In 2019, the World Health Organization classified vaccine hesitancy as one of the ten biggest threats to global health. Since then, the anti-vaccination movement has expanded, at the same time as the Covid-19 virus has spread around the world. This thesis examines how opinion leaders in an anti-vaccination Facebook group design their communication in order to spread their alternative realities of Covid-19 vaccines. This case study focuses on what a specific anti-vaccination online community’s rhetorical situation looks like, and which rhetorical appeals are being used by the group’s opinion leaders. It has its theoretical starting point in a modified version of Lazarsfeld and Katz’s Two-step flow of communication that was put in relation to Bitzer’s and Aristotle's rhetoric theories. The result shows that the use of logos, ethos and pathos depends on the rhetorical situation. Pathos dominated the opinion leader's Facebook posts as their language was emotionally emphasized and appealed to individuals' feelings. Emotional arguments were seen as an effective approach to receive engagement from the recipients. Logos was the least used appeal and the opinion leaders' arguments rarely involved scientific proof or credible sources. This was considered to be due to the fact that the rhetorical audience consisted of like-minded people who already shared the views of the opinion leader. Therefore, they did not need to be convinced with fact-based arguments. This study was conducted through a netnographic approach and a rhetorical analysis with the aim of helping to fill a knowledge gap that can be helpful as support in preventative measures to reduce vaccine resistance through communication.