Missing Chapter

Books by Jewish, Israeli and openly Zionist authors, as well as books with Jewish, Israeli or Zionist characters and themes, appear to be facing increased barriers at the acquisition stage. Because these decisions happen privately, through agent submissions, editorial meetings and acquisitions, they are difficult to document. No single rejection can usually be proven to have resulted from bias, political risk aversion or anti-Israel sentiment.

But the opacity of the process should not be mistaken for an absence of evidence. Across interviews, public reporting and industry testimony, authors and agents have described a recurring pattern: manuscripts dealing with Jewish identity, antisemitism, Israel, Zionism or the aftermath of October 7, 2023 are increasingly treated as commercially risky or politically fraught for the current market. Even nonpolitical Jewish or Israeli subject matter may be perceived as controversial because of its association with Israel or Zionism.

In March 2024, The Jewish Chronicle reported that an anonymous literary agent had said there was “no point” submitting some Jewish authors or Jewish subjects to commissioning editors because editors were simply “not interested.” The same report quoted writer Gillian Freedman, whose book Jews Milk Goats was reportedly removed from a website mention because, according to an email she received, the topics of Jews or Judaism were not “worth the hassle.”

Furthermore, interviews conducted for this report indicate that some Jewish characters, themes and narratives are perceived as more acceptable within the publishing ecosystem than others. Authors described greater receptivity to stories centered on historical antisemitism, particularly the Holocaust, while reporting greater hesitation around works engaging with Israel, Zionism, contemporary antisemitism or post-October 7 Jewish experiences.

This is especially concerning because acquisitions shape the future literary record. If Jewish, Israeli or Zionist stories are filtered out before publication, Jewish perspectives are not merely being criticized in the marketplace of ideas; they are being prevented from reaching that marketplace at all.

This pattern of Jewish authors being discouraged from including Jewish or Israeli topics, themes or characters in their books on the grounds that such content will not sell, is too risky or has no place in the literary field appears to be inconsistent with the broad preferences of the U.S. customer base. In July 2026, we surveyed 951 U.S. adults through the platform Prolific: 84% said they somewhat or strongly agreed that they would buy a book that interested them even if it included Jewish topics or characters, and 73% said the same of books with Israeli topics or characters.

The disconnect is striking. Literary agents are steering Jewish authors away from writing about Jewish and Israeli topics based on an assumption that books with such content are too risky or will not sell. Yet the finding that a strong majority of surveyed U.S. adults said they would buy books that caught their interest even if those books included Jewish or Israeli content sends a clear message to literary agents and publishers:

Publish the books readers want, not the books the loudest activists will tolerate.

In May 2024, a viral Google spreadsheet titled “Is your fav author a Zionist?” made visible an emerging system of author-level blacklisting. The spreadsheet sorted writers into “Pro-Israel/Zionist,” “Pro-Palestinian/Anti-Zionist,” “It’s complicated,” and “Both sides-ing it,” and encouraged readers not to buy or promote authors classified as Zionist. It also advised readers to consider withholding support from authors whose views were “unclear” until more evidence was available.

This pattern has spread across BookTok, Bookstagram, X, BlueSky, Threads, Goodreads and other reader communities, where creators and accounts identify “problematic” authors, circulate lists of Zionist or allegedly Zionist writers and call on readers not to buy, review, recommend or promote their work. These campaigns are not merely expressions of consumer preference. They are attempts by an extreme, loud minority to impose reputational and commercial penalties on authors based on identity, nationality, belief, perceived politics or relationship to Israel.

The St. Martin’s Press boycott illustrates how this pressure can extend from individual authors to publishing houses themselves. The boycott was publicly framed as a response to personal social media posts by a marketing employee, expressing support for Israel in the aftermath of October 7th. Activists called the posts “racist, Islamophobic, and anti-Palestinian,” and influencer networks organized a marketing and promotional boycott of St. Martin’s Press titles, refusing to promote books from the publisher until their demands were addressed. Notably, St. Martin’s Press did not capitulate and instead posted a statement that condemned both antisemitism and Islamophobia.

