Why is Blake Lively so overrated?

[Anonymous]

The heroine of this thread makes no effort to hide the fact she is using a movie about domestic violence to boast her ability to hawk shampoo and alcohol. What a role model!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The heroine of this thread makes no effort to hide the fact she is using a movie about domestic violence to boast her ability to hawk shampoo and alcohol. What a role model!

Now tell us how you feel about sexual harassment since you are a real champion of women's causes?

[Anonymous]

I loved her in The age of Adeline/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The heroine of this thread makes no effort to hide the fact she is using a movie about domestic violence to boast her ability to hawk shampoo and alcohol. What a role model!

Now tell us how you feel about sexual harassment since you are a real champion of women's causes?

Let’s change the subject as fast as we can . . . Every time we start talking about what really was going on here, you start attacking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting reddit post from four months ago, but at that time it is hard to know if it is a PR plant (the same person posted the same comment a couple of times).The most interesting part to me is that Blake was talking about going to the NY Times months ago (prior to obtaining the text messages and evidence of smear campaign?)

https://www.reddit.com/r/popculturechat/s/5gDvrprhq8

Thanks, that was interesting. Really shows how insidious this all is.

If I'd read that first, when the Lively lawsuit story broke out I'd be primed to think "oh, I heard about that, he called her sexy and then she threatened to cry harassment if they didn't go with her edit." Most people won't read the full complaint or even articles, just headlines.

Having read this after I've seen the lawsuit, naturally I'm thinking "ok, he harassed her and they wanted to get ahead of the story and plant seeds of doubt for when the inevitable hit."

But which is right? I'm still tending to go with the second version, because the lawsuit literally cites texts from Abel and Nathan discussing getting ahead of the story and creating alternate theories using reddit, so that's more credible than an anonymous reddit poster (but of course, that poster is using a throwaway account because they are spilling inside dirt - which is both what an actual insider and a paid troll would do!).

These are some citations from her complaint that seem relevant. Of course, Baldoni may have some other compelling evidence that disputes this. We'll see.

https://deadline.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Blake-Lively-NY-Lawsuit.pdf

9. On July 31, 2024, following the recommendation of their publicist, Jennifer
Abel, Wayfarer and Mr. Baldoni retained a crisis communications specialist named Melissa
Nathan, and her company The Agency Group PR LLC (“TAG”). Ms. Nathan delivered a proposal
to Mr. Baldoni, which included “[a] website (to discuss), full reddit, full social account take downs,
full social crisis team on hand for anything – engage with audiences in the right way, start threads
of theories (discuss) this is the way to be fully 100% protected.” Ms. Nathan also proposed the
“creation of social fan engagement to go back and forth with any negative accounts, helping to
change [sic] narrative and stay on track.” Per Ms. Nathan, “All of this will be most importantly
untraceable.” As Ms. Abel described it, the plan was to engage in “social media mitigation and
proactive fan posting to counter the negative” as well as “social manipulation.”3

10. This plan went well beyond standard crisis PR. What Ms. Nathan proposed
included a practice known as “Astroturfing,” which has been defined as “the practice of publishing
opinions or comments on the internet, in the media, etc. that appear to come from ordinary
members of the public but actually come from a particular company or political group.”4

11. On August 2, 2024, TAG circulated a “SCENARIO PLANNING”
document to Mr. Baldoni, Mr. Heath, and others, which described preparations and strategy
“should [Ms. Lively] and her team make her grievances public” (the “Scenario Planning
Document”), and is attached hereto as Exhibit D. To “get ahead of this narrative,” Ms. Nathan’s
plan proposed strategies to advance misleading counternarratives, including pushing Ms. Nathan’s
narrative that Ms. Lively had “less than favorable reputation,” proposing to “explore planting
stories about the weaponization of feminism…,” and misleadingly blaming Ms. Lively for
production members’ job losses.

16. Ms. Abel responded that she had just “spoke[n] to Melissa about this…
about what we discussed last night for social and digital.” Ms. Abel added, “Focus on reddit,
TikTok, IG.” With reassurance that Ms. Lively would be “destroy[ed]” and “buried,” Wayfarer
Case 1:24-cv-10049 Document 1 Filed 12/31/24 Page 9 of 93Deadline

Yes, I hold skepticism based on the timing of the (repeatedly copied) post, but even if a PR planted/bought comment, the anticipation of a NYT story months before it actually happened and prior to evidence of texts, is just intriguing. Back then, would a NYT story have been the sexual harassment angle alone? Without evidence of a smear campaign? And/or a male director not listening to female cast perspective on a (female audience targeted) film about domestic violence, as evidence of misogyny?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting reddit post from four months ago, but at that time it is hard to know if it is a PR plant (the same person posted the same comment a couple of times).The most interesting part to me is that Blake was talking about going to the NY Times months ago (prior to obtaining the text messages and evidence of smear campaign?)

https://www.reddit.com/r/popculturechat/s/5gDvrprhq8

Thanks, that was interesting. Really shows how insidious this all is.

