Hollywood execs may blacklist Cruz, Bardem for accusing Israel of 'genocide'

[Galraedia]

Last edited Mon Aug 11, 2014, 09:14 PM - Edit history (2)

Penelope Cruz and Javier Bardem face 'fury' of Hollywood following 'genocide' letter condemning Israel

Penelope Cruz and Javier Bardem are reportedly facing a serious backlash from top Hollywood executives following their support for Gaza, which saw the couple sign an open letter condemning the actions of Israel as tantamount to "genocide".

The couple were among 100 film professionals to sign the open Spanish letter calling on the European Union to end Israel’s military operation in Gaza, along with director Pedro Almodovar in July.

But their actions have sparked anger in top Hollywood executives, which has reportedly called their careers in to question. One top exec told the Hollywood Reporter that he was "furious at Javier and Penelope" and queried whether he would want to work with the couple again.

Ms Cruz’s subsequent clarification of the letter, in which she said her "only wish and intention" in signing it was to promote "peace in both Israel and Gaza," was knocked by another top exec, who said the actresses later comments were met with "a collective eye roll".

Read more: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/cruz-and-bardem-face-fury-of-hollywood-following-genocide-letter-condemning-israel-9659707.html



Hollywood execs may blacklist Cruz, Bardem for accusing Israel of 'genocide'

Hollywood producers have signaled a potential blackballing of actress Penelope Cruz and her husband, actor Javier Bardem, after the Spanish couple criticized Israel for its offensive on Gaza.

In July, Bardem and Cruz signed an open letter decrying the "the genocide perpetrated by the Israeli occupation army.”

The letter blames the latest bloodshed on the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories.

"Gaza is living through horror…while the international community does nothing,” said the Spanish letter, signed by 100 top figures in the film industry.

Read more: http://rt.com/usa/179544-penelope-cruz-blacklist-israel/

[BeyondGeography]

1. That would be dumb; doubling down on ugly

Which probably means it is bound to happen. These are great performers, though, and they won't disappear. Bad idea, imo.

[OKNancy]

2. Why would anyone believe what rt.com says?

I'll wait for another source.

[reorg]

10. Can you cite a single example, please

of a false story or false fact reported as true by RT?

I mean, given that you delete news by RT even when the very same news, word for word, are being reported by Western news agencies and media you surely must have a rational reason for your hate?

Tell you what: RT is just quicker in some instances (time zone!). Not in this case, though:

Actors reportedly could face losing work over public stance on the conflict
LOULLA-MAE ELEFTHERIOU-SMITH Sunday 10 August 2014

Penelope Cruz and Javier Bardem are reportedly facing a serious backlash from top Hollywood executives following their support for Gaza, which saw the couple sign an open letter condemning the actions of Israel as tantamount to "genocide".

The couple were among 100 film professionals to sign the open Spanish letter calling on the European Union to end Israel’s military operation in Gaza, along with director Pedro Almodovar in July.

But their actions have sparked anger in top Hollywood executives, which has reportedly called their careers in to question. One top exec told the Hollywood Reporter that he was "furious at Javier and Penelope" and queried whether he would want to work with the couple again.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/cruz-and-bardem-face-fury-of-hollywood-following-genocide-letter-condemning-israel-9659707.html

[sabrina 1]

68. Can you point to some major news story that RT has been wrong about? As a frequent viewer

along with millions of others, I have found them to be excellent wrt to reporting NEWS and generally corroborated by most other credible sources. I see a lot of this hyperbole, as we did re Al Jazeera but nothing to back it up.

And it appears that once again, they got this story right also. You wanted other sources, here are a couple, shameful calls for a BLACKLIST of anyone who dares to oppose Israel's policies:

Penelope Cruz and Javier Bardem Face Hollywood Fury Over Israel Genocide Letter

I doubt this fury will have much impact since most people probably agree with them. Maybe if those execs don't want people to be angry at Israel, they ought to talk to Netanyahu NOT those who rightfully oppose his brutal policies.

Another source:

Stars Face Hollywood Backlash in War of Words Over Israel

You did have another corrobating link in the OP also. As usual, RT got the story correctly.

[oberliner]

69. "Don't try to create a blacklist," says Voight.

Even the most fiercest critics of the views of Bardem and Cruz oppose having their careers being impacted in any way.

This is quoted from those other two links.

[sabrina 1]

73. Well, it's unlikely to happen. In one of the links there is a reference to someone who has worked

with Cruz saying that he will not be hiring her anymore. I'm sure it will be done quietly as people have had with censorship in this country. After the Dixie Chicks debacle, especially since they turned out to be right, even many Repubs who either participated in that disgusting attempt to destroy them over a simple, and truthful, comment, have no interest in turning this Democracy's clock back to the old McCarthy era.

