# Israel-Hamas War on X: A Case Study of Coordinated Campaigns and Information Integrity

**Authors:** Tuğrulcan Elmas, Filipi Nascimento Silva, Manita Pote, Priyanka Dey, Keng-Chi Chang, Jinyi Ye, Luca Luceri, Cody Buntain, Emilio Ferrara, Alessandro Flammini, Fil Menczer  
**arXiv:** [2604.10566](https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.10566)  
**Date:** 2026-04-12  
**Summary page:** https://www.summarizepaper.com/en/paper/2604.10566v1/

## Key points

- Study titled "Israel-Hamas War on X" by multiple authors delves into coordinated campaigns on social media during crises
- Analyzed 4.5 million tweets to identify 11 coordinated groups with 541 accounts
- Coordinated efforts mainly use low-complexity strategies like retweet amplification and copy-paste diffusion
- Different groups focus on distinct narratives such as advocacy work, religious solidarity, or humanitarian mobilization
- Claim-level integrity indicators like toxicity levels and emotional signals do not show significant correlations
- Researchers propose targeted moderation interventions focusing on the most prolific spreaders within identified coordinated groups
- Emphasizes evaluating coordination structures and specific content footprints for effective moderation interventions against misinformation during crises

## Summary

In their study titled "Israel-Hamas War on X: A Case Study of Coordinated Campaigns and Information Integrity," authors Tuğrulcan Elmas, Filipi Nascimento Silva, Manita Pote, Priyanka Dey, Keng-Chi Chang, Jinyi Ye, Luca Luceri, Cody Buntain, Emilio Ferrara, Alessandro Flammini, and Fil Menczer delve into the critical role that coordinated campaigns on social media play in shaping crisis information environments. Focusing specifically on the 2023 Israel-Hamas War on Twitter (X), the researchers analyze a vast dataset of 4.5 million tweets to identify 11 coordinated groups comprising 541 accounts. Through a comprehensive multimodal analysis encompassing topics, account amplification, toxicity levels, emotional tone, visual themes, and misleading claims within these coordinated groups. The study sheds light on the tactics employed by such campaigns. The findings reveal that these coordinated efforts predominantly utilize low-complexity strategies like retweet amplification and copy-paste diffusion to disseminate information. Moreover,the study highlights that these campaigns promote distinct narratives aligned with a fragmented manipulation landscape devoid of centralized control. Notably,the research underscores that while widely amplified misleading claims are concentrated within three specific coordinated groups identified in the study; other groups primarily focus on advocacy work,reli gious solidarity initiatives or humanitarian mobilization efforts. Importantly,the analysis demonstrates that claim-level integrity indicators such as toxicity levels and emotional signals do not exhibit significant correlations with each other.This suggests that no single behavioral signal can serve as a reliable proxy for others. The researchers propose targeted moderation interventions aimed at curbing the spread of misleading content by focusing on addressing the most prolific spreaders within identified coordinated groups.However they caution against targeting prolific amplifiers indiscriminately as it may not yield similar mitigation effects. The study emphasizes the need for evaluating coordination structures alongside specific content footprints to effectively prioritize moderation interventions in combating misinformation and maintaining information integrity during crises like conflicts.