Uncategorized
Weinstein approached me ‘Jew to Jew’: Jodi Kantor opens up on the ‘She Said’ movie’s Jewish moments
(JTA) — When the New York Times journalist Jodi Kantor was reporting the 2017 Harvey Weinstein sexual assault story that earned her a Pulitzer prize, the powerful Hollywood producer and his team tried to influence her by using something they had in common: They are both Jewish.
“Weinstein put [Jewishness] on the table and seemed to expect that I was going to have some sort of tribal loyalty to him,” Kantor told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency on a video call from the New York Times newsroom. “And that was just not going to be the case.”
Now, that exchange has been immortalized in “She Said,” a new film adaptation of the nonfiction book of the same name by Kantor and her collaborator Megan Twohey that details their investigation into Weinstein’s conduct, which helped launch the #MeToo movement.
The film, directed by Maria Schrader with stars Zoe Kazan as Kantor and Carey Mulligan as Twohey, is an understated thriller that has drawn comparisons to “All the President’s Men” — and multiple subtle but powerful Jewish-themed subplots reveal the way Kantor’s Jewishness arose during and at times intersected with the investigation.
In one scene, the Kantor character notes that a Jewish member of Weinstein’s team tried to appeal to her “Jew to Jew.” In another, Kantor shares a moving moment with Weinstein’s longtime accountant, the child of Holocaust survivors, as they discuss the importance of speaking up about wrongdoing.
Kantor, 47, grew up between New York and New Jersey, the first grandchild of Holocaust survivors — born “almost 30 years to the day after my grandparents were liberated,” she notes. She calls her grandmother Hana Kantor, a 99-year-old Holocaust survivor, her “lodestar.” Kantor — who doesn’t often speak publicly about her personal life, including her Jewish background, which involved some education in Jewish schools — led a segment for CBS in May 2021 on her grandmother and their relationship. Before her journalism career, she spent a year in Israel on a Dorot Fellowship, working with Israeli and Palestinian organizations. She’s now a “proud member” of a Reform synagogue in Brooklyn.
Kantor spoke with JTA about the film’s Jewish threads, the portrayal of the New York Times newsroom and what Zoe Kazan’s performance captures about journalism.
This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity and length.
JTA: How did you feel having Zoe Kazan, who is not Jewish, play you? Kazan has played some notably Jewish characters before, for example in the HBO miniseries “The Plot Against America.”
JK: I feel Zoe’s performance is so sensitive and so layered. What I really appreciate about her performance is that she captures so many of the emotions I was feeling under the surface in the investigation. You know, when you’re a reporter and especially a reporter handling that sensitive a story, it’s your responsibility to present a really smooth professional exterior to the world. At the end of the investigation, I had the job of reading Harvey Weinstein some of the allegations and really confronting him. And in dealing with the victims, I wanted to be a rock for them and it was my job to get them to believe in the investigation. And so on the one hand, you have that smooth, professional exterior, but then below that, of course you’re feeling all the feelings. You’re feeling the power of the material, you’re feeling the urgency of getting the story, you’re feeling the fear that Weinstein could hurt somebody else. You’re feeling the loss that these women are expressing, including over their careers. And so I think Zoe’s performance just communicates that so beautifully.
What Zoe says about the character is that there are elements of me, there are elements of herself, and then there are elements of pure invention because she’s an artist, and that’s what she does.
I think the screenplay gets at a small but significant line of Jewish sub-drama that ran through the investigation. It went like this: Harvey Weinstein and his representatives were constantly trying to approach me as a Jew. And they’ve done this more recently, as well. There have been times when Harvey Weinstein was trying to approach me “Jew to Jew,” like almost in a tone of “you and I are the same, we understand each other.” We found dossiers later that they had compiled on me and it was clear that they knew that I was the grandchild of Holocaust survivors, and they tried to sort of deploy that. So speaking of keeping things under the surface, I privately thought that was offensive, that he was citing that. But your job as a reporter is to be completely professional. And I wasn’t looking to get into a fight with Weinstein. I just wanted to find out the truth and I actually wanted to be fair to the guy. Anyway, even as he was approaching me “Jew to Jew” in private, he was hiring Black Cube — sort of Israeli private intelligence agents — to try to dupe me. And they actually sent an agent to me, and she posed as a women’s rights advocate. And she was intimating that they were going to pay me a lot of money to appear at a conference in London. Luckily I shooed her away.