This dynamic changes the risk calculus for editors and publishers. Acquiring a book by a Jewish, Israeli or openly Zionist author may now be perceived not only as an editorial or commercial decision, but as a potential flashpoint for organized backlash against the author, the imprint or the publishing house. Although such campaigns are likely often driven by a relatively small but highly organized and vocal minority, their visibility and ability to mobilize online can make them appear more representative than they are, amplifying their influence on institutional decision-making. As a result, manuscripts with literary and commercial merit can be treated as reputational liabilities if the author’s identity, nationality, affiliations, social media history or real or perceived relationship to Israel fails political tests.

Boycotts targeting Israeli publishing have moved from general cultural boycott rhetoric into concrete pressure on translation rights, publishers, literary agencies, literary festivals, publications and international book fairs. A major pre-October 7 precedent was Sally Rooney’s 2021 refusal to sell Hebrew translation rights for Beautiful World, Where Are You to Modan, the Israeli publisher that had previously published her work in Hebrew, unless the publisher complied with BDS guidelines. Rooney elected to publish her next book, Intermezzo, with a different publisher, suggesting that Modan did not capitulate to Rooney.

Since October 7, 2023, this pressure has expanded into broader publishing industry campaigns. In October 2024, a PalFest-led letter signed by more than 1,000 writers and publishing professionals, including Sally Rooney, Arundhati Roy, Rachel Kushner, Percival Everett, Jhumpa Lahiri and others, called for refusing cooperation with Israeli publishers, festivals, literary agencies and publications deemed complicit in or insufficiently opposed to, Israel’s actions. Publishers for Palestine later stated that more than 7,000 authors and book workers had joined the boycott campaign.

These campaigns isolate Israeli literary life from the rest of the literary world by essentially requiring Israeli publishers and cultural institutions to pass political tests before authors, translators, agents, festivals or publishers will work with them. The same logic has also been applied to major international publishing infrastructure: in 2025, Publishers for Palestine called for an industry-wide boycott of the Frankfurt Book Fair, the world’s largest publishing trade fair, over its perceived ties to Israel and Germany’s support for Israel. Rather than give in, the head of the book fair issued a statement in support of Israel that condemned Hamas.

This trend risks cutting Israeli authors, editors, translators, publishers and readers off from the global literary ecosystem. It also pressures non-Israeli publishers and authors to avoid Israeli partnerships, Hebrew translation deals, Israeli literary festivals and professional relationships with Israeli cultural institutions. As a result, Israeli books and voices may be excluded not because of the content of the work, but because of nationality, institutional affiliation or refusal to adopt a required political position.

Literary events have become another venue for the exclusion of Jewish, Israeli and openly Zionist authors. Since October 7, 2023, authors and speakers perceived as Zionist have faced cancellations, withdrawals by fellow panelists, protests and disruption of public programs. These incidents affect not only the authors’ ability to speak, but also their access to the promotional ecosystem that helps books reach readers. While such campaigns may be driven by a relatively small but highly vocal and organized minority, their visibility and capacity to generate reputational pressure have often proved sufficient to influence event organizers and participating institutions.

One prominent example occurred at the 2024 Albany Book Festival, where Jewish author Elisa Albert was scheduled to moderate a panel titled “Girls, Coming of Age.” The event was canceled after two panelists objected to appearing with Albert because they reportedly did not want to share a stage with a “Zionist.” Albert had been publicly vocal about Israel and antisemitism after October 7, 2023. The incident illustrates how the label “Zionist” can be used to make Jewish authors unacceptable participants in mainstream literary programming.

A similar dynamic appeared in Brooklyn in August 2024, when Powerhouse Arena canceled a launch event for Joshua Leifer’s Tablets Shattered, a book critical of Israel and American Jewish institutional life. The event was not canceled because of Leifer’s book, but because he was scheduled to be interviewed by Rabbi Andy Bachman, a progressive Zionist. According to reporting in the Forward, a store employee said Bachman was not welcome onstage because he was a Zionist. The store owner later apologized and said the employee had acted without authorization and was no longer employed there.

