Which public figures and media organizations publicly condemned or defended Candace Owens’ comments on Jews and antisemitism, and what reasons did they give?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Candace Owens’s remarks about Jews and antisemitism provoked a mix of condemnation and defense across political and media spheres: conservative Jewish commentators such as Ben Shapiro publicly rebuked her as “disgraceful,” mainstream Jewish watchdogs including the Anti-Defamation League and StopAntisemitism condemned her rhetoric as antisemitic and harmful, while some right‑wing outlets and personalities defended her as speaking truth or as being unfairly targeted; these responses hinge on competing readings of whether her comments are legitimate critique of Israel or classic antisemitic tropes .
1. Conservative Jewish figures who condemned her publicly
Ben Shapiro led the high‑profile conservative backlash, calling Owens’s behavior “disgraceful” during a college event and engaging in a public social‑media feud that culminated in calls for her to leave platforms linked to him, illustrating a rift on the right over Israel and antisemitism .
2. Jewish organizations and watchdogs: formal condemnations and warnings
The Anti‑Defamation League publicly criticized Owens, pointing to remarks that mirror antisemitic stereotypes and warning after footage showed praise for Owens from extremist figures like Nick Fuentes, while StopAntisemitism named her “Antisemite of the Year,” signaling institutional rejection of her recent rhetoric .
3. Mainstream media and opinion outlets that denounced her
Analysts and opinion writers at outlets including the American Enterprise Institute, Rolling Stone and The Guardian framed Owens’s comments as antisemitic or dangerously conspiratorial, cataloguing her comparisons of Jews to Marxists, her Holocaust‑adjacent rhetoric, and her defense of other known antisemites as evidence that her commentary crossed a civic line [1].
4. Right‑wing defenders and sympathetic media
Some conservative media and personalities have defended Owens by arguing she is being silenced or that criticism is politically motivated; Owens herself dismissed the label of “antisemitic” in a video and accused pro‑Israel organizations of diluting the definition of antisemitism, a line echoed by outlets and commentators who view debates over Israel as legitimate political critique rather than bigotry .
5. Institutional and governmental reactions: deplatforming and bans
Consequences followed the uproar: The Daily Wire severed ties with Owens amid tensions over her Israel commentary, and governments such as Australia cited past remarks when denying her entry—actions used by critics as evidence institutions found her rhetoric unacceptable and by defenders as proof of censorship .
6. The reasoning behind condemnations and defenses
Critics point to recurring themes—accusations of Jewish control, blood‑libel echoes, praising or defending other antisemites, and using Holocaust or genocide language irresponsibly—to argue her comments are part of a pattern of antisemitic tropes with tangible risks [1]. Defenders counter that Owens targets “Zionists” or Israeli policy and that labeling such critique antisemitic is a tactic to silence dissent; Owens herself framed some criticism as politically motivated or inconsistent .
7. Conflicts of interest, agendas and contested boundaries
The debate exposes competing agendas: Jewish watchdogs and some journalists prioritize policing antisemitic tropes and protecting Jewish safety, conservative allies prioritize free‑speech and intra‑right coalition cohesion, and far‑right figures who praise Owens reveal how her rhetoric can be co‑opted by extremists—an alignment that complicates claims she is merely engaging in policy critique .
Conclusion and limits of this account
The public record in the cited reporting shows a clear split: prominent Jewish conservatives and civil‑society groups condemned Owens for trafficking in antisemitic tropes while parts of the right defended her as a political provocateur; reporting documents actions such as her Daily Wire departure and organizational condemnations but does not settle every disputed claim about her intent, which remains contested between Owens and her critics .