Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course The NY Times reporter defends her work. Her entire career and reputation is at risk.

Sure, but a PP said that Twohey "must be embarrassed." She doesn't sound embarrassed at all and seems to be standing by the reporting.

I’d be embarrassed were I her. I don’t think the dueling PR angle is going to be legitimated when everything shakes out.

[Anonymous]

Seems like hiring that PR firm, after he had promised not to retaliate against Lively, and then egging the PR firm on to protect him, would be retaliation. Especially if it was successful. The PR form reported that Jed Wallace's team, in particular, had been successful. Wallace's team engages in astroturfing and social media manipulation. The PR firm reported that "we've started to see a shift on social, due largely to Jed and his team's efforts to shift the narrative toward shining a spotlight on Blake and Ryan."

That sounds like retaliation. Someone else in the thread noted that Lively noticed a deposition for Wallace, maybe for tomorrow?

Seems like either Wallace was actually doing nothing (as Baldoni's team now says) but taking credit for the shift in public opinion, or was actually posting negative stuff on Lively that would seem to amount to retaliation. Guess we'll see.

[Anonymous]

1) Any idea why Justin so thoroughly responded to many of Blake's claims yet left out others, like communicating with her dead dad and talking about his porn addiction?

2) As someone who actually does believe Blake was exaggerating at least some of her complaints, I'm curious how Baldoni supporters feeling about this part, which I feel is the most disturbing one of them all:

"During a car ride with Ms. Lively, her assistant and driver, Mr. Baldoni claimed to
Ms. Lively that he had been sexually abused by a former girlfriend (which he has since shared publicly).
At the end this story, Mr. Baldoni shared that it had caused him to reexamine his past. He then said: “ Did
I always ask for consent? No. Did I always listen when they said no? No.""

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a lawyer and a pretty old one at that. Spent most of my career at a very well regarded BigLaw firm, the kind that doesn’t hire anyone who wasn’t on law review. Baldoni’s lawyer is not bad, he’s put together some of the best work I’ve seen from a plaintiff side attorney. Blake’s lawyers on the other hand, are very mid. If you have reviewed a lot of complaints, you can spot it. Some of her allegations are just drafted in a strange way. For example, the birthing scene allegation with the footnote about what generally is worn in partially nude scenes but avoids identifying what Blake was actually wearing. Further the insinuation that an actor and financier were on set to get close to Blake’s crotch is just, well, odd.

There is definitely at least one poster here who is on Blake’s payroll in some capacity.

Lol, yes there are many older Big Law litigators who describe things as "mid" and thinks it's necessary to allege every single detail in an initial complaint or that, alternatively, they should refrain from including an allegation that could, with discovery, be recoverable because it seems "odd ."

Ok, sure.

Np

Hmm, I was only big law for a brief time but still a lawyer for 20+ years and seen a few complaints. I agree with the above.

I do think there is someone very defensive to Blake who posts on here.

[Anonymous]

It would be odd that Bladoni's PR team would be happy with Nathan's PR team if they did nothing. Why hire a crisis PR team to do nothing? Of course they retaliated in the press and I am sure there is plenty of evidence to show that the crisis team was behind a number of negative stories or manipulating online conversations.

The original complaints are blurry but hiring a crisis team and based on some of the texts already released - Nathan's team was definitely pushing bad press on Lively. If Wallace is deposed and truthful and they can get access to his work computer / phone, it will provide a lot more information.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Seems like hiring that PR firm, after he had promised not to retaliate against Lively, and then egging the PR firm on to protect him, would be retaliation. Especially if it was successful. The PR form reported that Jed Wallace's team, in particular, had been successful. Wallace's team engages in astroturfing and social media manipulation. The PR firm reported that "we've started to see a shift on social, due largely to Jed and his team's efforts to shift the narrative toward shining a spotlight on Blake and Ryan."

That sounds like retaliation. Someone else in the thread noted that Lively noticed a deposition for Wallace, maybe for tomorrow?

Seems like either Wallace was actually doing nothing (as Baldoni's team now says) but taking credit for the shift in public opinion, or was actually posting negative stuff on Lively that would seem to amount to retaliation. Guess we'll see.

Hiring PR after not-a-baller moves like having everyone unfollow Baldoni (Lively leaving “crumbs” for people to follow like her buddy Taylor Swift) does not seem retaliatory at all. It’s why that profession such as it is exists, to protect a project he developed, alone, for years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course The NY Times reporter defends her work. Her entire career and reputation is at risk.

Sure, but a PP said that Twohey "must be embarrassed." She doesn't sound embarrassed at all and seems to be standing by the reporting.

Her public stance isn’t meaningful is the point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seems like hiring that PR firm, after he had promised not to retaliate against Lively, and then egging the PR firm on to protect him, would be retaliation. Especially if it was successful. The PR form reported that Jed Wallace's team, in particular, had been successful. Wallace's team engages in astroturfing and social media manipulation. The PR firm reported that "we've started to see a shift on social, due largely to Jed and his team's efforts to shift the narrative toward shining a spotlight on Blake and Ryan."

That sounds like retaliation. Someone else in the thread noted that Lively noticed a deposition for Wallace, maybe for tomorrow?

Seems like either Wallace was actually doing nothing (as Baldoni's team now says) but taking credit for the shift in public opinion, or was actually posting negative stuff on Lively that would seem to amount to retaliation. Guess we'll see.