In July 2026, Alyssa Rosenheck’s launch event for her book White. Blonde. Jew.: A Call to End Extremism, Speak Up, and Reclaim Center was canceled by a Nashville bookstore. Subsequently, the bookstore owner made a statement on Instagram which cited security concerns as the reason behind the cancellation. However, Rosenheck indicated that she had hired her own private security. Not calling out the individuals who oppose the inclusion of Jewish authors in bookstores and who targeted the event sends a deeply problematic message. It signals that the issue is the Jewish authors themselves, rather than those responsible for the targeting.

Even when events proceed, Jewish or Zionist participants may face disruption. In January 2024, protesters from Writers Against the War on Gaza interrupted a PEN America Los Angeles event featuring Moshe Kasher in conversation with Mayim Bialik. PEN America described the disruption as an attempt to shut down a book event, while Publishers Weekly reported that protesters objected to Bialik’s participation because of her support for Israel.

The consequences extend well beyond the canceled event itself. Bookstores, festivals, universities and literary organizations are part of the infrastructure through which books are introduced to readers, reviewers, librarians, booksellers and the broader literary community. When Jewish, Israeli or Zionist authors are removed from these spaces or when other speakers are discouraged from appearing with them, those authors lose access to visibility that comparable writers may receive as a matter of course.

Jewish, Israeli and Zionist authors have faced targeted review-bombing and online harassment, including coordinated waves of negative ratings or reviews on public book platforms such as Goodreads, often in response to the author’s identity, perceived politics or connection to Israel rather than the content of the book itself. Review-bombing is especially damaging because online ratings shape reader perception, retailer visibility, influencer interest, library and bookstore demand and the overall sense of whether a book is commercially viable. Time has reported that Goodreads is widely viewed within publishing as a key marketing and discovery tool, while also documenting longstanding concerns that the platform is vulnerable to coordinated one-star campaigns, harassment and abuse.

This problem predates October 7, 2023. In 2021, before the publication of Haley Neil’s 2022 YA novel Once More With Chutzpah, about a temple youth trip to Israel, the book’s Goodreads page was flooded with negative comments and ratings. The Jerusalem Post reported that the book received negative Goodreads activity nearly a year before publication, “even though nobody had yet read it”. Since October 7, 2023, review-bombing of Jewish, Israeli and Zionist authors appears to have intensified. In January 2024, The Forward reported that Israeli-born author Talia Carner’s forthcoming novel The Boy With the Star Tattoo received a large number of negative Goodreads ratings and reviews after a TikTok emphasized the book’s Zionist themes and Carner’s activism in support of Israel.

These incidents are not simply examples of harsh criticism. In some cases, the negative ratings appear before publication or before reviewers could plausibly have read the book. Goodreads’ own rules make clear that ratings based on factors irrelevant to book content, ratings by people who have not read the book, and other related forms of problematic user activity are harmful. Yet the platform has long been criticized for allowing ratings and reviews to shape public perception before there is any meaningful way to determine whether users have read the work or are responding to the book itself.

Jewish, Israeli and openly Zionist authors have reported increasing difficulty obtaining or maintaining literary representation since October 7, 2023. Because agent-client relationships are private, this trend is harder to document. Authors may be dropped quietly, discouraged from submitting certain projects, advised to remove Jewish or Israeli material or told that work connected to Jewish identity, Israel, Zionism or antisemitism has become too difficult to sell.

Public reporting and author testimony suggest that this concern is not isolated. In 2026, The Canadian Jewish News described Meg Keene’s experience pitching Jewish fiction after October 7, 2023, reporting that she had been told by multiple agents that her book might not sell, not because of its literary content, but because she was openly Zionist and the book referenced Jewish and Israeli topics.

Agent representation is a crucial gatekeeping stage in publishing. For authors, agents are the path to major publishers, meaningful advances, subsidiary rights, film and television opportunities and long-term career development. If agents believe Jewish, Israeli or Zionist authors are harder to sell, more likely to attract backlash or less likely to receive publisher support, they may become less willing to sign those authors or to champion their work aggressively.