I suspect those who are speaking anonymously to the press, do not want THEIR work boycotted. People will be keeping an eye on their careers though and if they are affected there may be more boycotts against those who think we still live back in the McCarthy era.

As for Jon Voight, that man is a certified Right Wing nutcase. It's no surprise that he would have something stupid to say about this, he never fails to spew his Rightwing garbage to anyone willing to listen.

[zappaman]

70. Uh huh

http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/owk79r/sara-firth

Watch it and get back to us.
Although I admit I don't expect you to directly address anything she says, but one can hope...

[reorg]

79. so, still no examples

That RT has an admitted bias (just read "about us" at their website) is known. Just like (although not openly admitted) all the big-corporation owned cable stations in the US.

[PoutrageFatigue]

89. I dunno....let me ask that well known Putin-apologist Thom Hartman the same question...

....after all they're on the same network....

[Purveyor]

101. Still at it, eh Nancy?

[tritsofme]

3. Likely a BS story, but surely no one who supports BDS could object to this?

Everyone can choose who they boycott and why.

[jaysunb]

4. Your basic "bullshit sandwich."

There are thousands of producers here and you couldn't get more than three of them to agree on anything past film points and possibly lunch.
here's an example from the very same article.

But, ultimately, he said he does not believe the actors’ careers will be affected by their statements as long as their films are successful

Bottom line.....

[reorg]

17. both actors are known through high quality, independent productions

they don't need Hollywood producers who operate according to an entirely different business concept.

So, who cares what some dipshit millionaire employee who wants to make the maximum amount of money through movies thinks.

I'm sure Woody Allen, the Weinstein Company and even Sacha Baron Cohen don't even give a shit.

[JustAnotherGen]

105. I don't know about Weinstein

Harvey Scissor Hands is pretty clear about his politics. Not saying it's an ABSOLUTE - but he's gotten really crotchety in his old age.

[reorg]

109. Harvey Weinstein about "Miral"

Based on the autobiographical novel by Palestinian journalist Rula Jebreal, Miral tells the story of three generations of Palestinian women, and in particular an orphaned Palestinian girl, as they navigate the personal and political landscapes of their times, starting with the creation of the state of Israel in 1948, through the first nonviolent Palestinian uprising against Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip in 1987, to the signing of the Oslo Accords in 1993. Miral is not a documentary or a polemic; it is a window into the lives of Palestinians, whose voices have gone unheard in the United States for far too long. It tells the story of Palestine from the point of view of Palestinians, which makes some people very uncomfortable.

Indeed, before making Miral, we ourselves knew very little about the experiences of Palestinians and their history. Having grown up Jewish in the U.S., our families had deep connections to Israel and Zionism and we were rarely, if ever, exposed to the other side. It is ironic that perhaps only a Jewish filmmaker could make such a film about Palestinians in the political climate of the U.S. today.

Some in our community have refused to see the film; it has been accused of being "anti-Semitic," "anti-Israel," and a "promotion of Hamas." In reality, Miral cannot be categorized in simplistic terms like "pro-Palestinian" or "anti-Israel." If anything, it is pro-understanding and pro-peace. It would seem that any film that treats Palestinians as three-dimensional characters is bound to be smeared by those who insist on reducing this conflict to us vs. them. Such a worldview demands that the Palestinian story, told through Palestinian voices, remains taboo. Indeed, just this week we appealed the MPAA's R-rating of Miral, which we were convinced was a result of the film's political content—and its unapologetic portrayal of the Palestinian point of view—and little else. Had we not succeeded in overturning the decision we could have been left with a situation in which a 16 year old is able to pick up a newspaper and be exposed to hate-filled anti-Muslim views but would not be able to go to a neighborhood multiplex to see the true-life story of another 16 year old, whose nonviolent struggle for freedom and dignity stands in stark contrast to the vile rhetoric about Arabs and Middle Easterners.

Unless the Palestinian narrative is finally understood and acknowledged by Israelis and their American supporters, there will never be peace in the Holy Land.

Understanding the "other" requires us to step out of our comfort zones, to see ourselves in them. When an Israeli or a Jewish American can watch a film that features a Palestinian father sick with worry over his young daughter's future and they identify with that father, with his concern, we are one small step closer to peace. And by refusing to stoke the flames of Islamophobia here in America and beginning to truly see American Muslims as no different than Americans of any other faith, we are one step closer to fully realizing the values upon which our country was built.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/03/12/miral-a-new-movie-about-muslims-and-israelis.html

[JustAnotherGen]

110. Read

http://www.amazon.com/Down-Dirty-Pictures-Sundance-Independent/dp/0684862581

Down and Dirty Pictures - it really peels back the layers on Scissor Hands.