To some degree I can’t explain why private Israeli intelligence agents were hired to try to dupe the Hebrew speaking, yeshiva-educated, granddaughter of Holocaust survivors. But it’s not my job to explain that! It’s their job to explain why they did that.
Then the theme reappeared with Irwin Reiter, Weinstein’s accountant of 30 years, who kind of became the Deep Throat of the investigation. I quickly figured out that Irwin and I were from the same small world. He was the child of survivors, and had also spent his summers at bungalow colonies in the Catskills just down the road from mine. I don’t bring up the Holocaust a lot. It’s a sacred matter for me, and I didn’t do it lightly. But once I discovered that we did in fact have this really powerful connection in our backgrounds, I did gently sound it with him – I felt that was sincere and real. Because he was making such a critical decision: Weinstein’s accountant of 30 years is still working for the guy by day and he’s meeting with me at night. And I felt like I did need to go to that place with him, saying, “Okay, Irwin, we both know that there are people who talk and there are people who don’t. And we both grew up around that mix of people and what do we think is the difference? And also if you know if you have the chance to act and intervene in a bad situation, are you going to take it?”
We didn’t talk a lot about it, because I raised it and he didn’t want to fully engage. But I always felt like that was under the surface of our conversations, and he made a very brave decision to help us.
That was a very powerful scene in the film, and it felt like a turning point in the movie that kind of got at the ethical core of what was motivating your character. Was that a scene that was important to you personally to include in the film?
What Megan and I want people to know overall is that a small number of brave sources can make an extraordinary difference. When you really look at the number of people who gave us the essential information about Weinstein, it’s a small conference room’s worth of people. Most of them are incredibly brave women, some of whom are depicted, I think, quite beautifully in the film. But there was also Irwin, Weinstein’s accountant of all these years, among them. It’s Megan and my job to build people’s confidence in telling the truth. And as we become custodians of this story for the long term, one of the things we really want people to know is that a tiny group of brave sources, sometimes one source, can make a massive difference. Look at the impact that these people had all around the world.
Did you feel the film captured the New York Times newsroom? There’s a kind of great reverence to the toughness and professionalism in the newspaper business that really came through.
Megan and I are so grateful for the sincerity and professionalism with which the journalism is displayed. There are a lot of on screen depictions of journalists in which we’re depicted as manipulative or doing things for the wrong reasons or sleeping with our sources!
We [as journalists] feel incredible drama in what we do every day. And we’re so grateful to the filmmakers for finding it and sharing it with people. And I know the New York Times can look intimidating or remote as an institution. I hope people really consider this an invitation into the building and into our meetings, and into our way of working and our value system.
And we’re also proud that it’s a vision of a really female New York Times, which was not traditionally the case at this institution for a long time. This is a book and a movie about women as narrators.
“Harvey Weinstein and his representatives were constantly trying to approach me as a Jew,” Kantor said. (The New York Times)
There have been comparisons made between this movie and “All the President’s Men.” One of the striking differences is that those journalists are two male bachelors running around D.C. And this film has scenes of motherhood, of the Shabbat table, of making lunches. What was it like seeing your personal lives reflected on screen?
It’s really true that the Weinstein investigation was kind of born in the crucible of motherhood and Megan and my attempt to combine work with parenting. On the one hand, it’s the most everyday thing in the world, but on the other hand, you don’t see it actually portrayed on screen that much. We’re really honored by the way that throughout the film you see motherhood and work mixing, I think in a way that is so natural despite our obviously pretty stressful circumstances.
I started out alone on the Weinstein investigation, and I called Megan because movie stars were telling me their secrets but they were very reluctant to go on the record. So I had gone some way in persuading and engaging them, but I was looking to make the absolute strongest case for them. So I called Megan. We had both done years of reporting on women and children. Mine involved the workplace more and hers involved sex crimes more, which is part of why everything melded together so well eventually. I wanted to talk to her about what she had said to female victims in the past. But when I reached her, I could hear that something was wrong. And she had just had a baby, and I had had postpartum depression myself. So we talked about it and I gave her the name of my doctor, who I had seen. Then she got treatment. And she not only gave very good advice on that [initial] phone call, but she joined me in the investigation.
