Mark Ruffalo Denounces "Appalling" Antisemitism Claim Amid Paramount Merger Controversy
Actor Mark Ruffalo strongly rejected accusations of antisemitism from Paramount, asserting his criticism of a proposed media merger and Oracle's technology is rooted in political conviction, not prejudice.
Media·

Actor Mark Ruffalo vehemently denied accusations of antisemitism leveled against him, stating on Saturday, "The accusation that I am antisemitic is appalling and fundamentally dishonest."
He clarified his stance, asserting that "Criticizing the actions of the Israeli prime minister, a military technology contract, or the executives who supply it is not the same as criticizing Jewish people." Ruffalo added that this "critical and necessary dialogue is then dishonestly framed as being anti-Israel." He emphasized that his "views come from my own political convictions and should never be interpreted as hostility toward Jewish people, for whom I have deep love and respect." The actor further noted, "Everything I know about acting, activism, and humanism has been profoundly shaped by the Jewish friends, colleagues, and loved ones who have been integral and family throughout every point of my life."
Ruffalo's comments followed an accusation from a Paramount spokesperson, who claimed the actor was introducing "antisemitic tropes" into what the company described as a corporate disagreement. This contention arose after Ruffalo shared a video featuring Paramount board member Safra Catz. In the video, Catz appeared to highlight the "really profoundly scary technologies" that Oracle, a company co-founded by Larry Ellison, employed to support the Israeli military in the aftermath of the October 7, 2023, Hamas attacks.
The Core of the Dispute
Regarding Oracle, Ruffalo had previously written, "This is the company that Larry Ellison is using to fund his son David's Warner Bros acquisition."
He elaborated on his concerns, stating that these "really profoundly scary technologies" could "most likely be merged into one of the largest media conglomerates in the world and one day used on you." Ruffalo further questioned, "Look how she revels in what we now have come to see as a genocide, which was built on an apartheid system of oppression powered by Oracle."
A spokesperson for Paramount responded to Ruffalo's comments, expressing that the company is "troubled when antisemitic tropes are invoked in purported service of a business dispute," as reported by Variety.
The spokesperson continued, asserting that "Words like ‘genocide’ and ‘apartheid,’ applied to a corporate transaction, aren’t just wrong — they’re a bridge too far, and they cheapen the very real suffering those words are meant to describe."
The company representative added that Paramount does not "tolerate prejudice of any kind, against anyone."
Ruffalo Addresses Merger Implications
In his Saturday statement, the actor broadened his discussion to include the "real consequences" of the proposed merger, considering its immediate impact on individuals and its broader implications for the nation.
Ruffalo stated, "Scrutinizing the Ellisons, including Oracle’s business built on data, surveillance technology and government contracts, and the serious threat to editorial freedom and the loss of a livelihood for thousands of families, is fair and necessary."
He highlighted that "The $111 billion deal would hand one family control over CNN, HBO and Warner Bros., backed in part by foreign money whose influence on editorial decisions has never been fully explained to the public." Ruffalo pointed out that "Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have called for serious national security review, and regulators still haven’t given the public a real answer. Until they do, the merger shouldn’t move forward." He concluded by asserting, "Now is the time to dive boldly into all these issues, not step back or concede."
Legal Challenges to the Deal
The proposed merger, central to this disagreement, currently faces opposition from a coalition comprising 12 state attorneys general. The involved companies have entered an agreement not to finalize the transaction before June 1, 2027, or until a court delivers a decision regarding the states' claims, whichever event occurs first.
Related Stories

New HBO Series "Lanterns" Ignites Discussion Over Racial Privilege and Hero Origin Story
HBO's new series "Lanterns" faces criticism for reinterpreting Green Lantern John Stewart's origin story to focus on racial privilege, sparking debate among viewers and critics. The show's creators and actors defend its
Sep 4

Indiana Farm's Charlie Kirk Corn Maze Sparks Community Backlash
Goebel Farms in Evansville, Indiana, faced intense criticism for its corn maze honoring Charlie Kirk. The farm defended its decision, citing free speech principles, amidst negative reviews and the apparent removal of
Sep 3

Stephen A. Smith Cautions Democrats on Hasan Piker's Influence, Citing Potential Electoral Liability
Veteran sports analyst Stephen A. Smith warned that the political influence of streamer Hasan Piker might become a significant general election vulnerability for the Democratic Party. Smith suggested Piker's reach could
Sep 3

Federal Judge Dismisses Lawsuit Over Transgender Athletes in California Girls' Sports, Advocates Vow Continued Fight
A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit from the Department of Justice contesting California's policies on transgender athletes in girls' sports. The ruling, based on a procedural technicality, has spurred advocates for
Sep 3