Makes me love Old Sundance even more to know that the guy who ruined Sundance (he's a very very greedy controlling person) and goes to lunch with Redford . . . let's just say Redford always forgets his wallet when it's Harvey!

Harvey will say anything to make a buck or promote a flick -that's why deep down inside we all love him!

[joeybee12]

5. Well, if the RT says so, it must be true...I mean, they're always right,

and NEVER have been known to make things up completely!

Come on, do I really need this?

[reorg]

15. Example please

Put up or do the appropriate other thing.

[joeybee12]

49. If you're really going down that road...

And think the RT is nothing more than a cesspool of ignorant bullshit, that parades Putin lies and propoganda and then puts in stories like this one, without any attributions to anyone..in other words, pulled this shit out of thin air, you really need to be put on ignore...adios.

[reorg]

51. so, no example, as I expected.

The RT article cited in the OP references everything, links to the original article in the "Hollywood Reporter" which discusses the question whether the careers of Bardem and Cruz will be affected over 7 (out of 8) paragraphs.

[Tarheel_Dem]

82. I mean, it's not like RT ever hosted this guy, right?

Oh wait, they did.

[reorg]

83. on the news or in one of their entertainment shows?

Searching YouTube I could only find:

The reason why Alex Jones doesn't appear on RT any more

Alex Jones revealing the reason for him not appearing on Russia Today any more, while discussing, with independent journalist Ben Swann, the nature of the alternative and mainstream media.

1:57 "I'm very suspect of these people at RT ... you know, RT has been infiltrated ... the White House got in touch with RT 2 years ago and said do not have him back anymore if you wanna keep your license in this country ... and they never had me back on", LOL.

(I won't add the link, it's probably some crackpot show, but he is saying it in person)


(on edit) found another gem:

Alex Jones Spits Into The Face Of Vladimir Putin And His Organ RT - Finally!!! filmed on 2013-01-04

I don't sit there and try to manipulate my audience and use buzzwords over and over again ... everybody sees right through you! Okay? You're not gonna get our guns, Russians! You understand that, Vladimir Pootn? You're not gonna destroy America! (Bawls) You understand that???

[Tarheel_Dem]

98. Don't know if you know it, but you made my point for me.

I mean, it's fuckin' Alex Jones, and he is emblematic of the whole RT experience.

[reorg]

120. Yes, I know that you agree with Alex Jones n/t

[Tarheel_Dem]

121. !!!

[PoutrageFatigue]

88. Um...you know Thom Hartman is on that same network, right?

Right?

[Tarheel_Dem]

96. Yes. Yes I do, and I've lost all respect for him & Goodman.

[PoutrageFatigue]

97. You know he's probably the most liberal, progressive voice on American radio right now?

But under the bus he goes because of RT?

That's mind-blowing....

[Tarheel_Dem]

100. Ask yourself how "the most liberal, progressive voice on American radio" could associate himself....

with the Kremlin?

[PoutrageFatigue]

102. You'd have to ask him...maybe because none of the American networks will carry him?

Wouldn't a better question be 'why the hell does the most liberal, progressive voice on American radio" have to use RT to get the message out to the AMERICAN people?

[Tarheel_Dem]

111. Another question, how many "AMERICAN people" are actually listening to Putin's mouthpiece aka RT?

There are lots of very gifted and talented liberal voices who haven't, and would never stoop to being stooges for the Kremlin.

Everybody knows exactly what RT is, especially the people who work there.

[PoutrageFatigue]

112. I don't have Thom Hartmann's numbers handy, but they aren't enough to get interest from a US network

....which is a much larger problem than your weird fascination with trying to drag RT down....

You seem to prefer your propaganda USA-flavored....fine...Just don't lump Thom Hartmann in with the rest of the network...

[Tarheel_Dem]

113. Hartmann sold his soul for a few minutes on the teevee machine. Sad and pathetic.

Foundation

The creation of Russia Today was a part of a larger public relations effort by the Russian government that was intended to improve the image of Russia abroad.[22] RT was conceived by former media minister Mikhail Lesin,[23] and Russian president Vladimir Putin's press spokesperson Aleksei Gromov.[24] At the time of RT's founding, RIA Novosti director Svetlana Mironyuk stated: "Unfortunately, at the level of mass consciousness in the West, Russia is associated with three words: communism, snow and poverty," and added "we would like to present a more complete picture of life in our country."[23] It is registered as an autonomous nonprofit organization[25][26] funded by the federal budget of Russia through the Federal Agency on Press and Mass Communications of the Russian Federation.[27][28]

In 2005, RIA Novosti helped establish ANO TV-Novosti (or "Autonomous Non-profit Organization TV-News&quot to serve as the parent organization for the planned channel. ANO TV-Novosti appointed Sergey Frolov as its CEO position;[29] Frolov stated regarding the channel's development: "A main problem in the beginning was that in our country we've never broadcast English-language television. When it began Russia Today had a certain lack of personnel: it seems hard to find qualified journalists, political scientists, economists, analysts, with good English skills in Moscow."[

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT_(TV_network)

[PoutrageFatigue]

114. No, suggesting one of the leading Progressive voices in America "sold his soul"...

..is sad and pathetic.