I think the theme is responsibility. Our relationship was forged in a sense of shared responsibility, primarily for the work – once we began to understand the truths about Weinstein, we couldn’t allow ourselves to fail. But also Megan was learning to shoulder the responsibility of being a parent, and I had two kids. And so we started this joint dialogue that was mostly about work, but also about motherhood. And I think throughout the film and throughout the real investigation, we felt those themes melding. It’s totally true that my daughter Tali was asking me about what I was doing. It’s very hard to keep secrets from your kid in a New York City apartment, even though I didn’t tell her everything. And Megan and I would go from discussing really critical matters with the investigation to talking about her daughter’s evolving nap schedule. It really felt like we had to get the story and get home to the kids.
And also, we were reporting on our own cohort. A lot of Weinstein victims were and are women in their 40s. And so even though we were very professional with this and we tried to be very professional with the sources, there was an aspect of looking in the mirror. For example, with Laura Madden, who was so brave about going on the record, it was conversations with her own teenage daughters that helped her make her decision.
We didn’t write about this in our book because it was hard to mix the motherhood stuff with this sort of serious reporter-detective story and all the important facts. And we didn’t want to talk about ourselves too much in the book. But the filmmakers captured something that I think is very true. It feels particular to us but also universal. When Zoe [Kazan] is pushing a stroller and taking a phone call at the same time, I suspect lots of people will identify with that. And what I also really like is the grace and dignity with which that’s portrayed.
It must have been surreal, seeing a Hollywood movie about your investigation of Hollywood.
I think part of the power of the film is that it returns the Weinstein investigation to the producer’s medium, but on vastly different terms, with the women in charge. Megan and I are particularly moved by the portrayals of Zelda Perkins, Laura Madden and Rowena Chiu — these former Weinstein assistants are in many ways at the core of the story. They’re everyday people who made the incredibly brave decision to help us, in spite of everything from breast cancer to legal barriers.
Working with the filmmakers was really interesting. They were really committed to the integrity of the story, and they asked a ton of questions, both large and small. Ranging from the really big things about the investigation to these tiny details. Like in the scene where we go to Gwyneth Paltrow’s house and Megan and I discover we’re practically wearing the same dress — those were the actual white dresses that we wore that day. We had to send them in an envelope to the costume department, and they copied the dresses in Zoe and Carey’s sizes and that’s what they’re wearing. There was a strand of extreme fidelity, but they needed some artistic license because it’s a movie. And the movie plays out in the key of emotion.
—
The post Weinstein approached me ‘Jew to Jew’: Jodi Kantor opens up on the ‘She Said’ movie’s Jewish moments appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
University of Maryland Student Gov’t Teams Up With Anti-Zionist Group to Pass 4th Anti-Israel Resolution This Year
University of Maryland, College Park’s Students for Justice in Palestine chapter honoring Hamas terrorists, whom it called “our martyrs,” on the first anniversary of the Oct. 7, 2023, massacre. Photo: Screenshot
The University of Maryland, College Park’s student government on Wednesday passed its fourth anti-Israel resolution in just this academic year alone, cementing a governing partnership with the extremist group Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP).
Every member of the Student Government Association (SGA), notwithstanding one who abstained, supported the latest measure with a voting tally of 19-0-1, The Algemeiner has learned from sources close to the situation.
Previous resolutions, which include one passed on Yom Kippur, the holiest day in the Jewish calendar, amassed as many as 28 votes but failed to achieve unanimous approval.
The latest measure calls on the school to divest from a range of defense contractors for working with Israel in accordance with the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement, which seeks to isolate the world’s lone Jewish state on the international stage as the first step toward its elimination. Leaders of the movement have repeatedly stated their goal is to destroy Israel.
