Far-right conspiracy theories about Vondelkerk fire rampant on social media
Far-right conspiracy theories and misinformation about the Vondelkerk fire are being widely shared on social media, NOS reports based on research by the Justice for Prosperity Foundation. These claim that the fire was caused by an attack by “jihadists,” “Muslim terrorists,” and even the “left-wing elite.” The police and fire brigade are still investigating the fire in the Amsterdam church.
According to Jelle Postma, a former officer at the intelligence service AIVD and the director of Justice for Prosperity, these posts are part of a deliberate disinformation campaign. On January 1 and 2, 20 percent of all posts on X about the Vondelkerk linked the fire to Muslims. Similar stories also started circulating on other social media platforms.
“Within minutes of news of the fire, we saw the first false claims appear. Initially, they were mainly suggestions. It was then presented more as a question: ‘Could it be Muslims?” Postma said. After just an hour, the question changed to claims that it was an attack, without any evidence.
That same night, far-right influencers like Eva Vlaardingerbroek and the British Tommy Robinson pick up the posts. From that moment on, the misinformation spread rapidly. “A snowball really turned into an avalanche here,” Postma said. The message was consistently that the church fire was an attack on Christians, and that Muslims and a “left-wing elite” were behind it.
According to Postma, this was one of the first times in the Netherlands that right-wing misinformation so explicitly linked jihadism and the political left.
The Vondelkerk fire is not an isolated case when it comes to misinformation campaigns, Claes de Vreese, a professor of political communication at the University of Amsterdam, told the broadcaster. “You see anonymous accounts making suggestions about a local event. These aren’t necessarily concerned citizens.” Often, these suggestions just fade away, but sometimes they’re picked up. “It’s then used to capitalize on anger and rage: it’s called ragebait,” De Vreese said. “These kinds of influencers have a political and commercial interest in doing this.”
According to Postma, it is difficult to quantify exactly how much of an influence these campaigns have. “But you see that it has an impact on various levels. From a young Muslim being confronted on a football field about an incident, to right-wing parties adopting certain rhetoric.”
And what makes things even more complicated is that these kinds of claims are almost impossible to debunk. In the case of the Vondelkerk, it could take months for the investigation into the cause of the fire to be completed. And if the authorities come to a conclusion that doesn’t match the misinformation spreaders’ opinion, they could always create more uproar by claiming a cover-up.
According to Postma, more research needs to be conducted into the people and networks that deliberately spread disinformation. “You can moderate content, but if there’s an incentive to spread disinformation, it will continue to happen,” he said. “The defense is often that this is freedom of speech, but the fact is that it also undermines democracy.”
“Sometimes you have to protect democracy for itself. It would be good if there were a political discussion about this,” Postma said.