The result is a largely invisible bottleneck. Books may never be submitted or may be submitted more cautiously or with more censorship, because agents anticipate resistance from editors, publishers, reviewers, influencers or the broader literary community. For affected authors, the harm may look like ordinary rejection, but at scale it can limit which Jewish stories enter the publishing pipeline at all.

Even as blacklisting, review-bombing, event cancellations and other forms of exclusion have affected Jewish, Israeli and Zionist authors, major publishing institutions have often failed to address these incidents as a distinct antisemitism problem. When statements have been issued, they have frequently framed the issue as a broad matter of censorship, civility, free expression or generalized anti-bigotry, rather than directly naming the targeting of Jewish and Zionist authors.

This pattern is significant because antisemitism is often minimized through universalizing language. In other contexts, institutions are usually expected to name the specific form of bias at issue. But when Jewish authors are targeted, public responses often broaden the frame immediately: antisemitism is condemned alongside “all forms of bigotry.”

The viral “Is your fav author a Zionist?” spreadsheet illustrates the gap. The spreadsheet encouraged readers not to buy or promote authors classified as Zionist. Yet, major publishing institutions did not mount a clear, collective response naming the blacklist as antisemitic author-targeting.

The Authors Guild did issue a June 2024 statement condemning censorship, threats and blacklisting of authors. However, the statement framed the issue broadly as involving writers’ “religious or national identity” or views relating to “Israel or Palestine,” and said the Guild abhorred “antisemitism, Islamophobia, racism, and other forms of bigotry.” While such statements are valuable, this kind of generalized language can leave the specific targeting of Jewish, Israeli and Zionist authors unnamed.

PEN America’s responses show a similar pattern. PEN has spoken out on some cancellations and disruptions involving Jewish or Israeli writers, including the canceled Albany Book Festival panel involving Elisa Albert. In its statement on the Albany cancellation, PEN described it as “tragic and outrageous” that writers were denied the opportunity to speak because of their identity. But the statement did not name antisemitism, anti-Zionist exclusion or the targeting of Jewish authors as such.

The controversy at PEN America makes this institutional pattern impossible to ignore. In July 2026, PEN published “A Silent Moratorium,” an article based on interviews with more than 30 Israeli and Jewish writers and literary professionals who described an increase in exclusion since October 7, 2023.

Notably, the PEN article was cautious in its framing. It explicitly stated that it is “difficult to assess” how much of what writers described stemmed from cultural boycotts, broader protest against the war, anti-Israel or anti-Zionist sentiment, antisemitism, business concerns or taste. Yet, even this carefully caveated documentation of Jewish and Israeli writers’ experiences triggered an institutional crisis. Almost immediately after publication of the report, PEN America president Dinaw Mengestu resigned. According to The Atlantic, Mengestu objected to the article in part because he believed it could impede upon the constitutional rights of those who promote BDS or other efforts to shun Israeli products.

PEN has devoted substantial attention to Palestinian writers and to the destruction of cultural life in Gaza, work that falls squarely within its mission. But when PEN published a comparatively cautious article documenting the exclusion of Jewish and Israeli writers, the response was not merely disagreement. It produced the resignation of the organization’s president and exposed a deeper institutional conflict over whether documenting harm to Jewish and Israeli writers was itself politically suspect.

These kinds of generalized or contested responses can leave affected authors without meaningful institutional protection. When anti-Jewish targeting is treated primarily as one example of broader polarization, rather than as a specific form of discrimination requiring direct response, publishers, agents, festivals, bookstores, reviewers and influencers receive little guidance about where legitimate criticism ends and discriminatory exclusion begins.

The result is a vacuum of norms. In that vacuum, blacklists, boycotts, review-bombing and event exclusions can become normalized as ordinary political activism rather than recognized as forms of professional and cultural exclusion. Without clear industry leadership, Jewish, Israeli and Zionist authors are left to absorb the risk individually.