Blake Lively’s claims against Justin Baldoni put spotlight on ‘hostile’ Hollywood tactics

Actress Blake Lively was arguably the Internet’s number one enemy for weeks this summer. Now he has filed an explosive lawsuit that he says raises a “workplace” designed to defame Hollywood – making people question who they are and what to believe.

Blake Lively has always been a carefree actress.

She has appeared in successful TV shows and films, such as Gossip Girl and The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants. She is married to co-star Ryan Reynolds. They are friends with Taylor Swift.

Then in August, while promoting his latest movie It Ends With Us, he suddenly there was an argument, until it is resolved.

He was criticized for comments that appeared to minimize domestic violence, the film’s subject; when old troubling interviews were revived and turned into evidence of abusive behavior.

Public opinion – especially among those who knew and cared about him – seemed to turn against him.

Then the movie came out, the furore died down, and the social media moved on.

But Lively has now filed a lawsuit alleging she was victimized by It Ends With Us director and producer Justin Baldoni – and that when she complained, she and her studio Wayfarer retaliated by campaigning to “destroy” her reputation.

He was the subject of a “sophisticated, coordinated, and well-funded retaliation plan” designed “to silence”, including a “digital army” and fake news fed to “uninformed journalists”, his lawyers say. -that’s why he became a big part of the bad publicity.

In the entire complaint, which runs to 80 pages, Lively’s team repeatedly accuses Badoni and Wayfarer of creating a “working environment that nearly interfered with the production of the film”.

His lawyers published text messages sent between Baldoni’s publicist Jennifer Abel and Melissa Nathan, a crisis communications specialist hired by his studio to help deal with harassment complaints. He seems to provide a rare perspective in a discussion that is often not seen clearly.

Nathan developed a strategy to “generate ideas” on social media, “create, plant, and promote what appears to be truth”, and engage in “disturbing public opinion”, according to legal documents.

“You know we can put anyone,” Nathan wrote to Abel in one of the worst conversations.

Now, the people hired to handle Baldoni’s PR problems are creating problems for themselves.

Abel has said that Lively’s lawyers “picked” messages to include in their case without merit, and that “there was no ‘maliciousness’ established”.

“No bad press has ever been helped, there is no public policy, although we were prepared because it is our job to be prepared for any situation.

“But we didn’t have to do anything because the Internet was doing the work for us.”

Lively’s conflict happened naturally and did not require their help, Abel said.

Attorney Bryan Freedman, representing Baldoni and his studio as well as Abel and Nathan, agreed.

He said Baldoni hired a crisis manager because of the “numerous demands and threats” Lively allegedly made, including “threats not to do it. [show] to settle, and threatened not to promote the film, which caused the film to be destroyed during the release, if his demands were not met”.

He said that the plan that Nathan’s company created “became unnecessary because the audience found Lively’s performance, the interviews and advertising on the promotional tour uninteresting, and they responded enthusiastically to what the media did”.

Overall, Freedman called Lively’s complaint “disgraceful” and full of “falsehoods”.

In recent days, Lively has received support from former bandmates and others in Hollywood.

The name of one of his followers is well known.

Amber Heard, ex-wife of Johnny Depp, he told NBC: “Social networks are the true embodiment of the old saying, ‘A lie travels half the world before the truth begins.’

“I saw this up close. It’s as scary as it is destructive.”

Heard was on the receiving end of media hate for two high-profile lawsuits involving Depp in the UK and US in 2020 and 2022. Nathan is said to have worked for Depp as well.

Freedman responded to Heard by saying that the only connection between him and Lively was that “over the years every move they’ve made has been there for everyone to see” for people to “make up their own minds about – which they did, naturally”.

Tortoise Media chief researcher Alexi Mostrous, who hosted a podcast called Who Driven Amber? earlier this year while reviewing the abuse he received, he said there are similarities.

“In the case of Blake Lively and the case of Amber Heard, you see PR companies working with media professionals and other ‘contractors’ to promote profitable online news for their wealthy clients in vague and ambiguous ways,” he told the BBC. Story.

“It’s an unregulated world where all kinds of tricks can happen behind closed doors.”

Various did Lively’s article “reveals a business plan that needs to work smoothly – the hiring of expensive communications professionals is difficult to attract attention and raise customers”.

His claims reveal a “vicious campaign” that went “beyond what most Hollywood advertising companies consider acceptable”. The Wrap’s Sharon Waxman wrote.

According to Rory Lynch, partner and head of reputation law at Gateley Legal, “it’s common practice” in Hollywood and business disputes “to have PRs on both sides planting bad news, sometimes false, about opponents”.

“Even in the Hollywood era, there were rumors that Richard Burton and Elizabeth Taylor used PR professionals to get their word out.”

However, PR people who worked for Baldoni and his studio “dropped the ball a bit” when discussing the script’s strategy, he told BBC News.

“It doesn’t surprise me, especially in the US and in Hollywood, that you have such brutal PR problems.

“But I think the way they wrote this was probably not very smart. They can usually do things like this over the phone.”

Lively herself is a “professional user” who “will also have her own PR people working behind the scenes”, added Lynch.

The New York Timeswhich broke the story of Lively’s complaint over the weekend, said that she “denied that she or any of her representatives planted or spread bad news about Baldoni or Wayfarer”.

The paper added that it is “impossible to know how much of the negative publicity” for Lively was initially planted by those working on Baldoni’s behalf, “and how he saw it and developed it”.

Many fans who were against Lively now see the situation differently.

“We are so susceptible to misogyny that all it takes is a PR deal to turn sides against a domestic violence victim, or America’s ex-girlfriend,” wrote Maddy Mussen in the Standard.

“Now that our eyes are open, are we going to be hard to fool? Or are we going to look for any excuse to turn on a famous woman who is suddenly, in our eyes and in the eyes of those who disturb us, no longer worthy?”

The Guardian’s Laura Snapes wrote that he and his friends now “looked back, with horror, at what we said about him in the last months”.

He added: “Lively’s complaint has made my head spin.”