Do you listen to his show? Have you actually heard the things he talks about? If you did, you should feel pretty embarrassed right about now for speaking such utter rubbish...

[Tarheel_Dem]

115. Fuck Thom Hartmann.

[PoutrageFatigue]

116. Mighty progressive of you...

[Tarheel_Dem]

117. Hartmann doesn't represent the progressive left, just the Russian part.

[PoutrageFatigue]

118. Glad you crack yourself up...

...you clearly don't listen to him.

[Tarheel_Dem]

119. I did, before he sold his soul.

[Cha]

6. Sorry, fuck RT.. putin's propaganda outlet.

[onenote]

7. Why do DUers persist in posting "information" from RT

[reorg]

14. this is not information from RT

you should get out more.

[Ohio Joe]

8. I'm sorry but... Is this a 'The Jews Run Hollywood' thread?

Really?

[reorg]

13. Are you suggesting that only Jews support Israel?

Please.

[Ohio Joe]

16. I am not suggesting anything... I'm asking...

The article sure reads that way to me

[reorg]

18. I'm also asking

the implication of your question seemed very obvious to me, too.

[Ohio Joe]

19. And I answered you... I am not suggesting anything

A shame you cannot answer mine but... Only the OP could do that.

[reorg]

23. I should "answer" your impertinent suggestion?

It seems to me you are trying to make this news report by The Independent, UK (one day later repeated by RT) into something else entirely. I wonder why.

[Ohio Joe]

34. Are you responding to the correct poster?

I never made the suggestion you are pretending I made... I've said that twice. I also never asked you to answer anything... I thought I was clear that only the OP could answer my question. So... What the fuck are you going on about?

[reorg]

43. Sorry, I misread: so you are asking the OP

to reply to your impertinent question, implying that only Jews might support Israel by creating a blacklist?

[Ohio Joe]

47. Why are you so intent on putting those words in my mouth?

They don't even make sense... I know you are trying to put some type of label on me but... I can't really figure out what that label even is... You jumped on me as well as everyone else in this thread who sees the same possibility of anti Semitic commentary in the OP, so... Stop trying to put foolish words in my mouth and spit it the fuck out, what are you trying to say?

[reorg]

57. I find this reflex to start babbling about conspiracies

when nothing of the kind was even mentioned or implied in the OP or other sources reporting on the same story nauseous.

[Ohio Joe]

60. I find you trying to push anti Semitic bullshit as truth nauseous - nt

[reorg]

67. I should alert on your insults

but I won't.

Remember: my first question was why you seem to believe that only "Jews" would support Israel.

I have no idea in what world you live in, but it doesn't seem to be real. When Israel brutally attacked Palestinians in Gaza, it was defended and supported by pretty much every mainstream media outlet in the US and Europe, not to mention governments and spokespersons. So, when American studio executives and gossip magazines discuss a boycott of actors who publicly criticized Israel's attack, it would appear that they mirror the general mainstream view in Europe and the US. Follow me?

Your dumb "question" was simply an attempt to deflect from the topic at hand. Fox News uses the same tactics, you probably learned it from them. And if deflection doesn't work, you start with insults. Where on earth, I wonder, could you have learned THAT?

[Ohio Joe]

72. Go ahead and alert because you are full of shit...

"Remember: my first question was why you seem to believe that only "Jews" would support Israel."

And I answered you numerous times that I believed no such thing yet still you persist in repeating this crap.

"I have no idea in what world you live in, but it doesn't seem to be real. When Israel brutally attacked Palestinians in Gaza, it was defended and supported by pretty much every mainstream media outlet in the US and Europe, not to mention governments and spokespersons. So, when American studio executives and gossip magazines discuss a boycott of actors who publicly criticized Israel's attack, it would appear that they mirror the general mainstream view in Europe and the US. Follow me?"

And this has jack and shit to do with why I asked the OP the question I asked. I asked because the anti Semitic crap of 'Jews run Hollywood" has been used for many years. The article strongly implies it and I'm not the only one who sees it. You, seem to be the only one who is pretending no such meme exists.

You act as though it is somehow ok to trot out these old anti Semitic tropes since Israel is completely wrong in this latest round of violence (and has been for a very long time now IMO)... It is not ok to trot them out. It is not justified. There are no facts to support it. There are no quotes attributed to anyone that show anything like a "blacklist". It is not happening.

