LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA, UNITED STATES | Auschwitz Jewish Center Foundation President and Director General Jack Simony has praised Paramount for confronting what the company described as antisemitic tropes in actor Mark Ruffalo’s opposition to the proposed $111-billion acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery.
Simony said Ruffalo’s rhetoric followed a longstanding pattern in which Jewish participation and success in the media industry are recast as evidence of secret control or conspiracy.
“Paramount deserves recognition for confronting antisemitic tropes directly and unequivocally. From the earliest days of Hollywood, Jews working in media have seen their participation recast as control and their success as conspiracy,” Simony said in a statement provided to TheJ.Ca.
“At AJCF, we teach that antisemitism changes its vocabulary, not its architecture. Mark Ruffalo simply updated an old accusation for the age of surveillance technology: Israel, a billionaire, secret tools, control of a media empire and a warning that it would all be ‘used on you.’ Paramount recognized the pattern and refused to normalize it. That is what institutional responsibility looks like.”
The intervention follows a rapidly escalating dispute involving Ruffalo, Paramount and the Ellison family over the proposed combination of Paramount Skydance and Warner Bros. Discovery.
Ruffalo, a prominent critic of Israel, posted a video featuring Safra Catz, executive vice chair of Oracle and a Paramount board member, discussing Oracle technology made available to Israel following the Hamas-led October 7, 2023 terrorist attack.
Ruffalo used the video to attack Oracle founder Larry Ellison and Ellison’s son David, who leads Paramount Skydance.
“This is the company that Larry Ellison is using to fund his son David’s Warner Bros. acquisition,” Ruffalo wrote.
He warned that Oracle’s “really profoundly scary technologies” would potentially become connected to one of the world’s largest media companies and “one day used on you.”
Ruffalo also accused Israel of committing “genocide” and operating an “apartheid system of oppression,” claims he connected to Oracle’s technology.
He separately described Larry Ellison as a “classic oligarch” and accused powerful corporate interests of “consolidating the wealth of the world for their own power and concentrated dominance.” Ruffalo argued that the proposed merger would threaten competition, Hollywood employment and editorial independence.
Paramount Says Rhetoric Crossed a Line
Paramount responded unusually forcefully.
“We are, as always, troubled when antisemitic tropes are invoked in purported service of a business dispute,” a company spokesperson said.
Paramount also rejected Ruffalo’s use of the terms “genocide” and “apartheid” in connection with the corporate transaction, calling the rhetoric “a bridge too far” and saying it diminished the meaning of terms associated with genuine human suffering.
The company said it does not tolerate prejudice against anyone and called for the merger to be assessed on its legal merits rather than what it described as underlying bias.
The response was notable in an entertainment industry that has faced mounting criticism from Jewish organizations over how studios, agencies and professional organizations have responded to antisemitism since October 7.
Simony’s statement focused specifically on the structure of Ruffalo’s argument rather than asserting that criticism of Israel or corporate conduct is inherently antisemitic.
His concern centers on the combination of several themes with a long history in antisemitic conspiracy theories: Jewish wealth, control of communications or media, secret technology, global power and an implied threat against the wider population.
The Ellisons are Jewish.
Ruffalo Denies Antisemitism
Ruffalo rejected Paramount’s characterization.
“The accusation that I am antisemitic is appalling and fundamentally dishonest,” Ruffalo wrote on X.
He said criticism of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, military technology contracts or executives who supply such technology should not be equated with criticism of Jews.
Ruffalo said his views came from his political convictions and “should never be interpreted as hostility toward Jewish people,” adding that Jewish friends, colleagues and loved ones had profoundly influenced his acting, activism and humanism.
Ruffalo also maintained that scrutiny of Oracle, its government contracts, surveillance technology and the Ellison family’s role in the proposed media consolidation was legitimate.
“This merger has real consequences for real people, and for the entire country,” he wrote, arguing that the transaction could affect editorial freedom and thousands of jobs.
The distinction Ruffalo raises is important in any discussion of antisemitism.
Criticism of Israel, the Israeli government, a Jewish business executive or a corporate transaction is not automatically antisemitic.
The dispute centers instead on whether Ruffalo’s framing incorporated historically recognizable antisemitic themes about Jewish wealth, secretive technological power and media control.
