As World Cup Kicks Off, Online Campaign Targets Supporters

Fans gathering in Times Square in New York (Getty)

As the 2026 FIFA World Cup gets underway across the United States, Canada, and Mexico, Misbar’s team at Al Araby TV monitored a growing wave of online hostility directed at supporters of participating national teams. The trend emerged alongside the arrival of fans and delegations in host countries and the circulation of posts linking the tournament to immigration, security, and public health concerns.

Analysis showed that the discussion extended beyond isolated criticism of the tournament’s organization. In many cases, it adopted an inflammatory tone, portraying immigrants and supporters arriving from African, Arab, and Muslim-majority countries as security or health threats.

Right-wing American accounts and public figures featured prominently in the conversation, employing terms such as “Ebola,” “terrorism,” and “illegal immigrants” to advance narratives portraying the World Cup as a source of danger coming from abroad. Some users even called for the tournament to be canceled.

The volume of posts, repeated language patterns, and the recurring involvement of suspicious or highly active accounts suggest a significant amplification effort aimed at spreading anti-immigrant and anti-foreigner narratives by exploiting a global sporting event.

Interaction Analysis

An analysis of engagement trends revealed a noticeable increase in hostile rhetoric targeting supporters arriving from outside the United States as the opening of the 2026 World Cup approached and national teams and fans began arriving in host countries.

The surge coincided with several controversial incidents that received widespread attention, including allegations of mistreatment of African teams, measures affecting participants and supporters from Arab and Muslim backgrounds, and reports that Somali referee Omar Abdulkadir Artan—widely regarded as one of Africa’s top referees—was denied entry into the country.

Interaction Analysis

The analysis identified approximately 178,000 posts generated or shared by more than 110,000 accounts. While the scale of engagement alone does not prove the existence of a coordinated campaign, the intensity of posting, repetition of similar talking points, and participation of suspicious or unusually active accounts warrant closer examination of possible organized or semi-organized amplification efforts.

The analysis identified approximately 178,000 posts generated or shared by more than 110,000 accounts.

Among participating accounts, a strong presence of U.S. right-wing profiles was evident. Many used identifiers and symbols associated with populist conservative movements in the United States, including “MAGA,” “America First,” and “Trump Supporter,” alongside American flags and Christian religious imagery. Although not every participant belonged to the same ideological camp, the discussion displayed a clear ideological center of gravity.

Among participating accounts, a strong presence of U.S. right-wing profiles was evident.

English overwhelmingly dominated the conversation, reinforcing the likelihood that the campaign originated primarily from Western—particularly American—online spaces. Geographic data supported this conclusion, with the United States accounting for approximately 64% of identifiable posts, followed by the United Kingdom at 9%, another environment where anti-immigration political movements maintain a significant online presence.

English overwhelmingly dominated the conversation, reinforcing the likelihood that the campaign originated primarily from Western—particularly American—online spaces

Taken together, the findings suggest that the observed discourse was more than a spontaneous reaction to a sporting event. Rather, it reflected an effort to politicize the World Cup by reviving narratives portraying immigrants and Muslims as security, health, and cultural threats.

Dominant Narratives

Analysis of the most frequently used terms revealed a narrative linking immigration, public health, and security concerns. Within this framework, World Cup supporters arriving from outside the United States were portrayed as potential threats.

Frequently used keywords included “Ebola,” “COVID,” and “lethal hemorrhagic strain,” reflecting attempts to connect the tournament with fears of disease outbreaks. Security-related terminology such as “Homeland Security,” “ICE,” “immigration enforcement,” “arrested,” and “entry” also appeared prominently, indicating support for stricter border controls, airport screening measures, and restrictions on incoming visitors.

Other recurring phrases—including “Pedophile Illegal Aliens,” “terrorism deaths,” “terrorist attacks,” and “World Cup Massacre”—illustrated a more overtly inflammatory narrative linking immigrants to crime and terrorism. While these expressions alone do not prove coordination, they demonstrate that parts of the conversation moved beyond criticism of tournament logistics and into rhetoric that criminalized immigrants and portrayed them as societal threats.

This pattern reflects broader attempts to leverage a global sporting event to reinforce anti-immigration narratives commonly associated with far-right political movements, transforming the World Cup from a celebration of sport into a platform for fears about foreign visitors, particularly those arriving from the Global South.

This pattern reflects broader attempts to leverage a global sporting event to reinforce anti-immigration narratives

Accounts Driving the Anti-Fan Narrative

The analysis identified several influential accounts that contributed significantly to anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim narratives surrounding the 2026 World Cup.

Among them was Laura Loomer, a prominent voice within the American right, who called for the cancellation of the tournament and claimed it could contribute to the spread of Ebola through arriving supporters.

Also active in the discussion was Shawn Farash, whose posts employed inflammatory language toward the tournament and its supporters and similarly advocated canceling the event.

Tomi Lahren participated in the debate through a response to New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, criticizing immigration policies and linking the tournament to security concerns within the United States.

The account Wall Street Apes also circulated a video interview containing anti-Muslim claims alleging plans for attacks during the World Cup, a clip that achieved significant visibility within the monitored dataset.

Likewise, Mahyar Tousi called for the Iranian national team to be barred from entering the United States, framing the proposal as a measure to protect American security from what he described as terrorist threats.

Meanwhile, the anonymous account “ernaldo.bonitto” criticized the tournament and claimed it would bring homelessness and migrants from “third-world countries,” echoing stereotypical narratives directed at visitors from the Global South.

Beyond these high-profile participants, the analysis identified more than 26,000 accounts classified as suspicious or highly suspect based on indicators such as posting frequency, behavioral similarities, repeated messaging patterns, and intensive participation in amplifying the same narratives.

While these indicators alone do not conclusively demonstrate the existence of coordinated troll farms or organized influence operations, they strengthen the hypothesis of non-organic or semi-organized amplification of rhetoric targeting supporters of participating teams, particularly through repeated associations between the World Cup, immigration, terrorism, disease outbreaks, and law enforcement.

While these indicators alone do not conclusively demonstrate the existence of coordinated troll farms or organized influence operations,