Do you follow me?

"Your dumb "question" was simply an attempt to deflect from the topic at hand."

Deflect? WTF? It's about the OP and directed to the OP... How is that "deflecting"? You try to turn my questioning of a tired and worn anti Semitic meme into... Deflecting? From what?

"Fox News uses the same tactics, you probably learned it from them. And if deflection doesn't work, you start with insults. Where on earth, I wonder, could you have learned THAT?"

Are you shitting me? Less and less are people willing to deal in reality... It is so very fucked up.

[reorg]

78. is it okay to trot out old tropes

Last edited Tue Aug 12, 2014, 06:40 PM - Edit history (1)

When they only exist in your imagination?

WTF said that - call it blacklist, call it boycott, call negative effect on one's career - was considered because "Jews run Hollywood" except you?

All you need to do is to just shut up about this "meme" and we can talk about what was actually reported, whether it's just gossip (doubtful) or about the fact that well-known actors' statements can have an effect on the wider public and put a little dent in the mainstream consensus.

"One producer who has previously worked with Ms Cruz, told the magazine that he privately vowed never to work with the actress again." That's one. Perhaps others might follow, if they - as we are being told - cannot tolerate and qualify as "anti-Semitic" that: "The signatories of this statement, from the world of culture, declare their outrage over the genocide perpetrated by the Israeli occupation army in the Gaza Strip against Palestinian civilians."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/cruz-and-bardem-face-fury-of-hollywood-following-genocide-letter-condemning-israel-9659707.html
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/stars-face-hollywood-backlash-war-723613

A secondary consequence hinted at in the articles is that these actors may no longer be able to attract the right market: "the thing any executive or producer will try to calculate before working with Penelope Cruz or Javier Bardem in the near future is what their value is in the all-important international marketplace, and what territories they might have alienated people in by what they said." IOW, they can continue to make independent movies whose audience might even share their criticisms, but no big blockbusters, and that is, of course, the producers' decision who might just follow a trend.

[Ohio Joe]

80. What is "actually reported" is... Nothing... Made up stuff...

Yet you will wander down the lane from "blacklist" to "negative effect on one's career" without skipping a beat... Like they are the same thing... Based on shit... Fuckin-A, you even admit (barely) that these supposed quotes are attributed to no one (and they could only come up with three of those?) oh... Except for the one quote they use out of context (oh, and hey, his family was holocaust survivors) to lie to people so they think he and lots of his friends support blacklisting... But why would anyone think of an old meme because of that?

I'm not making any commentary on Penelope Cruz or Javier Bardem... I agree with them. Anyone spreading rumors that have no basis in fact while using an old anti Semitic meme... Those are the people I am commenting about.

One wrong does not justify another... Sheesh... Will we ever fucking learn that lesson.

[reorg]

81. Yup

The Hollywood Reporter: Nazi-infested hotbed of anti-Semitism



The Independent: anti-Semitic propaganda headquarters for Europe


An Israeli mother protects her children as they take cover during a rocket attack alert in the southern Israeli Kibbutz of Kfar Aza, neighbouring the Hamas-run Gaza Strip. (Image Gallery, The Independent)


RT: uses this deeply offensive and dangerous stuff and adds lurid headlines. But you didn't even talk about RT, I forgot!

[Ohio Joe]

86. "and adds lurid headlines"

Not "Lurid"... Lies. You should spend some time reading what you link to... As has already been pointed out by others, RT twisted not only the headline but also then says the opposite of the other articles...

But I suspect you already know that.

[reorg]

87. I have asked for an example

many times - nobody ever gave one. Nobody pointed out a single, specific "lie".

As I already pointed out, the information in the article is the same as in various others. Except that their headline writer added the reference to the anti-Communist backlash against sympathisers of the Popular Front movement in the thirties, when every politically active liberal was denounced as "un-American".

Whereas others headlined "Cruz And Bardem 'Face Hollywood Backlash'", or "fury", RT said "Hollywood may blacklist" them.


The Australian is a little less subtle "Hollywood studios blacklist Cruz and Bardem over Gaza letter"

nor is the Internatinal Business Times "Hollywood Studios Blacklist Penelope Cruz over Gaza Letter Accusing Israel of 'Genocide'"

or Al-Bawaba: "Hollywood BLACKLISTS Penelope Cruz & Javier Bardem over Gaza letter"

Mondoweiss "Hollywood’s latest blacklist shadows Bardem, Cruz, Almodovar"

[Ohio Joe]

93. lies are lies, no matter who tells them

No sources make it bullshit... using an old anti Semitic meme makes it anti Semitic bullshit. Saying 'lots of people are saying it' changes nothing and does not make it one bit less anti Semitic... But you do not appear interested in doing anything but justifying your spreading it.