Paramount and several Jewish organizations say it did.
Ruffalo says it did not.
Other Jewish Organizations Condemn Ruffalo’s Remarks
The Auschwitz Jewish Center Foundation is not alone in criticizing the actor.
Simon Wiesenthal Center CEO Jim Berk praised Paramount for drawing a clear boundary when political or corporate debate crosses into antisemitic rhetoric.
“We commend Paramount for speaking clearly and refusing to allow prejudice to masquerade as political or corporate criticism,” Berk said, according to Variety.
Berk said antisemitism is increasingly “minimized, rationalized, or repackaged in more socially acceptable language” and argued that institutional clarity is therefore important.
Creative Community for Peace Executive Director Ari Ingel issued an even stronger condemnation.
“Mark Ruffalo’s rhetoric has increasingly crossed the line from criticism of Israel into extremist and antisemitic messaging,” Ingel said.
The organization pointed specifically to Ruffalo’s references to an oligarch consolidating wealth and power, control of a major media company, and threatening technology that could eventually be “used on you.”
CCFP said the combination echoed historical conspiracy theories portraying Jews as a wealthy elite secretly accumulating control over media, money and political power. It called on Ruffalo to retract his remarks and apologize.
Ruffalo Has Faced Similar Controversy Before
The dispute also revives scrutiny of Ruffalo’s previous statements concerning Israel.
In 2021, Ruffalo apologized after using the term “genocide” in connection with Israel during fighting between Israel and Hamas.
“I have reflected & wanted to apologize for posts during the recent Israel/Hamas fighting that suggested Israel is committing ‘genocide,'” he wrote at the time.
He called the term “inaccurate, inflammatory, disrespectful” and said it was “being used to justify antisemitism here & abroad.”
Creative Community for Peace cited that earlier apology to argue that Ruffalo had already acknowledged the danger of inflammatory terminology but later returned to similar accusations.
His latest comments come amid an increasingly contentious political and legal battle surrounding Paramount Skydance’s proposed acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery.
The transaction would bring major entertainment and news properties under one corporate structure, including Warner Bros., HBO and CNN.
Ruffalo and other critics have argued the transaction could reduce competition and cost thousands of entertainment-sector jobs.
A coalition of state attorneys general has challenged the deal on antitrust grounds, while Paramount has defended the acquisition and its economic rationale.
Simony Points To How Antisemitism Evolves
The Auschwitz Jewish Center Foundation’s response places the controversy within a broader historical context.
AJCF operates educational programs centered on the history of Jewish life in Oลwiฤcim, the Polish town the German Nazis renamed Auschwitz during the Second World War, and on the consequences of unchecked hatred.
The organization maintains the Chevra Lomdei Mishnayot Synagogue, the only surviving Jewish house of prayer in Oลwiฤcim, and works to preserve the history of the Jewish community that lived in the town for centuries before the Holocaust.
Its programs educate students, teachers, military personnel, police officers, diplomats and other visitors about antisemitism, prejudice and the processes through which discrimination can escalate into persecution and mass violence.
The Foundation also provides humanitarian assistance to people affected by mass atrocities and major crises, including those affected by Hamas’s October 7 attack and Ukrainian refugees, according to information supplied to TheJ.Ca.
For Simony, the Ruffalo controversy illustrates a central lesson in the Foundation’s work: antisemitic narratives do not necessarily disappear when societies reject their historical vocabulary.
They can be reformulated.
The medieval accusation can become the modern conspiracy theory. The allegation of secret Jewish influence can be expressed through contemporary language involving billionaires, corporations, technology, surveillance and media ownership.
That is why, Simony argues, identifying the structure of antisemitism matters as much as recognizing explicitly antisemitic words.
“Antisemitism changes its vocabulary, not its architecture,” he said.
In this case, Paramount concluded that a line had been crossed.
Ruffalo insists it had not.
The growing number of Jewish organizations supporting Paramount suggests the dispute is unlikely to end with that disagreement.
TheJ.ca receives no government money. Independent journalism depends on readers who believe these stories must be told. Consider supporting our efforts.
Stand Proud. Stand Strong. Stand Zionist.