Hiring PR after not-a-baller moves like having everyone unfollow Baldoni (Lively leaving “crumbs” for people to follow like her buddy Taylor Swift) does not seem retaliatory at all. It’s why that profession such as it is exists, to protect a project he developed, alone, for years.

Exactly. She has a huge causation issue. He hired a PR firm bc SHE was going scorched earth on him and his project.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The dancing scene and the voicemail come across like they were emotionally enmeshed and then Blake spun it as Justin was creepy to Ryan and the whole thing blew up.

There are more texts released today in Daily Mail that show a very flirty, close relationship before it all blew up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It would be odd that Bladoni's PR team would be happy with Nathan's PR team if they did nothing. Why hire a crisis PR team to do nothing? Of course they retaliated in the press and I am sure there is plenty of evidence to show that the crisis team was behind a number of negative stories or manipulating online conversations.

The original complaints are blurry but hiring a crisis team and based on some of the texts already released - Nathan's team was definitely pushing bad press on Lively. If Wallace is deposed and truthful and they can get access to his work computer / phone, it will provide a lot more information.

They definitely did something. I think they stopped other allegations from coming out and made sure that their side was represented when the tabloids were reporting on potential on-set strife. Typical request for comment stuff. Melissa Nathan's sister also works at Page Six.

That seems like standard PR, right? I guess what sounds like it might cross the line is the use of bots and planting of stories on Reddit and Twitter? Not a lawyer though. And Melissa in Justin's suit claimed they didn't use bots.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The dancing scene and the voicemail come across like they were emotionally enmeshed and then Blake spun it as Justin was creepy to Ryan and the whole thing blew up.

There are more texts released today in Daily Mail that show a very flirty, close relationship before it all blew up.

If this is what you're talking about, they were already in Justin's suit

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-14330233/blake-lively-justin-baldoni-flirty-text-exchange-ends-us.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:1) Any idea why Justin so thoroughly responded to many of Blake's claims yet left out others, like communicating with her dead dad and talking about his porn addiction?

2) As someone who actually does believe Blake was exaggerating at least some of her complaints, I'm curious how Baldoni supporters feeling about this part, which I feel is the most disturbing one of them all:

"During a car ride with Ms. Lively, her assistant and driver, Mr. Baldoni claimed to
Ms. Lively that he had been sexually abused by a former girlfriend (which he has since shared publicly).
At the end this story, Mr. Baldoni shared that it had caused him to reexamine his past. He then said: “ Did
I always ask for consent? No. Did I always listen when they said no? No.""

It’s very personal but this is two actors working on intimate scenes together, who have each shared personal things with each other in order to build their on screen chemistry. It is definitely not your run of the mill office cooler chatter, but this context is totally different

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seems like hiring that PR firm, after he had promised not to retaliate against Lively, and then egging the PR firm on to protect him, would be retaliation. Especially if it was successful. The PR form reported that Jed Wallace's team, in particular, had been successful. Wallace's team engages in astroturfing and social media manipulation. The PR firm reported that "we've started to see a shift on social, due largely to Jed and his team's efforts to shift the narrative toward shining a spotlight on Blake and Ryan."

That sounds like retaliation. Someone else in the thread noted that Lively noticed a deposition for Wallace, maybe for tomorrow?

Seems like either Wallace was actually doing nothing (as Baldoni's team now says) but taking credit for the shift in public opinion, or was actually posting negative stuff on Lively that would seem to amount to retaliation. Guess we'll see.

Hiring PR after not-a-baller moves like having everyone unfollow Baldoni (Lively leaving “crumbs” for people to follow like her buddy Taylor Swift) does not seem retaliatory at all. It’s why that profession such as it is exists, to protect a project he developed, alone, for years.

It would be different if he hired PR simply to get him good press. In fact his PR people did do that. That's their job.

But he signed a document saying he would not retaliate against Lively. And then he hired a PR firm to take her down *in retaliation.*

The fact that her unfollowing him on socials was damaging to him is what it is. She's not required to follow him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The dancing scene and the voicemail come across like they were emotionally enmeshed and then Blake spun it as Justin was creepy to Ryan and the whole thing blew up.

There are more texts released today in Daily Mail that show a very flirty, close relationship before it all blew up.

I don't see any flirtation in those posts. They are both being very appreciative of the other but these are all texts we have seen before in the complaints.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1) Any idea why Justin so thoroughly responded to many of Blake's claims yet left out others, like communicating with her dead dad and talking about his porn addiction?

2) As someone who actually does believe Blake was exaggerating at least some of her complaints, I'm curious how Baldoni supporters feeling about this part, which I feel is the most disturbing one of them all:

"During a car ride with Ms. Lively, her assistant and driver, Mr. Baldoni claimed to
Ms. Lively that he had been sexually abused by a former girlfriend (which he has since shared publicly).
At the end this story, Mr. Baldoni shared that it had caused him to reexamine his past. He then said: “ Did
I always ask for consent? No. Did I always listen when they said no? No.""

It’s very personal but this is two actors working on intimate scenes together, who have each shared personal things with each other in order to build their on screen chemistry. It is definitely not your run of the mill office cooler chatter, but this context is totally different

That's fine but I think the point is that's a disturbing thing to share at all. He's admitting to sexually assaulting women.

If they were making a movie about a murderer and he told his costar, "Did I maybe kill someone in high school? Yeah, maybe I did." That would be very alarming. Would you be enthusiastic to then go play scenes where that guy was pretending to strangle you?