Ms. Rachel says she won’t work with “privileged” people who stay silent on Gaza, and the backlash has been fast and pointed. The British podcaster and children’s content creator made the comments during a Guardian interview and on Ilana Glazer’s “It’s Open” podcast, drawing criticism from Campaign Against Antisemitism, which called her stance an exclusionary “political purity test.”
Accurso’s central claim is simple: people who hold power and choose not to speak about the conflict in Gaza are the ones she refuses to collaborate with. She made an exception for those who might lose their livelihood by speaking publicly. But the critics say her own position as a public figure means she has privilege too, and that she should not be judging others by it.
The Guardian Interview
In the Guardian interview, Accurso said, “I’m going to work with people who aren’t in a privileged position, because that’s not fair to them if they could lose the ability to put food on the table. But people who are privileged who don’t say anything? Yeah, I’m not interested in working with them. Because I feel like maybe if we all said something, the genocide would stop.”
The word “genocide” is doing a lot of work in that sentence. Accurso is not calling for quiet diplomacy. She is arguing that public speech itself — especially from people with platforms — could end the conflict. That is a strong claim, and it is the core of what has drawn the most attention.
She also questioned why celebrities with secure careers would not risk speaking publicly. On Glazer’s podcast, she asked, “If you are so famous, and you’re uncancellable, and you’re so famous, and you won’t even say like, ‘Kids in Gaza should have schools, people in Gaza should have hospitals.’ Like you won’t say something so basic and like why can’t you risk something to help save lives?”
The Match and the Call
Accurso pledged to match rapper Macklemore’s $1 million donation to Palestinian aid organizations. She called on “every wealthy White celebrity” to do the same.
“I’m going to work with people who aren’t in a privileged position, because that’s not fair to them if they could lose the ability to put food on the table.”
The pledge is notable because it is concrete. Matching a million-dollar donation is a real commitment, not just talk. But the call for other wealthy white celebrities to do the same puts her in the position of telling other rich people what they should do with their money.
The Backlash From Campaign Against Antisemitism
Campaign Against Antisemitism responded quickly. The group called Accurso’s comments “patently hypocritical” and said acting as an adjudicator is a privileged position in itself. The group noted that Accurso had admitted to liking a comment online saying, “Free America from the Jews,” and said she should avoid such topics.
The group also said Accurso was too eager to ostracize those with differing views on the war in Gaza, many of whom will be Jews. That is the central charge: Accurso is using her platform to exclude people based on their silence, and the group argues that this silencing is itself a problem.
Accurso’s Response to Criticism
Accurso addressed criticism of her focus on Gaza directly. She said, “I was confused and devastated that people said because you care about children who are starving, and whose food is being blocked, you don’t care about these [Jewish] kids,” adding, “I was like, oh my god, I have a deep love for, a deep care for, all children.”
The response is defensive but also sincere. She is trying to explain that her concern for Palestinian children is not a rejection of Jewish children. The criticism she described came from people who felt she was ignoring Jewish interests in favor of Palestinian ones, and she pushed back against that reading.
The Resurfaced Video
A 2025 video of Accurso introducing Palestinian photojournalist Motaz Azaiza to her young audience as her “friend” resurfaced. Azaiza said in a podcast interview that he filmed Israeli hostages being beaten by a crowd in Gaza on Oct. 7, 2023, but deliberately withheld the footage.
The resurfacing adds a layer of context. Accurso has publicly named and endorsed Azaiza, and he has footage of Israelis being attacked that he chose not to release. Whether that changes how people read her comments is unclear, but it is part of the record now.
The Numbers Behind the Podcaster
Accurso’s channel has more than 21 million subscribers. Her children’s programming has been streamed more than 69 million times since signing with Netflix in 2025, according to The Guardian. Those numbers matter because they establish how much influence she is wielding when she makes these statements.
| Metric | Number |
|---|---|
| Subscribers on YouTube | More than 21 million |
| Streams of children’s content since Netflix signing | More than 69 million |
| Donation matched | $1 million |
The streams figure is notable because it shows how deeply her content has penetrated children’s entertainment. She is not a niche podcaster; she is a major presence in the space, and her opinions carry weight.
The Critics’ Case Against Her
The Campaign Against Antisemitism’s argument rests on several points:
- Accurso’s own position as a public figure is privileged.
- She has admitted to liking an antisemitic comment online.
- Her call for others to speak out is exclusionary.
- Many of those she criticizes will be Jews.
The group’s position is that Accurso should not be using her platform to exclude people based on their silence, especially when her own silence on related topics could be seen as problematic. The criticism is sharp, and it is aimed directly at the logic of her own statement.
The Hypocrisy Question
The group’s central charge is that Accurso is being hypocritical. She is telling other people to speak out while remaining silent on topics that could draw attention to her own views.
The group noted that Accurso had admitted to liking a comment online saying, “Free America from the Jews.” That is a serious charge, and it is one that the group has raised in response to her comments about privilege.
The paper does not take a position on the specific comment. It simply reports that the group has raised it as evidence of hypocrisy.
Where This Leaves Her
Accurso has made her position clear. She will not work with people she considers privileged who stay silent on Gaza. She has backed that up with a concrete pledge to match a million-dollar donation and a call for other wealthy white celebrities to follow.
The backlash has been fast and pointed. Campaign Against Antisemitism has framed her comments as a political purity test, and the criticism has been sharp.
This is a story about power, privilege, and the right to speak. Accurso has used her platform to make a demand of others. Now she is facing the consequences of that demand, and the debate is likely to continue as long as she holds that platform.
Where the paper stands
The paper backs neither side here; it supports keeping the channels open for honest, respectful conversation across difference, and opposes the use of public shaming to silence anyone on any subject. Accurso’s critics are right that a public figure should not be judging others by privilege; her critics are wrong to try to shame her into silence.
The paper is sceptical of foreign entanglements and of trade wars alike, and backs the deal over the standoff. This story sits outside that frame; it is about a public figure using her platform to exclude others, and the public reaction to it.
Accurso’s comments were made in good faith, and her matching of Macklemore’s donation is concrete. But her demand that others speak — especially when she herself remains silent on certain topics — is exclusionary. The Campaign Against Antisemitism’s point stands: a public figure should not be using her platform to judge others by privilege.
See the video the story is built around at Fox News.
Get the Notebook.
The day's best stories and every fresh verdict, in plain English, in your inbox by seven. One email a day, no more.