Disgusting.

[reorg]

94. "blacklist" is not

an "old anti Semitic meme" (sic), my sweet friend.

The discussion was about whether or not strong criticism of Israel should or would have consequences for the career of popular actors.

It was reported that such things were discussed. In a newspaper that has some experience with Hollywood blacklists, and presumably lots of contacts in the movie industry. Others picked up the story. Not sure whom you are accusing of lying.

[roody]

41. All the Jews I know do not support

what Israel is doing to Gaza.

[reorg]

44. it's also my own experience

that the most vocal critics of Israel are of Jewish descent, many Israelis among them, too.

[alp227]

35. So show me what the journalist got wrong in the story.

I frown upon reading "JOOS CONTROL HOLLYWOOD!!!!one" rants, but this RT article (as cranky a news source they are) actually reports on a concrete concept.

[Ohio Joe]

40. Does it?

A few anonymous quotes... And one on the record who says nothing about 'blacklisting' of any kind... In fact says their careers won't be harmed at all as long as their films make money. So... WTF is "concrete" about any of it?

[reorg]

45. If you would actually read an article before commenting on it

you might be able to answer your question yourself.

[Ohio Joe]

48. Spit it out... What is concrete in the article?

WTF?

[reorg]

52. The article reports on the reaction of "Hollywood execs"

Last edited Tue Aug 12, 2014, 06:44 PM - Edit history (1)

which was first reported on at length in the "Hollywood reporter" (linked in the RT article). After this was taken up by some blogs (and discussed briefly here in GD), the London paper The Independent published the story on Sunday.

What you are trying to dismiss as "RT's" "anonymous sources" are actually those of the Hollywood Reporter, they explicitly state that many executives are mulling over what they should do but won't go public with their thoughts, except one: Relativity Media chief executive Ryan Kavanaugh, who wrote in an open letter that Cruz and Bardem (among others) are "either ignorant and shouldn't be commenting or is truly anti-Semitic". He added that he "received more than 500 calls, emails, and texts in approval of his comments in the 24 hours after his comments were published. He said that support included top Hollywood executives."

The Hollywood Reporter goes on to discuss whether it will affect Cruz' and Bardem's career over 7 paragraphs (out of 8) and cites some statements by unnamed executives which could be read as a threat (like Kavanaugh's). "I think the thing any executive or producer will try to calculate before working with Penelope Cruz or Javier Bardem in the near future is what their value is in the all-important international marketplace. And what territories they might have alienated people in by what they said."

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/stars-face-hollywood-backlash-war-723613

The Independent added: "One producer who has previously worked with Ms Cruz, told the magazine that he privately vowed never to work with the actress again."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/cruz-and-bardem-face-fury-of-hollywood-following-genocide-letter-condemning-israel-9659707.html

The term "blacklist" was brought up by Jon Voight who warned "Don't try to create a blacklist".

So, while everyone who talked to HR and others apparently agree that the letter signed by Cruz and Bardem was an outrage and "anti-Semitic", and ponder if they themselves would ever work with them, a direct and open threat to blacklist and boycott them was not made.

Still, the underlying feelings were made very clear, so concrete actions may depend on the future good behavior of the perpetrators and whether it will be "worth" it to make that concession.

Thus the somewhat sensational, but still careful RT headline "may blacklist".

[Ohio Joe]

53. I don't give a rats ass whose article it is...

I never even mentioned RT... And not one bit of what you put makes it 'concrete'... It makes it rumor mongering that does it's best to imply 'The Evil Jews' are behind it.

[reorg]

56. what Jews - again?

Last edited Tue Aug 12, 2014, 08:16 AM - Edit history (1)

must be some kind of reflex on your part.

I don't care if you mentioned RT, pretty much everybody else in this thread did - in order to discredit the report, although it was the same information as in the solidly American Hollywood Reporter that claims to have talked to the sources. It was credible enough for The Independent to pick up the story, and for others, too.

I am not aware that any of the "Hollywood execs" sources are Jewish. Jon Voight, is he? I wouldn't know. It seems to me that you are the one who is entertaining the notion that somehow "Jews" must be behind everything. The word blacklist has exclusively American connotations. As to criticism of Israel, it is first and foremost the mainstream US, also European media who often denounce criticism of Israel as anti-Semitic. Likewise, if "Hollywood executives" would indeed consider a boycott of certain actors, it would have to be an American boycott, wouldn't it? So, how on earth do you come up with this shit about "The Evil Jews"? Ridiculous.

