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
The three responses to the Bondi Beach Hanukkah attack that could make Jews safer
After two gunmen opened fire at a Hanukkah celebration on Sydney’s Bondi Beach, killing at least 11 people and wounding dozens more, the world is asking urgent questions: Could this be the first of many such attacks? Who might be behind it? And how can we prevent the next tragedy?
Was Iran involved?
Iran, with its long history of using proxies and terrorism, naturally comes to mind. Israeli intelligence has publicly warned that Tehran remains highly motivated to target Israeli and Jewish interests abroad.
Reports suggest that Israeli agencies have assessed not only that Iran has the intent, but that it also possesses the capability to use its networks — through Hezbollah, Hamas, and other proxy groups — to strike outside the Middle East. Western governments, including Australia, the U.S., and members of the EU, have acknowledged Iranian intelligence activity on their soil.
The motivation is clear: Israel’s military strike damaged Iranian infrastructure and positions in June, followed shortly by U.S. attacks that compounded the damage and were widely celebrated in Israel and by Jewish communities. To Iran’s benighted regime, they were provocations that demanded a response. Certainly some of the investigation into the Bondi Beach attack will look in that direction.
But focusing solely on Iran risks missing a more immediate and pervasive danger: Violence against Jews does not require orchestration by a foreign state. The conditions that make it possible — and increasingly thinkable — are already everywhere.
Terrorism against Jews has gone global
Terrorism is tragically easy to carry out. Only two months ago, two Jews were killed by a Muslim attacker on Yom Kippur who rammed a car into a crowd outside a synagogue in England and attacked people with knives.
And while the UK and Australia severely restrict access to weapons, nowhere in the developed world is mad violence easier to orchestrate than in the United States. Firearms are cheap, accessible, and legal for virtually anyone, and the sheer size of the country makes monitoring and security far more difficult than in smaller, more centralized nations. Lone actors can wreak destruction on a scale that would be unthinkable elsewhere. If one wanted to locate the most vulnerable place for ideologically motivated attacks, the United States sits uncomfortably near the top.
Motivation for such violence has been growing steadily. Antisemitic attacks have increased across the Western world, and the way the Gaza war unfolded has only accelerated the trend. The narrative of “genocide” has become increasingly entrenched, making it harder for Jews to occupy the once-unquestioned moral space: I still defend Israel and should not be attacked for it. That space is collapsing.
“The idea that Jews collectively bear responsibility for Israel’s actions is seeping into public consciousness in ways that make massacres like Bondi Beach more thinkable, if not inevitable.”
Dan Perry
Polls now show that roughly half of Americans believe Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. Substantial minorities go further, rationalizing recent attacks against Jews as “understandable” or even “justified.” These numbers do not indicate majority support for violence, but they are significant enough to suggest that moral restraints are weakening.
This shift is particularly pronounced among younger generations, where hostility toward Israel has become a moral baseline. It does not automatically translate into action, but it lowers the social cost of excusing violence. The idea that Jews collectively bear responsibility for Israel’s actions is seeping into public consciousness in ways that make massacres like Bondi Beach more thinkable, if not inevitable.
The situation is compounded by Israel’s current government. Its policies and rhetoric have alienated large swathes of the global community, including non-orthodox Jews in the United States. The government’s posture — contemptuous, dismissive, and occasionally openly sneering — makes the work of diplomats, community leaders, and advocates far more difficult. Israel’s failure to convey a nuanced understanding abroad of the delicacy of its own situation, nor give any inkling of introspection about its conduct in Gaza, feeds perceptions of illegitimacy and exacerbates antisemitism.
So, what can be done?
The 3 ways to make Jewish communities safer
First, Jewish communities must assume that maximal security at every event, and certainly on holidays and around landmarks, is essential not optional. Every public event, school, and institution should be protected at the highest feasible level. Prudence demands it. Governments that claim to protect minorities must fund and sustain this protection, not treat it as an emergency add-on after tragedy strikes.
Second, political leadership matters. World leaders must speak clearly and forcefully against antisemitic violence. Silence or hedging is read as permission. Muslim leaders, in particular, should speak plainly: Condemning attacks on Jews is not an endorsement of Israel, nor a betrayal of Palestinian suffering — it is an assertion of basic moral boundaries. President Donald Trump, despite his many failings, has a unique capacity to apply pressure. If he insisted publicly that major figures in the Muslim world denounce antisemitic violence, he could secure statements and commitments that might otherwise be unattainable. That could save lives.
