In the immediate aftermath of the deadly shooting at a Jewish gathering near Sydney’s Bondi Beach, social media platform X became a major conduit for misinformation, according to a digital media academic. As authorities worked to piece together the facts of the attack — which killed 15 people and injured dozens more — false claims and inflammatory speculation spread rapidly online, often reaching large audiences before official information could be confirmed.
The online chaos unfolded within hours of the shooting, as users scrambled for updates and explanations. Instead of clarity, many encountered misleading posts that wrongly accused innocent people, inflamed ethnic and religious tensions, and promoted conspiracy theories about the nature of the attack.
Innocent Sydney Man Falsely Named as Shooter
One of the most disturbing examples of misinformation involved Sydney resident Naveed Akram, who said he was subjected to death threats after being incorrectly identified on X as one of the attackers. Mr Akram shares a name with one of the gunmen, a coincidence that led to his photograph and personal information being widely circulated.
Posts falsely naming him included details about his university and other identifying information, leaving him fearful for his safety and that of his family. A Pakistani national living in Australia, Mr Akram later released a video through the Facebook page of the Pakistan consulate in Sydney, urging people to stop spreading the false claims.
“It was a real nightmare for me, seeing photos of my face shared on social media, wrongfully being called the shooter,” he told the ABC.
Shaken by the threats, Mr Akram said friends accompanied him to a police station to report what was happening. However, he said officers told him there was little they could do.
“Friends came with me to the police station to report it, but the police said they couldn’t do anything and told me just to deactivate my accounts,” he said.
Although some posts were taken down after being flagged, others remained visible across X and other platforms.
“I am still shaking. This has put me at risk, and also my family back home in Pakistan [at risk],” he said.
“My mum broke down and feels in danger.”
Fireworks Video Used to Stoke Tensions
The false identification of individuals was not the only misinformation to gain traction. Videos showing fireworks in western Sydney were widely shared and misrepresented as celebrations by “Arabs” or “Islamists” in Bankstown following the shooting.
A local community organisation later confirmed the footage was linked to Christmas festivities, not the attack. While X eventually added community notes to some of the misleading posts and removed a few others, many users continued reposting the video with inflammatory captions.
Other unfounded claims circulating on the platform included assertions that the shooters were former members of the Israel Defense Forces, that they were from Pakistan, that additional attacks were underway in nearby suburbs, or that the shooting was a staged “false flag” operation.
Authorities later clarified that one of the attackers was originally from India, while the other was born in Australia.
Financial Incentives Drive Viral Falsehoods
Dr Timothy Graham, an associate professor of Digital Media at Queensland University of Technology, said X continues to play a central role in the early spread of false narratives that later ripple across the broader media landscape.
He said misleading posts ranged from genuine misunderstandings to deliberate deception, but many were driven by the same underlying incentive.
“The biggest takeaway for me really is that the platforms, X in particular, really incentivise this through their design features … unfortunately, this both propels and rewards [misleading content],” Dr Graham said.
He pointed to X’s Creator Revenue Sharing program, which allows users to earn money based on engagement such as likes and replies. According to X’s website, “earnings are calculated based on verified engagements with your posts, such as likes and replies.”
Dr Graham said moments of crisis create a perfect environment for exploitation.
“People are incentivised to share content that they know is going to get a lot of clicks irrespective of its quality, irrespective of whether it’s true or factual, simply because they can make money out of it,” he said.
“There’s basically an economy around disinformation now.”
While X’s terms state that content related to tragedy or mass violence may face restricted monetisation, Dr Graham said it remains unclear how consistently those rules are applied.
Community Notes Too Slow for Breaking News
Dr Graham also raised concerns about X’s reliance on its “community notes” system, which allows users to collaboratively add context to potentially misleading posts. Notes only appear when contributors with differing viewpoints agree they are helpful.
While effective in some situations, Dr Graham said the system struggles during fast-moving, emotionally charged events.
“For breaking polarising events, which require agreement between people who have extreme opposing views, the notes end up taking too long or never being added,” he said.
“Meanwhile, they’re racking up the views. They are being reported on. They are being picked up on by [other channels].”
“It’s spreading like wildfire, and you know 10, 12, 24 hours later we still don’t see any context added.”