[Ohio Joe]

59. Yeah... I read you loud and clear...

"I don't care if you mentioned RT, pretty much everybody else in this thread did - in order to discredit the report"

There is no "report". It is rumors plopped together with poorly cherry picked quotes. It's shit. That fact is not even a debate, there are simply zero sources for this supposed '"blacklist". That the OP decided to dump this turd into GD and run makes it very suspect. That you are defending to the death... To the extent of putting words in my mouth, admitting it, and standing by your attacks, all for the singular purpose of trying to prove a load of anti Semitic bullshit is some how "concrete" or "credible" tells me everything I need to know about you.

You are not fooling me and I doubt you are fooling anyone else.

[reorg]

62. *I* am putting words in *your* mouth?

That's hilarious.

I don't give a shit how you qualify a report. If you had said: gossip, cannot be true, criticism of Israel's attack on Gaza is always fine and dandy with me and everybody else, NO ONE would ever spend a moment's thought on such an outrageous and silly idea to boycott prominent Israel critics ... well, everybody has an opinion.

Your characterization of the Hollywood Reporter, The Independent and RT as peddlers of "anti-Semitic bullshit", however, is baseless and, to put it bluntly, dumb as a stump.

[Bluenorthwest]

55. Jon Voight is a known crank, birther, right wing nut job. He is also not a producer.

Anyone quoting him as a reasoned voice should be sent to the Gulag.

[reorg]

58. True, but it's still interesting

that he agrees with the denunciation of certain criticisms but feels he must warn those with whom he agrees not to boycott those who are being denounced.

[alp227]

46. OK, the article doesn't have a real leg to stand on.

It's just a bunch of hearsay clickbait. Thanks for clarifying.

[lpbk2713]

9. Fascists

They have a right to express their opinions.

[MindPilot]

11. Hollywood execs threatening to blacklist would be supreme irony.

Kind of like accusing Jews of committing genocide.

[REP]

12. 'Jews run Hollywood' + RT source ... One more and I get a Bingo

[reorg]

20. what do you mean by "Jews run Hollywood"?

Are you out of your mind?

[JI7]

25. are only black people born in kenya ? so how is it racist to say he was born in kenya

[reorg]

27. What?

[REP]

26. What do you mean?

Do you not know what single quotes mean? Are you still in grade school?

[reorg]

28. Are you saying the poster quoted somebody else?

Link please.

[REP]

29. No.

[reorg]

30. Okay. Now go back to grade school and learn what quotes mean.

[REP]

32. You're adorable! I used single quotes. Look it up, cutie pie.

I just want to pinch those chubby-wubby widdle cheekies!

[reorg]

33. I think you were using

"dumb" quotation marks.

[REP]

36. Soooooo cute!!

Now let Mommy have her phone back.

[reorg]

38. Now, before you slobber all over me

how about an apology to RT and The Independent and the OP?

[snooper2]

91. you're still here! cool!

I was starting to have a sad when coljam got the hammer...thought I had nobody else to play with LOL

[betterdemsonly]

21. Hollywood has become more corporate and right wing in the last

20 years so I wouldn't be surprised if this hurt them,but they tend to do indy films so the effect would be minimal in their case.

[JI7]

22. this is anti semetic bs, the worst they are getting are idiots like Jon Voight who attack them

for some stupid shit

[reorg]

24. I think you should look for a dictionary n/t

[Galraedia]

39. Because anything not "pro-israel" is anti-semetic?

Give me a break. Judaism is a religion, not a nationality. And the current nation of Israel wasn't founded on Judaism, it was founded by Zionists.

[JI7]

42. yeah, and there is nothing racist about "Obama was born in kenya"

[Galraedia]

50. Jews are not a race.

[JI7]

74. Kenya is not a race either

[Galraedia]

76. Kenya is a nationality. Israel is a nationality. Neither is a religion.

Therefore one cannot merely be 'anti-semetic' for criticizing Israel, as its a nation and not a religion.

[JI7]

77. and that means birthers aren't racist ......................

[zappaman]

31. RT?

[reorg]

37. No.

Ryan Kavanaugh, chief executive of Relativity Media, told the magazine that the initial letter "makes my blood boil".

"As the grandson of Holocaust survivors, I know that anyone calling what’s going on in Israel 'genocide' versus self-defence is either ignorant and shouldn’t be commenting, or is truly anti-Semitic," he added.

Mr Kavanaugh claimed that in the 24 hours after making these comments earlier in the week, he had received more than 500 calls, emails and texts of support, including messages from high-ranking industry executives.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/cruz-and-bardem-face-fury-of-hollywood-following-genocide-letter-condemning-israel-9659707.html

[Bluenorthwest]

54. This rates as stereotyping and utter bullshit.

It suggests cabals and conspiracy and Jewish control of the film business, it is tired, old retreaded bullshit. When there was actual blacklisting in the film industry during the vicious McCarthy era, a disproportionate number of blacklisted artists were Jewish. This sort of rhetoric was often part of the bogus whisper campaigns used to destroy liberal artists.
The people reporting this tripe are ignorant and bigoted.