Finally, Israel itself must confront its role. The current government has become a strategic liability — not just for Israel’s security, but for Jews worldwide. Its policies, tone, and posture have helped create the conditions in which antisemitism flourishes abroad. This in no way justifies attacks on Jews, but we must live in the real world that can be cruel, indifferent, superficial and unfair.
A government that understands the global stakes, communicates openness to the world, respects the diversity of the Jewish diaspora, and approaches foreign and domestic policy with nuance and restraint would do enormous good. It would not eliminate the threat overnight, but it would drastically reduce the conditions that allow such hatred to grow. Replacing the current government with one capable of such diplomacy and moral awareness could, in a sense, be the most effective preventive measure of all.
The Bondi Beach massacre is a devastating warning. It is a tragedy that could have happened anywhere and serves as a grim reminder that antisemitic violence is an urgent threat to Jews everywhere.
The post The three responses to the Bondi Beach Hanukkah attack that could make Jews safer appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
U.S. leaders condemn ‘vile act of antisemitic terror’ after deadly Hanukkah attack in Australia
American politicians responded early Sunday to devastating reports from Sydney, Australia, where at least 11 people were killed during a Hanukkah celebration at the popular Bondi Beach on the first night of Hanukkah. Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese called the terror attack an “act of evil antisemitism” that targeted Australia’s Jewish community.
Some elected officials struck a somber tone, while others drew political conclusions.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio issued a brief statement condemning the attack and said that “antisemitism has no place in this world.”
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Sunday that the Australian government’s decision to recognize a Palestinian state earlier this year encouraged “the Jew-hatred now stalking your streets.”
Sen. Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, tied the attack to the Israel-Hamas war, sending a warning to governments that support the unilateral recognition of an independent Palestinian state before Hamas is disarmed. “When you appease those who kill Jews, you get more killing of Jews,” Graham said in an interview on Fox News’ Sunday Morning Futures.
Sen. John Fetterman, a pro-Israel Democrat from Pennsylvania, echoed that sentiment on the same program, saying that anti-Israel protests in recent years have “penetrated” into violent attacks on Jews. “Just call it what it is,” Fetterman said. “Antisemitism is a worldwide scourge, and it’s constantly demonstrated to be deadly.”
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, who is Jewish, posted on X that the attack is a “shocking reminder that antisemitism and hate is not only toxic and far too present and widespread around the world, it is deadly. It must be vigorously condemned, confronted and overcome.”
New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani issued a statement, posted on his social media accounts, calling the attack a “vile act of antisemitic terror” and “the latest, most horrifying iteration in a growing pattern of violence targeted at Jewish people across the world.”
Mamdani, an outspoken critic of Israel whose statements on the conflict and refusal to disavow the “globalize the Intifada” slogan have roiled and divided the Jewish community, said the deadly attack should be met with urgent action to counter antisemitism. He also reiterated his pledge to “work every day to keep Jewish New Yorkers safe — on our streets, our subways, at shul, in every moment of every day.” New York City is home to the largest concentration of Jews in the United States.
Outgoing New York City Mayor Eric Adams said the police department will provide additional security at public menorah lightings across the city. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul said the state police will assist with protection. “New York will always stand against the scourge of antisemitism and confront violence head-on,” Hochul added.
Brad Lander, the outgoing New York City Comptroller who is Jewish, and also running for Congress, also highlighted the heroism of a local man, Ahmed al-Ahmed, who put his own life at risk by running behind one of the gunmen and tackling and disarming him. Lander mourned the killing of a Chabad of Bondi’s Rabbi Eli Schlanger.
“Our menorahs tonight will also be yahrzeit candles — with grief for this grievous loss and rededication to shine brighter than slaughter and hate,” Lander wrote on X.
The post U.S. leaders condemn ‘vile act of antisemitic terror’ after deadly Hanukkah attack in Australia appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Timeline: How attacks on Jews in Australia have been growing since Oct. 7
The mass shooting at a Hanukkah celebration on Sydney’s Bondi Beach on Sunday marked a grim new chapter in a pattern Australian officials have been tracking for more than two years: the steady escalation of antisemitic threats, from harassment and vandalism to arson, attempted attacks on synagogues and, now, mass-casualty violence at a public Jewish gathering.
Police said at least 11 people were killed, including a rabbi, when a gunman opened fire on families celebrating the first night of Hanukkah at the Chabad event, known as “Chanukah by the Sea.” Federal and state leaders swiftly condemned the attack as antisemitic terrorism and pledged a full national security response.