“[The University of Maryland’s] investments may include companies such as Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, BAE Systems, Elbit Systems, Caterpillar Inc, and RTX Corp, all companies that in some form or another, supply weapons, surveillance, technology, or infrastructure used in Israel’s oppression of Palestinians and have been linked to human right’s violations in other regions,” the resolution states, seemingly admitting that its supporters are not certain of the contents of the university’s investment portfolio. “This framework shall apply to the investment of all USM-controlled funds subject to Maryland law.”
October’s Yom Kippur vote, which Jewish students could not attend, accused Israel of “apartheid and occupation.”
Other resolutions at the University of Maryland (UMD) lodged discredited claims of “genocide” and “crimes against humanity” against Israel, parroting atrocity propaganda confected by Hamas to influence the public’s perception of the war in Gaza prompted by Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, invasion of and massacre across southern Israel.
In the days leading up to Wednesday’s vote, Jewish and Christian groups castigated the student government for what they described as being so easily captured by extremists who flagrantly signal their contempt for Jews by perpetrating hate incidents and using Jewish holidays as an occasion for promoting the destruction of the Jewish state.
“As a movement, we are trying to combat antisemitism. It is difficult when we have groups like BDS and UMD’s own student government outwardly discriminating against Jewish students,” said Christians United for Israel (CUFI) and Students Supporting Israel (SSI) in a joint statement, posted on the Instagram social media platform, on Saturday. “They have screamed at Jewish students and cornered them in rooms until police had to get involved. UMD’s student government is not interested in dialogue. They tell their followers not to speak with Israelis.”
They continued, “This form of extremism is hateful and discriminatory. We are calling for awareness and action from UMD to put an end to this.”
On Thursday, SSI president Uriel Appel told The Algemeiner, “The only surprising thing about SGA’s blatant attack on Jewish students on our campus is their zealous persistence on the matter.”
UMD, College Park SJP leading Muslim prayers. Photo: Screenshot
The University of Maryland, College Park’s SJP chapter is one of the most radical in the country. After the Oct. 7 attack, it held a “vigil” for Palestinian terrorists and other events which appeared aimed at pitting the Black and Latino communities against Jews. In its public statements, it has rejected a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and called for the destruction of the Jewish state.
“UMD SJP unequivocally states that the Zionist state of Israel has no right to exist,” it said in a statement issued in July 2024. “Beyond being an apartheid state, the system of Israeli apartheid is a symptom of the fact that it is a settler-colonial ethnostate that seeks to use apartheid to facilitate its genocidal intent and ultimate goal of displacing indigenous Palestinians from their homeland.”
Student governments at other major universities are also pushing anti-Israel measures, as antisemitic incidents remain at high levels on campuses across the US.
As reported by The Algemeiner last week, the University of Nebraska-Lincoln’s (UNL) student government approved a BDS measure pushed by SJP. The student government, facing public scrutiny, ultimately amended the resolution to remove any mention of Israel and rename it the “Divest for Humanity Act.” The measure demanded divestment from armaments manufacturers to block “”complicit in the genocide and atrocities worldwide.” It passed by a wide margin after being doggedly argued against by Jewish students who were subjected to unfounded allegations about links to Israel.
SJP exalted its passing as a victory for its mission to foster a climate in which pro-Israel support in the US is untenable.
The vote came days after a right-wing social media influencer and University of Miami student upbraided her Jewish peers in a tirade in which she denounced them as “disgusting” while accusing rabbis of eating infants.
“Christianity, which says love everyone, meanwhile your Bible says eating someone who is a non-Jew is like eating with an animal. That’s what the Talmud says,” the online influencer, Kaylee Mahony, yelled at members of Students Supporting Israel who had a table at a campus fair held at the University of Miami. “That’s what these people follow.”
She continued, “They think that if you are not a Jew you are an animal. That’s the Talmud. That’s the Talmud.”
The Talmud, a key source of Jewish law, tradition, and theology, is often misrepresented by antisemitic agitators in an effort to malign the Jewish people and their religion.
Mahony can also be heard in video of the incident telling one of the “Because you’re disgusting. It’s disgusting.”
