On 7 November 2024, following a football match between Ajax Amsterdam and Maccabi Tel Aviv, unrest erupted in several locations in the Dutch capital. The events were marred by appalling violence, sparking widespread outrage and significant political fallout. Adding to the controversy was the media’s reporting, which drew sharp criticism for its perceived bias and censorship.
Major Dutch and international media outlets rushed to draw a clear picture of what unfolded on the night. The events were widely reported as ‘antisemitic attacks targeted at Israeli fans’. The Dutch newspaper De Telegraaf, known as a conservative and populist media outlet, was among the most explicit, using the term ‘jew hunt’ in the headlines of at least 8 news articles published since 7 November.
Other major Dutch media outlets like the national broadcaster NOS and the ‘free and fearless’ Het Parool also reported ‘antisemitic attacks’, for example in headlines on 9 November and 13 November. With the 86th anniversary of the Kristallnacht only a couple days away, the parallels to historical antisemitism were perhaps hard to overlook for overzealous journalists seeking to create a narrative. The historical sensitivities contextualising this incident and the rapidly spreading dramatic visuals undoubtedly contributed to the sensationalism of initial news media reports.
Trouw, a newspaper known for its in-depth reporting, appears to have taken a slightly more even-handed view of the events. “A lot is still unclear,” it reported on 11 November, 5 days after the football match. Contrary to many other media outlets, the paper also published a perspective more critical of the role of the Israeli fans by enlisting the opinion of James Montague, an expert on football hooligans. Montague described Maccabi Tel Aviv fans as ‘racist and untranationalist’.
Not to be ignored are the online-only English-language news platforms that primarily serve expats and international students in The Netherlands. DutchNews mostly stuck to factual reporting, although “Eyewitnesses film Maccabi fans causing trouble in Amsterdam” is a notably divergent headline when compared to mainstream media – as is NL Times’ “Footage shows Maccabi supporters attack Amsterdammers”.
Making money on a twist of the script
In the aftermath of the troubling events, more reports, video material and perspectives of the events surfaced. It became apparent that a more nuanced approach was necessary to make sense of the violence.
Images from the previous day and in the hours leading up to the football match suggested that fans of Maccabi Tel Aviv may have indeed played an incendiary role in the tension. Videos depict Maccabi fans engaging in anti-Arab chants calling for ‘death to Arabs’, while other footage showed Maccabi fans tearing down and even burning Palestinian flags hanging from building windows.
One video which purportedly showed Israeli fans being violently chased was quickly shared by Reuters and picked up by BBC, The Wall Street Journal and The New York Times and reinforced the narrative of a ‘jew hunt’. Dutch photographer Annet de Graaf later claimed ownership of the video, clarifying that the footage in fact depicted Maccabi Tel Aviv supporters attacking locals near Amsterdam Central Station.
In a viral post on X, de Graaf reminded media outlets of their responsibility for accurate reporting, and to strive for finding the truth, rather than “making money on a twist of the script”. Her clarification prompted various reputable outlets like the Tagesschau, Deutsche Welle, The New York Times or the Belgian broadcaster RTL to issue corrections on websites and on social media.
Overall, news reporting took an increasingly multi-dimensional path as more information became available. Various media outlets adjusted their narrative, reflecting a more nuanced approach that was more sensitive to the complicated geopolitical context. Political figures like
Amsterdam mayor Femke Halsema also added more context to their initial interpretations, concluding that the events were “a toxic cocktail of antisemitism, football hooliganism and anger over the war in Palestine and Israel and other parts of the Middle East”.
Media self-reflection for accurate, balanced, and inclusive journalism
Despite widespread criticism of media coverage – reporting has been labelled ‘skewed’ and ‘one-sided’ – several media outlets can be highlighted for good practices. De Volkskrant, part of the same media group that owns Trouw, published a collection of at least 13 articles on the events, including a live blog that ran for nearly two weeks. On 12 November, Deutsche Welle conducted a factcheck that shows how many media outlets (mis)represented the violent events.
These events serve as a stark reminder that the ‘victim versus perpetrator’ narrative adopted by the majority of mainstream media outlets fell short of the nuance required for such sensitive topics.
They also underscore the critical importance of responsible journalism, particularly in emotionally charged and politically sensitive contexts. While the initial narratives resonated with historical sensitivities and societal fears, they often oversimplified the events, neglecting the broader complexities revealed by later evidence.
More transparency and reflection, perhaps even public corrections and apologies, must be demanded from media outlets. Accurate, balanced, and inclusive journalism is not only a professional standard but a societal necessity – and one that can help bridge social divides, rather than further driving polarisation.
And as these events have shown, journalists shouldn’t be the only ones responsible. “Just as important is that authorities and politicians refrain from polarising comments and protect all minorities from discrimination,” says the College voor de Rechten van de Mens, the Dutch human rights institute.