If I'd read that first, when the Lively lawsuit story broke out I'd be primed to think "oh, I heard about that, he called her sexy and then she threatened to cry harassment if they didn't go with her edit." Most people won't read the full complaint or even articles, just headlines.

Having read this after I've seen the lawsuit, naturally I'm thinking "ok, he harassed her and they wanted to get ahead of the story and plant seeds of doubt for when the inevitable hit."

But which is right? I'm still tending to go with the second version, because the lawsuit literally cites texts from Abel and Nathan discussing getting ahead of the story and creating alternate theories using reddit, so that's more credible than an anonymous reddit poster (but of course, that poster is using a throwaway account because they are spilling inside dirt - which is both what an actual insider and a paid troll would do!).

These are some citations from her complaint that seem relevant. Of course, Baldoni may have some other compelling evidence that disputes this. We'll see.

https://deadline.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Blake-Lively-NY-Lawsuit.pdf

9. On July 31, 2024, following the recommendation of their publicist, Jennifer
Abel, Wayfarer and Mr. Baldoni retained a crisis communications specialist named Melissa
Nathan, and her company The Agency Group PR LLC (“TAG”). Ms. Nathan delivered a proposal
to Mr. Baldoni, which included “[a] website (to discuss), full reddit, full social account take downs,
full social crisis team on hand for anything – engage with audiences in the right way, start threads
of theories (discuss) this is the way to be fully 100% protected.” Ms. Nathan also proposed the
“creation of social fan engagement to go back and forth with any negative accounts, helping to
change [sic] narrative and stay on track.” Per Ms. Nathan, “All of this will be most importantly
untraceable.” As Ms. Abel described it, the plan was to engage in “social media mitigation and
proactive fan posting to counter the negative” as well as “social manipulation.”3

10. This plan went well beyond standard crisis PR. What Ms. Nathan proposed
included a practice known as “Astroturfing,” which has been defined as “the practice of publishing
opinions or comments on the internet, in the media, etc. that appear to come from ordinary
members of the public but actually come from a particular company or political group.”4

11. On August 2, 2024, TAG circulated a “SCENARIO PLANNING”
document to Mr. Baldoni, Mr. Heath, and others, which described preparations and strategy
“should [Ms. Lively] and her team make her grievances public” (the “Scenario Planning
Document”), and is attached hereto as Exhibit D. To “get ahead of this narrative,” Ms. Nathan’s
plan proposed strategies to advance misleading counternarratives, including pushing Ms. Nathan’s
narrative that Ms. Lively had “less than favorable reputation,” proposing to “explore planting
stories about the weaponization of feminism…,” and misleadingly blaming Ms. Lively for
production members’ job losses.

16. Ms. Abel responded that she had just “spoke[n] to Melissa about this…
about what we discussed last night for social and digital.” Ms. Abel added, “Focus on reddit,
TikTok, IG.” With reassurance that Ms. Lively would be “destroy[ed]” and “buried,” Wayfarer
Case 1:24-cv-10049 Document 1 Filed 12/31/24 Page 9 of 93Deadline

Yes, I hold skepticism based on the timing of the (repeatedly copied) post, but even if a PR planted/bought comment, the anticipation of a NYT story months before it actually happened and prior to evidence of texts, is just intriguing. Back then, would a NYT story have been the sexual harassment angle alone? Without evidence of a smear campaign? And/or a male director not listening to female cast perspective on a (female audience targeted) film about domestic violence, as evidence of misogyny?

DP to add that this poster and "insider scoop" very much appears to be a PR plant on Baldoni's behalf. That same comment was posted repeatedly and the account was created Aug 12, no posts since that time other than the same story repeatedly (even started a thread with it), and never again since Aug.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting reddit post from four months ago, but at that time it is hard to know if it is a PR plant (the same person posted the same comment a couple of times).The most interesting part to me is that Blake was talking about going to the NY Times months ago (prior to obtaining the text messages and evidence of smear campaign?)

https://www.reddit.com/r/popculturechat/s/5gDvrprhq8

Thanks, that was interesting. Really shows how insidious this all is.

