A response from Antony Antoniou (Northampton North)

Key facts (summary)

• I have never posted anything antisemitic.
• Sky News published: “Reform candidates accused of ‘antisemitic’ posts” on 29 June 2024: Sky News.
• Allegations of this nature require high-quality proof of authorship (e.g., direct URLs, post IDs, platform provenance), not unauthenticated images or assertions.
• Screenshots are not reliable proof: it is easy to alter what a webpage displays locally using standard browser developer tools and then screenshot the result.
• I have a long public record of writing about the legality of the State of Israel and expressing support for Israel on my website.
• Publication of these allegations caused significant distress and created safety concerns due to hostility and threats that followed.

On 29 June 2024, Sky News published an article titled “Reform candidates accused of ‘antisemitic’ posts” by Ben Bloch: Sky News. The article attributes to me a series of alleged posts on X (formerly Twitter) and presents them as evidence that I “shared material” deemed antisemitic.

I am publishing this statement to put the record straight.

1) I have never posted antisemitic content

I am unequivocal: I have never posted anything antisemitic. I reject antisemitism completely.

I have also published numerous articles on my website over many years discussing the legality of the State of Israel and expressing support for Israel. That public record is inconsistent with the suggestion that I hold antisemitic views.

2) The central problem: Sky News did not prove authorship

Sky News’ article states that a dossier was compiled by the Campaign Against Antisemitism and “verified by Sky News”. It also claims the X account in question “is being used today as his account representing his candidacy”.

Even if an account displays my name or is presented as associated with me, that does not establish that:

• I personally authored the posts,
• the posts were created on a genuine account under my control at the relevant time, or
• the material was not fabricated, manipulated, or misattributed.

This distinction matters. Allegations of antisemitism are exceptionally serious and can foreseeably put someone at risk. The standard for attribution must therefore be correspondingly high.

3) Screenshots are not proof — and manipulation is trivial

A key issue in stories like this is the misuse of screenshots as if they are definitive evidence. They are not.

It is widely understood (and easy to demonstrate) that anyone can alter what appears on a webpage locally using standard browser tools (for example, “Inspect / Developer Tools” in Chrome, Edge, Firefox, etc.). With a few edits to the page text on their own screen, a person can make a post appear to say something it never said, then take a screenshot that looks “real”.

That kind of manipulation:

• does not require hacking,
• does not require specialist expertise,
• leaves no trace visible within the screenshot itself.

Because of this, any responsible publisher should treat screenshots as inherently insufficient on their own, and should instead rely on verifiable data such as:

• direct post URLs,
• immutable post IDs,
• archived captures showing the full URL and context,
• platform-provided account identifiers and provenance,
• or other primary-source evidence that demonstrates authorship and authenticity.

4) Account creation date discrepancy and impersonation risk

After the article was published, I noticed a further red flag: the X account used in connection with these allegations had a different account creation date to my own account.

That matters because a mismatch can indicate that:

• an account has been misidentified,
• an impersonator account existed,
• content has been attributed to the wrong account,
• or material has been curated to create a misleading impression.

If Sky News had robustly verified the account identity and provenance, this kind of discrepancy should have been a central issue—not an afterthought discovered by the subject of the story.

5) Sky News acknowledges I added no endorsement — yet still convicted me by implication

Sky News’ article itself states:

“Although Antoniou shared all of this content on his X account, he did not add any commentary endorsing it.”

That is an important admission. Yet the story’s framing still presents me as having “shared material” in a way that suggests agreement, motivation, and personal belief—despite the absence of any endorsement text and despite the obvious risks of misattribution in online content.

At minimum, that framing is irresponsible. At worst, it is defamatory by implication.

6) The harm caused was real and foreseeable

The publication of these allegations caused me personal distress and put my safety at risk. Following the story, I experienced hostility and threats. That outcome is predictable when a national outlet publishes inflammatory allegations about a political candidate days before a general election.

This is exactly why verification and fairness are not optional.

7) What I asked for — and what I did not receive

I raised formal concerns, including via the ICO process. Sky News’ response (as I experienced it) did not provide meaningful disclosure of how they concluded the material was genuinely posted by me, nor did it provide the underlying verification steps that would be necessary to assess whether this reporting met basic standards of accuracy.

Simply restating publication copies is not the same as substantiating the claim.

8) What Sky News should do now

Given the seriousness of the allegations, the timing, and the inadequacy of screenshot-style “evidence” for proving authorship, I am calling on Sky News to:

1. Publish a clear correction/clarification addressing the attribution failures and the account-identity issues.
2. Issue an apology for publishing allegations that they did not properly evidence as being authored by me.
3. Disclose (to me and/or publicly) the verification basis they relied upon—e.g., whether they had post URLs, post IDs, account identifiers, platform confirmation, or any other primary-source proof of authorship.

If Sky News cannot demonstrate that these posts were genuinely authored by me on an account verifiably controlled by me at the relevant times, then the ethical course is to correct the record promptly and prominently.

9) A note to readers

If you have encountered screenshots circulating online, please treat them with caution. In 2024, it is trivial to manufacture a convincing screenshot. The question is not “does it look real?” but “can it be independently verified using primary-source evidence?”

I will continue to publish openly about my political positions and my longstanding support for Israel, and I will not allow false and dangerous allegations to stand unchallenged.

Antony Antoniou
Reform UK candidate (2024), Northampton North