For Australia’s Jewish community, which numbers around 100,000, the shooting shattered any remaining sense that the country’s recent antisemitic incidents — alarming as they were — remained largely isolated and contained. Some of those attacks, including the Dec. 2024 firebombing of a kosher restaurant and a firebombing of a Melbourne synagogue that same month, were linked to potential Iran involvement.
Sunday’s attack followed mounting warnings from law enforcement and Jewish organizations that antisemitism in Australia had entered a more dangerous phase since Hamas attacked Israel on Oct. 7, 2023 and the war in Gaza ensued.
Below is a timeline of major recent antisemitic incidents in Australia, as authorities and Jewish groups charted an intensifying threat.
July 2025
Australia’s antisemitism envoy reported a dramatic rise in attacks against Jews, citing more than 2,000 cases in the year following Oct. 7 — an increase of more than 300% compared with the previous year.
July 2025
A man set fire to the front door of a synagogue in Melbourne while congregants were inside for Shabbat dinner, as a separate group of protesters stormed an Israeli restaurant nearby. No one was injured in either attack, police said, adding that the synagogue fire was quickly extinguished and that one person was arrested after demonstrators chanting anti-Israel slogans disrupted the restaurant.
Feb. 2025
Two nurses at a Sydney hospital were arrested after they threatened to kill Israeli patients in a video that went viral. It was an episode officials described as emblematic of how antisemitic rhetoric had seeped into workplaces and public institutions.
Feb. 2025
Police in Melbourne arrested a man accused of scrawling antisemitic graffiti in a park and throwing a packet of bacon at a passerby who confronted him.
Feb. 2025
A cluster of incidents in Sydney’s southeast suburbs, home to a large Jewish community, raised alarm among authorities. Antisemitic graffiti was sprayed on cars, homes and on a Jewish elementary school.
Jan. 2025
Police discovered explosives in a camper van in Sydney, saying the device may have been intended for a mass-casualty attack targeting Jews. Police later revealed that the plot was an elaborate hoax masterminded by a crime boss.
Jan. 2025
Two synagogues in Sydney were vandalized on successive days with swastikas and other antisemitic slogans. The attacks also included a nearby home that was defaced with an anti-Jewish slur.
Dec. 2024
The Australian government formed a national antisemitism task force, signaling a shift toward treating antisemitic violence as a coordinated security threat rather than isolated hate crimes.
Dec. 2024
Arsonists firebombed an historic synagogue in Melbourne, causing congregants gathered for morning services to flee. At least one person was injured and the building suffered extensive damage.
In Aug. 2025, federal authorities announced charges in the case and said intelligence agencies were examining evidence of foreign-linked coordination. Officials publicly alleged Iranian involvement, escalating the case into a matter of international security, and expelled from the country Ambassador Ahmad Sadeghi and three other Iranian officials.
October 2024
On Bondi Beach, where the Dec. 2025 shooting took place, arsonists first attacked a brewery which they had incorrectly identified as a kosher caterer. They went back and set fire to the caterer’s building a few days later. Authorities eventually revealed they thought the attacks were done at the behest of Iran. That same month, antisemitic graffiti appeared on a Jewish bakery in Sydney.
May 2024
Vandals sprayed antisemitic graffiti on a Jewish school in Melbourne. School officials increased security amid concerns about copycat attacks.
Feb. 2024
Pro-Palestinian activists made public the personal details of hundreds of Jewish academics, artists and professionals who had participated in a private WhatsApp group. The leak triggered a wave of harassment, prompting at least one family to go into hiding. The episode drew condemnation from federal leaders and warnings from police that online targeting could translate into real-world violence.
Dec. 2023
The Executive Council of Australian Jewry reported a sharp spike in antisemitic incidents in the weeks following Oct. 7, including threats, harassment, vandalism and intimidation. The increase prompted expanded security at synagogues, schools and community centers across major cities.
Nov. 2023
A Melbourne synagogue was ordered to evacuate during Friday night Shabbat services as police responded to nearby pro-Palestinian demonstrations. About 150 congregants had gathered at Central Shul in Caulfield when authorities advised them to leave as a precaution.
Oct. 2023
Two days after Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack on Israel, the Sydney Opera House was lit up in the colors of the Israeli flag and was expected to draw Jews looking for a public space to mourn. Instead, it drew more than 1,000 pro-Palestinian protesters, some of whom spewed antisemitic slogans and rhetoric.
The post Timeline: How attacks on Jews in Australia have been growing since Oct. 7 appeared first on The Forward.