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
Uncategorized
France Continues to See Surge in Antisemitism, New Government Data Shows, Amid Rampant Hostility Toward Jews
Procession arrives at Place des Terreaux with a banner reading, “Against Antisemitism, for the Republic,” during the march against antisemitism, in Lyon, France, June 25, 2024. Photo: Romain Costaseca / Hans Lucas via Reuters Connect
Antisemitism in France remained at alarmingly high levels last year, with 1,320 incidents recorded nationwide, as Jews and Israelis faced several targeted attacks amid a relentlessly hostile climate despite heightened security measures, according to a newly published data.
On Thursday, the French Interior Ministry released its annual report on anti-religious acts, revealing a troubling rise in antisemitic incidents documented in a joint dataset compiled with the Jewish Community Protection Service.
Although the total number of antisemitic outrages in 2025 fell by 16 percent compared to 2024’s second highest ever total of 1,570 cases, the newly released report warns that antisemitism remains “historically high,” with more than 3.5 attacks occurring every day.
Over the past 25 years, antisemitic acts “have never been as numerous as in the past three years,” the report says, noting a dramatic spike following the Hamas-led invasion of and massacre across southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.
Les chiffres de l’antisémitisme en France en 2025 : un enracinement de la haine antijuive.
Le ministère de l’Intérieur a publié, ce jeudi 12 février 2026, les chiffres des actes antireligieux en France pour l’année 2025. Les données chiffrées concernant les actes antisémites… pic.twitter.com/PQXQfNwsqT
— CRIF (@Le_CRIF) February 12, 2026
Even though Jews make up less than 1 percent of France’s population, they accounted for 53 percent of all religiously motivated crimes last year.
Between 2022 and 2025, antisemitic attacks across France quadrupled, leaving the Jewish community more exposed than ever.
The most recent figure of total antisemitic incidents represents a 21 percent decline from 2023’s record high of 1,676 incidents, but a 203 percent increase from the 436 antisemitic acts recorded in 2022, before the Oct. 7 atrocities.
According to French officials, this latest report, which is based on documented cases and official complaints, still underestimates the true scope of the problem, largely due to widespread underreporting.
The first six months of 2025 alone saw more than 640 antisemitic incidents, a 27.5 percent decline from the same period in 2024, but a 112.5 percent increase compared to the first half of 2023, before the start of the war in Gaza.
The report also reveals a surge in physical attacks, totaling 126 incidents last year, with a striking 67.4 percent of all antisemitic acts aimed at people.
Of all recorded incidents, 30.5 percent of antisemitic outrages took place in private settings and 13.1 percent in educational institutions, but the true extent is likely higher, as these numbers do not account for school-related antisemitism reported by the French Ministry of National Education.
The latest data further indicates that anti-Israel rhetoric is fueling antisemitism, with one-third of incidents explicitly referencing Palestine or the war in Gaza.
The French government’s newly released figures come as the local Jewish community continues to face a growing climate of hostility, despite official efforts to increase security and curb the rise in anti-Jewish hatred.
In a shocking second antisemitic attack in less than a week, a 13-year-old boy in Paris was brutally beaten Monday by a knife-wielding assailant.
On his way to a synagogue in Paris’s 18th arrondissement, the schoolboy was physically attacked by a group of five individuals who beat him, pressed a knife to his throat, called him a “dirty Jew,” and stole his belongings, the French news outlet Le Parisien reported.
According to the Paris prosecutor’s office, the victim was walking to a synagogue, clutching his kippah in his hand rather than wearing it for fear of being recognized, when five attackers confronted him. The group then stole his AirPods, sneakers, and coat, and forced him to empty his pockets.
The boy also told authorities that he was shoved, punched in the face, and threatened with a knife to his throat before his attackers stole his belongings, shouting antisemitic remarks throughout the assault.
In a separate incident over the weekend, three Jewish men wearing kippahs were physically threatened with a knife and forced to flee after leaving their Shabbat services near the Trocadéro in southwest Paris’s 16th arrondissement, European Jewish Press reported.
As the victims were leaving a nearby synagogue and walking through the neighborhood, they noticed a man staring at them. The assailant then approached the group and repeatedly asked, “Are you Jews? Are you Israelis?”
