Mark Ruffalo hits out after being accused of antisemitism by Paramount: ‘Appalling and fundamentally dishonest!’

“This critical and necessary dialogue is then dishonestly framed as being anti-Israel,” he wrote.

Mr Ruffalo stressed that his stance was rooted in political conviction, adding: “To be clear, my 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.”

|

PA

The four-time Oscar nominee said his understanding of “acting, activism, and humanism” had been shaped by Jewish friends, colleagues and loved ones throughout his life.

The row erupted after Mr Ruffalo posted on Instagram on Friday, sharing a clip from 2024 of Oracle executive vice chair Safra Catz discussing the “really profoundly scary technologies” the company had made available to the Israeli military following the Hamas-led attacks of October 7, 2023.

Mr Ruffalo drew a direct line between Oracle and the proposed $111 billion acquisition, pointing out that Larry Ellison, the tech giant’s co-founder, had underwritten more than $40 billion towards the deal being led by his son David, Paramount’s chief executive.

“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,” Mr Ruffalo wrote.

|

PA

He branded Larry Ellison, whose fortune stands at roughly $189 billion, a “classic Oligarch” intent on “crushing workers and consolidating the wealth of the world.”

Paramount responded swiftly on Saturday, issuing a lengthy statement through a spokesperson that took direct aim at Mr Ruffalo’s language.

“We are, as always, troubled when antisemitic tropes are invoked in purported service of a business dispute,” the spokesperson said.

“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 accusation that I am antisemitic is appalling and fundamentally dishonest. 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. This critical and necessary dialogue…

— Mark Ruffalo (@MarkRuffalo) August 22, 2026

The studio maintained that it does “not tolerate prejudice of any kind, against anyone,” and suggested Mr Ruffalo’s intervention “simply exposes the true motivation of some who have advocated opposition to this transaction.”

Paramount called for cooler heads, stating: “This brings us to a moment to lower the temperature, not raise it. We’d rather build than further engage in such rhetoric.”

The company also pledged there would be no professional reprisals, affirming its commitment to “every story, every storyteller, and no blacklists, no exceptions.”

Mr Ruffalo argued the deal carried profound consequences for the public, warning that it would place CNN, HBO and Warner Bros under the control of a single family who’d allegedly be partly backed by foreign capital.

| GETTY

He also cited estimates that roughly 4,500 film and television jobs in Los Angeles could disappear within three years, with thousands more positions at risk across the wider industry.

“Mergers like these are almost always bad for workers, consumers, and the industry they take over,” he wrote.

The actor noted that legislators from both parties had demanded a thorough national security review, while regulators had yet to provide the public with satisfactory answers.

In April, Mr Ruffalo joined forces with attorney Norm Eisen to rally state officials against the acquisition, gathering more than 5,000 signatures on an open letter warning the deal would “threaten the sustainability of the entire creative community.”

The letter was backed by the Committee for the First Amendment, the Future Film Coalition, the Writers Guild of America, and the Democracy Defenders Fund.

12 Democratic state attorneys general, led by California’s Rob Bonta, have mounted a legal challenge arguing the combined entity would “extinguish competition” in Hollywood.

On July 20, a US district judge imposed a temporary restraining order, finding the states had raised “serious questions” about the deal’s potential to substantially reduce competition.

Paramount faces a daily penalty of $7 million if the merger fails to close by 30 September, and has asked a federal judge to compel the challenging states to post a $1.88 billion bond to cover the costs of delay.