If I'd read that first, when the Lively lawsuit story broke out I'd be primed to think "oh, I heard about that, he called her sexy and then she threatened to cry harassment if they didn't go with her edit." Most people won't read the full complaint or even articles, just headlines.

Having read this after I've seen the lawsuit, naturally I'm thinking "ok, he harassed her and they wanted to get ahead of the story and plant seeds of doubt for when the inevitable hit."

But which is right? I'm still tending to go with the second version, because the lawsuit literally cites texts from Abel and Nathan discussing getting ahead of the story and creating alternate theories using reddit, so that's more credible than an anonymous reddit poster (but of course, that poster is using a throwaway account because they are spilling inside dirt - which is both what an actual insider and a paid troll would do!).

These are some citations from her complaint that seem relevant. Of course, Baldoni may have some other compelling evidence that disputes this. We'll see.

https://deadline.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Blake-Lively-NY-Lawsuit.pdf

9. On July 31, 2024, following the recommendation of their publicist, Jennifer
Abel, Wayfarer and Mr. Baldoni retained a crisis communications specialist named Melissa
Nathan, and her company The Agency Group PR LLC (“TAG”). Ms. Nathan delivered a proposal
to Mr. Baldoni, which included “[a] website (to discuss), full reddit, full social account take downs,
full social crisis team on hand for anything – engage with audiences in the right way, start threads
of theories (discuss) this is the way to be fully 100% protected.” Ms. Nathan also proposed the
“creation of social fan engagement to go back and forth with any negative accounts, helping to
change [sic] narrative and stay on track.” Per Ms. Nathan, “All of this will be most importantly
untraceable.” As Ms. Abel described it, the plan was to engage in “social media mitigation and
proactive fan posting to counter the negative” as well as “social manipulation.”3

10. This plan went well beyond standard crisis PR. What Ms. Nathan proposed
included a practice known as “Astroturfing,” which has been defined as “the practice of publishing
opinions or comments on the internet, in the media, etc. that appear to come from ordinary
members of the public but actually come from a particular company or political group.”4

11. On August 2, 2024, TAG circulated a “SCENARIO PLANNING”
document to Mr. Baldoni, Mr. Heath, and others, which described preparations and strategy
“should [Ms. Lively] and her team make her grievances public” (the “Scenario Planning
Document”), and is attached hereto as Exhibit D. To “get ahead of this narrative,” Ms. Nathan’s
plan proposed strategies to advance misleading counternarratives, including pushing Ms. Nathan’s
narrative that Ms. Lively had “less than favorable reputation,” proposing to “explore planting
stories about the weaponization of feminism…,” and misleadingly blaming Ms. Lively for
production members’ job losses.

16. Ms. Abel responded that she had just “spoke[n] to Melissa about this…
about what we discussed last night for social and digital.” Ms. Abel added, “Focus on reddit,
TikTok, IG.” With reassurance that Ms. Lively would be “destroy[ed]” and “buried,” Wayfarer
Case 1:24-cv-10049 Document 1 Filed 12/31/24 Page 9 of 93Deadline

Yes, I hold skepticism based on the timing of the (repeatedly copied) post, but even if a PR planted/bought comment, the anticipation of a NYT story months before it actually happened and prior to evidence of texts, is just intriguing. Back then, would a NYT story have been the sexual harassment angle alone? Without evidence of a smear campaign? And/or a male director not listening to female cast perspective on a (female audience targeted) film about domestic violence, as evidence of misogyny?

I think yes on NYT - they seem to want first dibs on any MeToo stories and the article was basically a recitation of the complaint so I think Lively has a source there, and it's a reasonable guess that Baldoni's people knew that (sure beats their Daily Mail source).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting reddit post from four months ago, but at that time it is hard to know if it is a PR plant (the same person posted the same comment a couple of times).The most interesting part to me is that Blake was talking about going to the NY Times months ago (prior to obtaining the text messages and evidence of smear campaign?)

https://www.reddit.com/r/popculturechat/s/5gDvrprhq8

Thanks, that was interesting. Really shows how insidious this all is.

If I'd read that first, when the Lively lawsuit story broke out I'd be primed to think "oh, I heard about that, he called her sexy and then she threatened to cry harassment if they didn't go with her edit." Most people won't read the full complaint or even articles, just headlines.

