The organisation, which collaborates with platforms such as Meta (Facebook, Instagram and Threads), TikTok and YouTube, said its monitoring teams observed a rapid spread of antisemitic narratives across several platforms, particularly on X.

Tracking content in English, Arabic and Farsi, CyberWell reported that several hostile narratives resurfaced shortly after the conflict began.

These included posts glorifying violence against Jews, celebrating attacks on Israeli civilians and amplifying conspiracy theories targeting Jewish communities.

According to CyberWell, some of the same hashtags, chants and digital content previously flagged during the Israel–IRGC conflict in June 2025 have re-emerged online.

Among them is the chant “Khaybar, Khaybar, ya Yahud,” which references the 7th-century Battle of Khaybar and is widely used as a call for violence against Jews. A variation of the chant targeting Zionists also began circulating again.

The nonprofit also identified renewed circulation of an AI-generated song titled “Boom Boom Tel Aviv,” including new versions celebrating missile strikes.

Other narratives included the conspiracy theory known as “ZOG” (Zionist Occupied Government), which falsely claims that Israel controls the U.S. government, as well as dehumanising language targeting Jews and Israelis.

Holocaust-justification rhetoric also appeared to spike during the escalation. CyberWell recorded a significant increase in posts using the phrase “Hitler was right,” a slogan widely condemned as explicit Holocaust glorification.

“In moments of geopolitical escalation, we consistently see antisemitism surge online,” said CyberWell founder and CEO Tal-Or Cohen Montemayor.

She noted that many of the same narratives flagged during the June 2025 conflict resurfaced again following the latest escalation.

“Our concern about the spread of these trends online is tied to the heightened security alerts Jewish communities around the world are experiencing,” she said. “Antisemitism is a global problem, and the amplification of Jew-hatred online plays a major role in that.”

CyberWell’s preliminary data shows a dramatic spike in posts containing the chant referencing Khaybar. In the six months before the war, the phrase appeared in roughly 53 posts per day.

Since Feb. 28, that figure has surged to about 950 posts daily, an increase of more than 1,700% with a peak of 1,461 posts on the first day of the conflict.

Holocaust-justification rhetoric followed a similar pattern. Posts containing the phrase “Hitler was right” averaged around 1,355 per day during the six months prior to the war.

On the day the conflict began, the number rose to 2,245 posts and climbed to a peak of 5,467 posts on March 1, a 304% increase from the previous baseline.

Arabic-language variations of the phrase also increased, jumping from an average of about two posts per day to 71 posts on the first day of the conflict.

CyberWell said that while some social media platforms appeared to activate emergency moderation measures during the escalation, responses varied widely across the digital ecosystem.

The organisation noted that antisemitic hashtags and narratives were most consistently visible on X during the crisis. In one example cited by the group, the phrase “Hitler was right” remained searchable and visible as a hashtag on the platform.

“According to X’s own policies, there is no reason why a phrase explicitly celebrating the Holocaust should remain easily searchable or widely circulated,” Cohen Montemayor said.

She added that the company’s stated principle of “freedom of speech, not freedom of reach” should prevent such content from being amplified, particularly during periods of heightened geopolitical tension.

“Responding to fast-moving spikes in online antisemitism during geopolitical crises requires more than reactive moderation,” she said.

“Platforms must strengthen automated detection systems, invest in regionally knowledgeable human moderators, review training data and maintain structured collaboration with expert civil society partners.”

CyberWell is an independent technology-driven nonprofit focused on combating the spread of antisemitism online.

Its AI-powered systems monitor social media platforms in English and Arabic for posts promoting antisemitism, Holocaust denial or violence against Jews, based on the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s working definition of antisemitism.

The organisation’s analysts review and report such content to platform moderators while cataloguing verified posts in an open database designed to track antisemitic content on social media.

Through partnerships, research and real-time alerts, CyberWell works with social media companies and digital service providers to help them enforce platform policies and respond more quickly to online hate speech.

The alliance of women’s rights groups, parent advocates and political organisations are accusing the Elon Musk-owned services of breaching app store regulations and exposing women and children to abuse. 

In the open letters released on Wednesday, the campaigners say the apps are being used to generate illegal and degrading material at scale.

At the centre of the campaign are groups including UltraViolet, the National Organisation for Women, MoveOn and ParentsTogether Action. They argue that the continued availability of X and Grok on app stores gives legitimacy to tools that are being misused to create sexualised images without consent.

“We are really imploring Apple and Google to take this extremely seriously,” Jenna Sherman, UltraViolet’s campaign director, said ahead of the letters’ publication. “They are enabling a system in which thousands, if not tens of thousands, of people, particularly women and children, are being sexually abused through the help of their own app stores.”

The issue got worse after X was flooded around the new year with highly realistic images of women and minors, many of them sexualised. While X later adjusted Grok so that images it creates or edits are not automatically shared publicly, tests carried out this week showed the chatbot could still generate bikini-clad versions of people’s photos on request.

Outside the United States, regulators from Malaysia and Indonesia became the first countries to ban Grok in January 2026 due to the creation of sexually explicit and non-consensual images. 

In Europe, the Commission has ordered X to preserve Grok-related records until the end of 2026 as part of an investigation under the Digital Services Act. Authorities in the UK and several other countries have also demanded explanations over how the tool is being used.