When one of them replied “yes,” the man pulled a knife from his pocket and began threatening the group. The victims immediately ran and found police officers nearby. None of the victims were injured.
Last week, a Jewish primary school in eastern Paris was vandalized, with windows smashed and security equipment damaged, prompting a criminal investigation and renewed outrage among local Jewish leaders as targeted antisemitic attacks continued to escalate.
Uncategorized
Antisemitism bills head to NYC Council Committee to Combat Hate
The New York City Council committee is moving forward with a series of bills aimed at addressing the rise in antisemitism, including a controversial proposal that would limit protests outside houses of worship.
The newly created Committee to Combat Hate is set to hold a hearing later this month on seven related bills introduced last month by Council Speaker Julie Menin, who is Jewish. The measures include a proposal to establish a 100-foot buffer zone outside synagogues and educational centers, increased funding for security measures, expanded education on online harassment, and improved reporting of antisemitic incidents.
Antisemitic incidents continue to account for a majority of reported hate crimes in New York City. According to the New York City Police Department, antisemitic incidents made up 57% of all hate crimes reported in 2025. The trend has continued into the new year, with more than half of all hate crimes reported in January targeting Jews or Jewish institutions, NYPD data showed.
Menin, who is the first Jew to lead the city’s legislative body, said last month that the council would vote on her five-point plan to combat antisemitism at Thursday’s meeting, hoping to pass it on an “aggressive and fast timetable.” A council spokesperson said the timetable has since been modified to align with the Feb. 25 committee hearing. After that hearing, the Speaker will decide when the bills go to the full council for a vote.
The panel is chaired by Councilmember Yusef Salaam, who is Muslim and has spoken about the need to confront antisemitism alongside Islamophobia. “When antisemitism rises, Islamophobia often follows,” Salam said at a news conference when the speaker announced her plan. “When Islamophobia is tolerated, antisemitism finds new grounds to grow.”
Before she became speaker, Menin privately promised Inna Vernikov, a Republican from Brooklyn, to create a subcommittee dedicated to combating antisemitism. Instead, she formed a task force, co-chaired by Vernikov and Eric Dinowitz, a Democrat from the Bronx and chair of the seven-member Jewish Caucus. The appointment of Vernikov drew criticism for her incendiary remarks on social media about Mayor Zohran Mamdani and the Democratic Party’s approach to antisemitism.
Mamdani, a strident Israel critic who faces scrutiny from mainstream Jewish organizations over his response to antisemitism and pro-Palestinian protests, said he broadly supports the package introduced by Menin but expressed reservations about the legality of the proposed 100-foot buffer zone around synagogues and other houses of worship. “I wouldn’t sign any legislation that we find to be outside of the bounds of the law,” he said.
On Wednesday, during a budget hearing at the state Legislature, Mamdani was questioned again about his response to antisemitic rhetoric, including the slogan “globalize the intifada,” that has been chanted at protests against the war in Gaza. “I strongly discourage the language, and I have not used the language,” Mamdani said.
Progressive groups that support Mamdani, including Jews For Racial & Economic Justice, Jewish Voice for Peace and IfNotNow, called on council members to reject the buffer zone bill. “When houses of worship host non-religious political events, they are making a choice with the knowledge that they might be protested for doing so,” the groups said.
Mamdani has faced criticism twice for his response to protests outside synagogues hosting events about real estate investment in Israel. On Jan. 8, protesters outside a Queens synagogue featured chants of “Say it loud, say it clear, we support Hamas here.” Though Mamdani quickly condemned the language, he had to follow up later to denounce Hamas.
Just after Mamdani’s election in November, he issued a mixed response to a demonstration outside Manhattan’s Park East Synagogue that featured anti-Israel and antisemitic slogans. He initially questioned the use of a sacred place for an event promoting migration to Israel. He later clarified his statement and said he would consider legislation limiting protests outside synagogues.
Critics said the response, which took nearly a day, was slow and undercut Mamdani’s repeated pledges to protect Jewish New Yorkers, and raised fresh questions about what kind of mayor he intends to be. New York City is home to the largest concentration of Jews in the United States.
The post Antisemitism bills head to NYC Council Committee to Combat Hate appeared first on The Forward.