Social Media Firms Failing, Refusing to Cooperate With Anti-Semitism Investigation

The counsel for the Royal Commission investigating the Bondi terror attack says its had limited cooperation from X, Telegram, Reddit, and Liberty Social.

In this photo illustration, social media networking apps are displayed on a phone screen with the Australian flag displayed in the background in Sydney, Australia on Dec. 7, 2025. Illustration by George Chan/Getty Images

Counsel assisting the Royal Commission into Anti-Semitism and Social Cohesion, Richard Lancaster, says the inquiry has encountered resistance—and in some cases outright refusal—from social media platforms in its efforts to obtain relevant documents and information.

Speaking at the start of the third tranche of hearings into anti-Semitism in Australia, Lancaster said many platforms with offices in Australia had been issued compulsory notices to produce evidence.

However, they claimed they could not comply because their services were provided to Australians via offshore entities, typically based in the United States.

He noted that the commission had received no response from X Corp or Telegram.

“Other platforms, including Reddit and Liberty Social, have responded in a limited fashion, typically by pointing the commission to their publicly available policies without offering any detail as to how those policies are interpreted and enforced,” Lancaster said.

The counsel also stated that Gab, a microblogging and social networking service, was “openly hostile” to the Commission.

According to Lancaster, the Commission had received an email from an attorney for Gab, who said that “Gab is an American company run by American citizens and will publish what it likes when it likes.”

In a social media post, Gab CEO Andrew Torba said he had received a notice from the Commission and alleged that the Australian government had threatened him with 12 months’ imprisonment for exposing “their blueprints.”

“I do not answer to Australian bureaucrats, and Gab does not answer to state sponsored censors,” he said.

Lancaster then suggested that Australia’s regulatory regime needed to be “robust enough” to deal with companies “at the extreme end of the spectrum.”

“The question that will be considered is whether the eSafety Commissioner or some other regulator should be given greater powers to regulate or compel the cooperation of social media platforms that are based offshore,” he said.

Several social media platforms have been given leave to appear at the inquiry, including Meta, Google, LinkedIn and TikTok.

Public broadcasters the ABC and SBS would also appear before the hearing, Lancaster added.

“These media outlets occupy a particularly important, trusted position in the Australian media landscape. Their statutes, charters, and policies commit them to high standards of accuracy, impartiality, and balance, and they are charged with reflecting and, indeed, fostering,” he said.

Meanwhile, the commission has received public submissions critical of the public broadcasters’ coverage of the conflict in the Middle East, claiming it is inaccurate or unbalanced in both the selection of stories and the way they are reported.

Special envoy to combat anti-Semitism Jillian Segal would be called to give evidence of such concerns, and witnesses from the broadcasters would testify on their approach to reporting the conflict and their policies around managing complaints of anti-Semitism.

However, Commissioner Virginia Bell said it was not the Commission’s remit to resolve individual complaints.

The Commission is due to issue a final report by December, and in April issued an interim report containing 14 recommendations, all of which the government has agreed to implement.

Segal has also put forward some recommendations, including calls for prison terms for anti-Semitic harassment.