Did David Corenswet’s wife quietly liked and then unliked a controversial Instagram post

Julia Best Warner reportedly liked a controversial post as husband David Corenswet’s name surfaced on a false pledge

Actor David Corenswet and his wife Julia Best Warner are at the centre of a swirling online narrative following claims that Warner allegedly liked a greeting-card-style Instagram post with Zionist references. The like was reportedly removed after it sparked attention. Meanwhile, Corenswet’s name was falsely listed on a pledge by Film Workers for Palestine (FWFP), which later confirmed that an impersonator had added him to the campaign without his knowledge.

The FWFP pledge, which calls on Hollywood professionals to avoid collaborating with Israeli film institutions deemed “complicit in genocide and apartheid”, originally included Corenswet’s name among thousands of signatories. On 4 November 2025 the organisation issued a statement clarifying that his name was removed after verification revealed the inclusion was based on fraud. While the pledge itself remains legitimate and backed by many industry figures, the inclusion of Corenswet’s name was incorrectly attributed.

Warner’s alleged Instagram like has fed into the narrative because it coincided with the pledge controversy, though it remains unverified whether the post was genuinely Zionist, contextual or mis-interpreted. No official comment has been released by Warner or Corenswet’s representatives about the Instagram activity. The combination of the two incidents, Warner’s reported social-media interaction and Corenswet’s false pledge listing, has drawn criticism from online commentators, many of whom view it as emblematic of how rapidly celebrity reputation can be affected by social media and misinformation.

The reaction across forums and image-boards has skewed negative. Several users claimed the Instagram like indicated support for contentious political views and accused Warner of being careless. Others argued that the pledge listing issue reflected broader issues around identity, digital impersonation and the perils of unfounded associations. The thread of conversation has emphasised that the absence of clear verification does not prevent reputational impact in an age of rapid online mobilisation.

As the story evolves, it highlights the convergence of celebrity, social media and sensitive geopolitics. Even where allegations remain unconfirmed, the online community is unforgiving. For now, neither Warner nor Corenswet has offered a full public explanation, and the situation stands as a reminder of how quickly personal profiles can become entangled in global controversies.