material into diplomatic statements, while advocacy groups have used viral posts to support allegations of siege tactics or war crimes.
Media experts suggest several measures to mitigate the influence of misrepresented reporting. Social platforms could implement stronger verification requirements for accounts claiming to report from conflict zones. Journalists could adopt stricter standards for incorporating social media content, including consistent metadata checks and primary source validation.
“These measures don’t restrict speech,” notes David Kaye, former UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of expression. “They simply clarify provenance and reduce the risk of narrative manipulation in high-stakes international situations.”
The revelation of this network underscores how the digital information environment surrounding conflicts has evolved. With traditional journalism facing access restrictions and resource limitations, the gap has been filled by alternative voices—not all of whom represent themselves honestly.
As platforms implement stronger transparency measures, the challenge for media consumers, journalists, and policymakers remains: distinguishing authentic voices from those manipulating perception from afar.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
16 Comments
This highlights the need for rigorous fact-checking and source verification, especially for news and information coming from conflict zones. Social media amplification can make even fabricated content appear credible.
Platforms have a responsibility to enforce their policies and protect users from coordinated disinformation campaigns. But it’s an uphill battle given the scale and sophistication of these operations.
Kudos to the researchers and analysts who are working to expose these coordinated disinformation campaigns. Shining a light on such tactics is an important step in combating the spread of false information.
This issue speaks to the broader challenges of maintaining truth and accountability in the digital age. It’s an ongoing battle that requires collaboration between platforms, researchers, and engaged citizens.
The revelations about fake Gaza accounts highlight the complexity of navigating online information, especially during volatile geopolitical events. Platforms need to continue strengthening their transparency and verification measures.
At the same time, users have a responsibility to be critical consumers of content and to fact-check claims, especially those that align with their own biases or preconceptions. Diligence is key.
While it’s disappointing to see social media being weaponized for propaganda, I’m glad that the platform’s transparency policies were able to uncover this coordinated disinformation campaign. Ongoing vigilance is crucial.
This issue speaks to the broader challenge of maintaining integrity and trust in online discourse. It’s a constant battle, but one that is essential for a healthy information ecosystem.
The revelation of this coordinated fake Gaza disinformation campaign is a sobering reminder of the importance of source verification and fact-checking, especially when it comes to sensitive geopolitical issues.
It’s heartening to see researchers and analysts working to expose such manipulation. Platforms, policymakers, and citizens all have a role to play in combating the spread of false information online.
The Gaza conflict is a complex geopolitical issue, and it’s troubling to see it being exploited for propaganda purposes. We need more transparency and accountability in online discourse to combat such manipulation.
While technological solutions have a role to play, ultimately this comes down to media literacy and critical thinking. Users need to be vigilant about verifying sources and questioning narratives, especially during times of crisis.
Interesting revelation about the coordinated misinformation campaign around the Gaza conflict. It’s concerning to see how social media can be weaponized to shape narratives, even on such sensitive geopolitical issues.
Transparency measures like location tagging are important to expose such manipulation. But it’s an ongoing battle against bad actors trying to game the system.
This is a concerning development, but I’m glad that the platform’s transparency measures were able to uncover this coordinated effort to shape the narrative around the Gaza conflict. Ongoing vigilance is crucial.
While technology has a role to play, ultimately this is a societal challenge that requires a multifaceted approach. We all have a responsibility to be critical consumers of online content and to support efforts to maintain the integrity of public discourse.