Great article and a very useful resource. The key point is that hate crimes against Jews are classified by the police as religious hate crimes, while those against Muslims are split between two categories, religious- and race-based hate crimes, with the great majority of cases in the latter.
Its doubtful if those attacking (presumed) Muslims verbally or physically separate out their motivations. But what is clear is that Jews per capita experience an order of magnitude less attacks.
The spin machine claiming otherwise is of course part of the campaign that also tries to undercut criticism of Israel by claiming it is motivated by antisemitism. Jews are to be understood as victims.

Thank you for this informative review. There currently an effort across the media to present the idea of Jews under siege from antisemitic violence. The lack of concern for groups which suffer a higher per capita level of hate crimes reveals the political motivations behind the exaggerated reporting. This article will help us all to respond to that on the basis of the facts.

This a very welcome article but does seem to have to this topic a bit late. After the 2014 bombing of Gaza – 551 children killed along with 2000+ adults – I did a media representation case study of the story of a Jewish lad badly hurt in a gang in Manchester. Originally reported as ‘drug related’ by The JC, it was taken down and re-spun as an anti-Semitic attack across the media for many months despite the Police, DPP, and Judge saying otherwise. There were similar listed cases around this time. See Arena ‘Anti-Semitism Moral Panics’. https://arena.org.au/anti-semitism-moral-panics-by-gavin-lewis/
Frequently too by comparison Black victim experiences are frequently labelled merely ‘alleged racism’ – if at all. Whereas anti-Semitism allegations seems to require little corroboration. There is also the issue of like-for-like standards. BBC online recently reported “Jewish man ‘kicked like animal'”. Leaving aside the tabloid imagery of kicking animals as a British norm, actually he was an Israeli. Would anyone have reported the religion of a white South African or Rhodesian hurt in a revenge attack – and those colonial projects had armed revolutionary resistance movements.

Btw it is also worth mentioning the comparative ease with which so-called anti-Semitism dossiers are presented as establishment credible and authentically newsworthy. From memory, it might have been Saul Staniforth that critiqued one of these as ‘padded’. But the real issue is that if you’re from an oppressed group – particularly of people of colour – you’re not likely to be going to the authorities, Police who shoot-to-kill, beat, disproportionately stop and imprison you, the Education authorities who strip-search your children, or the Health Managers who marginalise your complaints and treatment. Parts of the media are even suggesting Housing authorities should be privileging indigenous Britons? By comparison look at the massive advantage in access, networking, lobbying and uncritical acceptance of claimed anti-Semitism grievances of Israel’s lobby. And significantly these advantages are hardly ever equivalently enjoyed even by non-Zionist or anti-Zionist Jews.

I think the headline is unfortunate because it makes this careful analysis seem biased and denialist. It’s therefore hard for me to use the findings, even though I believe them entirely and can see the facts on the ground every day where I live.