Having read this after I've seen the lawsuit, naturally I'm thinking "ok, he harassed her and they wanted to get ahead of the story and plant seeds of doubt for when the inevitable hit."

But which is right? I'm still tending to go with the second version, because the lawsuit literally cites texts from Abel and Nathan discussing getting ahead of the story and creating alternate theories using reddit, so that's more credible than an anonymous reddit poster (but of course, that poster is using a throwaway account because they are spilling inside dirt - which is both what an actual insider and a paid troll would do!).

These are some citations from her complaint that seem relevant. Of course, Baldoni may have some other compelling evidence that disputes this. We'll see.

https://deadline.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Blake-Lively-NY-Lawsuit.pdf

9. On July 31, 2024, following the recommendation of their publicist, Jennifer
Abel, Wayfarer and Mr. Baldoni retained a crisis communications specialist named Melissa
Nathan, and her company The Agency Group PR LLC (“TAG”). Ms. Nathan delivered a proposal
to Mr. Baldoni, which included “[a] website (to discuss), full reddit, full social account take downs,
full social crisis team on hand for anything – engage with audiences in the right way, start threads
of theories (discuss) this is the way to be fully 100% protected.” Ms. Nathan also proposed the
“creation of social fan engagement to go back and forth with any negative accounts, helping to
change [sic] narrative and stay on track.” Per Ms. Nathan, “All of this will be most importantly
untraceable.” As Ms. Abel described it, the plan was to engage in “social media mitigation and
proactive fan posting to counter the negative” as well as “social manipulation.”3

10. This plan went well beyond standard crisis PR. What Ms. Nathan proposed
included a practice known as “Astroturfing,” which has been defined as “the practice of publishing
opinions or comments on the internet, in the media, etc. that appear to come from ordinary
members of the public but actually come from a particular company or political group.”4

11. On August 2, 2024, TAG circulated a “SCENARIO PLANNING”
document to Mr. Baldoni, Mr. Heath, and others, which described preparations and strategy
“should [Ms. Lively] and her team make her grievances public” (the “Scenario Planning
Document”), and is attached hereto as Exhibit D. To “get ahead of this narrative,” Ms. Nathan’s
plan proposed strategies to advance misleading counternarratives, including pushing Ms. Nathan’s
narrative that Ms. Lively had “less than favorable reputation,” proposing to “explore planting
stories about the weaponization of feminism…,” and misleadingly blaming Ms. Lively for
production members’ job losses.

16. Ms. Abel responded that she had just “spoke[n] to Melissa about this…
about what we discussed last night for social and digital.” Ms. Abel added, “Focus on reddit,
TikTok, IG.” With reassurance that Ms. Lively would be “destroy[ed]” and “buried,” Wayfarer
Case 1:24-cv-10049 Document 1 Filed 12/31/24 Page 9 of 93Deadline

Yes, I hold skepticism based on the timing of the (repeatedly copied) post, but even if a PR planted/bought comment, the anticipation of a NYT story months before it actually happened and prior to evidence of texts, is just intriguing. Back then, would a NYT story have been the sexual harassment angle alone? Without evidence of a smear campaign? And/or a male director not listening to female cast perspective on a (female audience targeted) film about domestic violence, as evidence of misogyny?

DP to add that this poster and "insider scoop" very much appears to be a PR plant on Baldoni's behalf. That same comment was posted repeatedly and the account was created Aug 12, no posts since that time other than the same story repeatedly (even started a thread with it), and never again since Aug.

Heh, good catch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting reddit post from four months ago, but at that time it is hard to know if it is a PR plant (the same person posted the same comment a couple of times).The most interesting part to me is that Blake was talking about going to the NY Times months ago (prior to obtaining the text messages and evidence of smear campaign?)

https://www.reddit.com/r/popculturechat/s/5gDvrprhq8

Thanks, that was interesting. Really shows how insidious this all is.

If I'd read that first, when the Lively lawsuit story broke out I'd be primed to think "oh, I heard about that, he called her sexy and then she threatened to cry harassment if they didn't go with her edit." Most people won't read the full complaint or even articles, just headlines.

Having read this after I've seen the lawsuit, naturally I'm thinking "ok, he harassed her and they wanted to get ahead of the story and plant seeds of doubt for when the inevitable hit."