[reorg]

61. Great

Who mentioned "Jewish control" outside yourself and others with the same reflex?

The OP suggests nothing of the kind and neither does the Hollywood Reporter, where the information stems from, nor the UK Independent, where the same story was also reported. Shame on you for foisting "anti-Semitic" motives on those who discuss whether criticism of Israel should affect one's career or not.

[Galraedia]

63. Yeah, I'm not sure how he came to that either. @_@

Israel is a nationality, not a religion. I don't see how any criticism of a Israel = anti-semetic when you have Jews of various nationalities.

[Bluenorthwest]

92. Here's the thing, I've spent my entire life in the business you are casting as nefarious

and comprised of colluding unified employers of like mind. It was bullshit when McCarthy pulled this crap and it is bullshit now.
It is like any other business, those in it are of many different opinions about many things, you have right wingers, you have left wingers, you have gay people, you have people who hate gay people, you have the bad, you have the good.
The prejudice in the piece is more toward 'Hollywood', and it is a typical, tired right wing thought form. It is based on nothing but a belief that in Hollywood, they are all alike. Who is they? Depends on which time of history we are looking at. Sometimes conservatives have said they are all gay, they are all Communists, they are all race traitors. The details of the language are not nearly as important as the overall meme, 'Hollywood controlled by an evil cabal'. It is Rush Limbaugh territory. A realm of fools and idiots.

And of course, I said nothing about criticism of Israel, I said this piece about the film business is a prejudicial, right wing retread based on nothing but paranoia. Criticize Israel all you like. Just don't put words into my mouth, that comes off as disrespectful. If you want to know what I think about something, ask me. Don't speculate and gossip with your cohort, just ask me.

[oberliner]

64. The non-RT article you added specifically says the opposite

In fact, even the people quoted who are most critical of the letter say that there would and should not be any kind of blacklist.

[zappaman]

71. Duh.

It's RT.com, FFS!

http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/owk79r/sara-firth

[JI7]

75. most credible sources say that there is less support for Israel overall

but that would go against what some would love to believe about who controls what.

[sabrina 1]

65. Shades of the Dixie Chicks. Scary that someone's career can be threatened for wanting PEACE.

Hopefully they will receive support from a public who is damn tired of this kind of censorship. Do we live in a Democracy or not?

This will only make people even MORE angry at Israel. I wonder if some of these people are actually trying to hurt Israel because if they were trying hard to do so, they couldn't be any more successful.

[PoutrageFatigue]

103. Indeed...

[indepat]

66. This is Amurika and the Bardems should be aware that freedom of speech does not include being

critical of Israel or its actions, no matter if the number of brown people they kill with advanced weaponry might seem to some to be tantamount to genocide.

[LeftishBrit]

84. I don't trust rt.com. If it's true then it's utterly wrong.

I don't approve of cultural boycotts on either side of the issue.

[Warren DeMontague]

85. Newly-sentient apes may learn to speak, and subsequently take over the world.

It's not hugely likely, but it may happen.

[Unvanguard]

90. I'm sure both of them will be fine.

Israel's actions in Gaza are (obviously) not "tantamount to genocide" but sometimes people say/sign silly things.

[NCTraveler]

95. I love state run right wing media. It is the best.

Step one: Come up with the concept behind a story based on your preconceived notions.
Step two: Determine how said story needs to read.
Step three: By way of six degrees of kevin Bacon find a way to attribute a quote to an "insider".
Step four: Sit back and watch the fools you tailor your rag to defend it for you.

Yep, that about does it.

[PoutrageFatigue]

99. Yup, that sounds JUST like the Thom Hartmann show....

...

[NCTraveler]

104. Amazing to me that there are five or six posters here....

who absolutely swoon over a right wing state run media outlet. It goes against everything progressive. Then again, the same posters have never said anything but positive words about the right wing lunatic Putin. Go figure.

[PoutrageFatigue]

107. No-one is swooning, just asking for proof of incorrect reporting...

....and I'm sure Thom Hartmann as a SCREAMING liberal likes being tarred with your brush of ignorance....(Putin is right-wing? On what fucking planet?)

[NCTraveler]

108. You must not have read the link in the op.

There is absolutely nothing in it to back up its own claims. It is laughable. How can there be incorrect reporting when there is no true reporting in the first place. Amazing what some will defend. I get it. State run media is your thing. But for you to claim that this is reporting means you don't know what reporting is in the first place. A little clue. There is nothing in the rt story in the op that can be called reporting. How in the world do you call that reporting. That is our first issue.