The Runnymede report defines Islamophobia inconsistently across sentiment, prejudice, and discrimination.

Evidence

Although the term has become relatively common, there is little agreement about Islamophobia’s precise meaning. The 1997 Runnymede Trust report contains varied and sometimes contradictory perspectives. It describes Islamophobia as “a useful shorthand way of referring to dread or hatred of Islam—and, therefore, to fear or dislike of all or most Muslims” (Runnymede Trust, 1997, p. 1). It then nuances that position by making a distinction between “legitimate criticism and disagreement” with Islamic doctrine or with the policies and practices of Muslim states as contrasted with true Islamophobia, defined as “unfounded prejudice and hostility” (p. 4). The report uses the term not just to cover hostile sentiments but also extends it to “the practical consequences of such hostility in unfair discrimination against Muslim individuals and communities, and to the exclusion of Muslims from mainstream political and social affairs” (p. 4). — Erik Bleich, What Is Islamophobia and How Much Is…, 13

Categorization

• DEFINE: Directly relevant to the reading purpose: shows the original Runnymede framework as internally contradictory, which is precisely the instability Bleich’s neutral concept-formation responds to.
• XREF: This is the foundational definition contested across all rivals: Bleich’s critique of Runnymede’s precision here is the anti-thesis to the racialization turn in the 2017 Runnymede report. — connects to: The Runnymede report introduced Islamophobia as marking Muslim-specific experience beyond shared discrimination. — Runnymede Trust (ed. Farah Elahi & Omar Khan), Islamophobia: Still a Challenge for Us…, 479; The 1997 Runnymede report defined Islamophobia as faith-based discrimination beyond ethnicity — Runnymede Trust (ed. Farah Elahi & Omar Khan), Islamophobia: Still a Challenge for Us…, 185; The Runnymede Report redefined Islamophobia around closed views of Islam — Chris Allen, Islamophobia, 348 (+15 more)
• recurring: this claim recurs 2 times within its source

Broader Connections

• The Runnymede Report’s definition of Islamophobia shifted and changed within its own pages. #corroborates (0.90)
• The Runnymede Report redefined Islamophobia around closed views of Islam #expands (0.85) — Chris Allen, Islamophobia, 348
• The Runnymede definition conflates Islamophobia’s effects with its core #corroborates (0.85) — Erik Bleich, What Is Islamophobia and How Much Is…, 40
• Runnymede defines Islamophobia as closed views of Islam #corroborates (0.82) — Runnymede Trust, Islamophobia, 24
• The Runnymede report classed Islamophobia as racism without defining it as racism #expands (0.78) — Chris Allen, Islamophobia, 264
• Inconsistent operational definitions prevent cumulating research on Islamophobia. #expands (0.78) — Erik Bleich, What Is Islamophobia and How Much Is…, 66
• The report’s racial-religious conflation undermines Islamophobia’s distinctiveness as a category #responds-to (0.75) — Chris Allen, Islamophobia, 384
• Runnymede’s model failed to distinguish Islamophobia from other similar phenomena #responds-to (0.75) — Chris Allen, Islamophobia, 642
• The report separates legitimate criticism from closed-view Islamophobia #expands (0.75) — Green, Todd H, The Fear of Islam_ An Introduction to…, 51
• The closed-versus-open views of Islam dichotomy anchors the Runnymede model. #expands (0.75) — Chris Allen, Islamophobia, 275
• Islamophobia is defined differently by scholars, spanning fear, media violence, racism, gender, and nationalism. #complicates (0.72)
• Measuring Islamophobia requires reliable indicators rather than anecdotal evidence. #expands (0.72) — Erik Bleich, What Is Islamophobia and How Much Is…, 59