Whereas, in Washington, three Democratic senators have written to Apple and Google, urging them to remove X and Grok from their app stores and warning of the risks they project on women and children if the apps remain available.

Some organisations are no longer waiting for regulators or tech firms to decide. This week, the American Federation of Teachers announced it was leaving X, calling Grok’s Al-generated child images “the last straw.” For campaigners, that decision is being held up as proof that the issue has crossed a line.

Responses from the companies involved have been limited. X did not reply to requests for comment. Its parent company, xAI, responded to criticism with the words, “Legacy Media Lies.” Apple and Google have also declined to comment publicly, despite repeated requests.

Sherman said the moment is a test of credibility for the app store operators. While both companies usually stress their commitment to child safety, she argued that their handling of X and Grok would show “what their values actually are in practice.”

From Friday, only paid users on X can generate or edit images using the chatbot, according to responses sent by Grok to users. 

The limitation applies only to X. The separate Grok app will still allow image creation without a subscription at the time of writing.

This follows regulatory attention over the use of the feature on the platform. Images produced with the tool spread fast on X, prompting reactions from European authorities and questions about safeguards on large platforms. 

German media minister Wolfram Weimer called the trend the “industrialisation of sexual harassment”. The European Commission said the images circulating on X were unlawful, while Britain’s data regulator said it had asked the company to explain how it was complying with data protection laws.

The image-generation restriction was easy to spot, as the bot replied that the function was available only to paying subscribers when users attempted to generate or edit images with Grok on X. The same requests made through the Grok app were still accepted.

xAI, the company behind Grok, did not provide a detailed response. An automated reply to a Reuters enquiry stated: “Legacy Media Lies”. X did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Elon Musk said last week that anyone using Grok to create illegal content would face the same consequences as uploading such material directly.

The company says it is working to quickly close those gaps, calling the content illegal and unacceptable.

Users have shared screenshots showing Grok’s public media feed populated with altered images. In several cases, people uploaded photos and asked the chatbot to modify them. The results, according to Grok, crossed a legal and ethical line.

“There are isolated cases where users prompted for and received AI images depicting minors in minimal clothing,” Grok said in a public post. “xAI has safeguards, but improvements are ongoing to block such requests entirely.”

The chatbot went further, acknowledging internal failures. “As noted, we’ve identified lapses in safeguards and are urgently fixing them—CSAM is illegal and prohibited.” Grok did not explain how long the issue lasted or how many users were affected.

In another exchange on X, the chatbot tried to put the incident in context, arguing that most harmful outputs can be stopped before they appear. It added that “no system is 100% foolproof”, while saying xAI is strengthening its filters and reviewing reports from users.

Regulators in both the United States and Europe are warning that generative tools can be misused to create child sexual abuse material, even when no real child is involved. 

Under the EU’s AI Act and existing child protection laws, companies are expected to prevent such content outright, making any failure a potential legal risk.

Advocacy groups have also argued that AI-generated abuse material, though synthetic, can still encourage harmful behaviour and demand. From that perspective, the Grok incident exposes how fragile current safety systems can be when faced with determined users.

Grok is xAI’s flagship product and is tightly integrated into X, formerly Twitter. It is marketed as a challenger to OpenAI’s ChatGPT and Google’s Gemini, with an emphasis on humour and a rebellious tone. 

Reports say that same positioning may complicate efforts to enforce strict safety boundaries, especially on a platform already criticised for weak moderation.

On public reactions, images attributed to Grok spread quickly on X, prompting a new case of Elon Musk’s approach to content control. When Reuters contacted xAI for comment, the company responded with a short message: “Legacy Media Lies”.

That reply has only added to the issue about transparency and responsibility in the AI sector. Warnings about trust in chatbots being eroded if companies appear dismissive when serious safety concerns emerge, have been released, particularly where child protection is involved.

For now, xAI says fixes on the safety of Grok are underway.

Selected developers will receive a $500 voucher to build with the X API and gain early access to a revamped Developer Console, which aims for a more flexible and transparent experience. “We are expanding a closed beta to both new & power users who want to ship amazing apps on X,” the platform’s developer account posted.

The new model breaks away from X’s previous flat-rate structure by introducing granular pricing for various request types, including reading posts, sending direct messages, accessing trends, and pulling bookmarks. 

A built-in calculator now allows developers to estimate costs based on projected usage, a move the company says will help teams manage their spending with greater precision.

Unlike the old tiered system, which offered Basic ($200 per month), Pro ($5,000 per month), and Enterprise ($42,000 per month) plans, the pay-per-use framework is designed for a wider spectrum of developers, from startups to large-scale enterprises.

Many in the community had previously criticised the old model for being unaffordable and inflexible, particularly after X ended free API access in 2023.

That decision led to the shutdown of several popular third-party apps such as Tweetbot and Twitterrific, further affecting relations between X and its developer base. In a bid to ease some of that tension, the company later introduced top-up packs for developers who exceeded their usage limits.

Now, with this usage-based system, X appears keen to reposition itself as a platform that supports innovation rather than restricts it. Developers selected for the beta will be among the first to test the updated tools and pricing structure before a wider rollout.

Analysts say the pay-per-use API beta could help revive developer engagement on the platform, allowing X to compete more effectively with companies like Reddit, Discord, and Mastodon, all of which offer comparatively accessible API frameworks.