But which is right? I'm still tending to go with the second version, because the lawsuit literally cites texts from Abel and Nathan discussing getting ahead of the story and creating alternate theories using reddit, so that's more credible than an anonymous reddit poster (but of course, that poster is using a throwaway account because they are spilling inside dirt - which is both what an actual insider and a paid troll would do!).

These are some citations from her complaint that seem relevant. Of course, Baldoni may have some other compelling evidence that disputes this. We'll see.

https://deadline.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Blake-Lively-NY-Lawsuit.pdf

9. On July 31, 2024, following the recommendation of their publicist, Jennifer
Abel, Wayfarer and Mr. Baldoni retained a crisis communications specialist named Melissa
Nathan, and her company The Agency Group PR LLC (“TAG”). Ms. Nathan delivered a proposal
to Mr. Baldoni, which included “[a] website (to discuss), full reddit, full social account take downs,
full social crisis team on hand for anything – engage with audiences in the right way, start threads
of theories (discuss) this is the way to be fully 100% protected.” Ms. Nathan also proposed the
“creation of social fan engagement to go back and forth with any negative accounts, helping to
change [sic] narrative and stay on track.” Per Ms. Nathan, “All of this will be most importantly
untraceable.” As Ms. Abel described it, the plan was to engage in “social media mitigation and
proactive fan posting to counter the negative” as well as “social manipulation.”3

10. This plan went well beyond standard crisis PR. What Ms. Nathan proposed
included a practice known as “Astroturfing,” which has been defined as “the practice of publishing
opinions or comments on the internet, in the media, etc. that appear to come from ordinary
members of the public but actually come from a particular company or political group.”4

11. On August 2, 2024, TAG circulated a “SCENARIO PLANNING”
document to Mr. Baldoni, Mr. Heath, and others, which described preparations and strategy
“should [Ms. Lively] and her team make her grievances public” (the “Scenario Planning
Document”), and is attached hereto as Exhibit D. To “get ahead of this narrative,” Ms. Nathan’s
plan proposed strategies to advance misleading counternarratives, including pushing Ms. Nathan’s
narrative that Ms. Lively had “less than favorable reputation,” proposing to “explore planting
stories about the weaponization of feminism…,” and misleadingly blaming Ms. Lively for
production members’ job losses.

16. Ms. Abel responded that she had just “spoke[n] to Melissa about this…
about what we discussed last night for social and digital.” Ms. Abel added, “Focus on reddit,
TikTok, IG.” With reassurance that Ms. Lively would be “destroy[ed]” and “buried,” Wayfarer
Case 1:24-cv-10049 Document 1 Filed 12/31/24 Page 9 of 93Deadline

Those are just the characterizations in the complaint. I’m curious about what the planning documents actually say (I haven’t read exhibit D for example). It’s going to be so interesting to see how baldoni responds and if this goes to trial.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting reddit post from four months ago, but at that time it is hard to know if it is a PR plant (the same person posted the same comment a couple of times).The most interesting part to me is that Blake was talking about going to the NY Times months ago (prior to obtaining the text messages and evidence of smear campaign?)

https://www.reddit.com/r/popculturechat/s/5gDvrprhq8

Thanks, that was interesting. Really shows how insidious this all is.

If I'd read that first, when the Lively lawsuit story broke out I'd be primed to think "oh, I heard about that, he called her sexy and then she threatened to cry harassment if they didn't go with her edit." Most people won't read the full complaint or even articles, just headlines.

Having read this after I've seen the lawsuit, naturally I'm thinking "ok, he harassed her and they wanted to get ahead of the story and plant seeds of doubt for when the inevitable hit."

But which is right? I'm still tending to go with the second version, because the lawsuit literally cites texts from Abel and Nathan discussing getting ahead of the story and creating alternate theories using reddit, so that's more credible than an anonymous reddit poster (but of course, that poster is using a throwaway account because they are spilling inside dirt - which is both what an actual insider and a paid troll would do!).

These are some citations from her complaint that seem relevant. Of course, Baldoni may have some other compelling evidence that disputes this. We'll see.

https://deadline.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Blake-Lively-NY-Lawsuit.pdf

9. On July 31, 2024, following the recommendation of their publicist, Jennifer
Abel, Wayfarer and Mr. Baldoni retained a crisis communications specialist named Melissa
Nathan, and her company The Agency Group PR LLC (“TAG”). Ms. Nathan delivered a proposal
to Mr. Baldoni, which included “[a] website (to discuss), full reddit, full social account take downs,
full social crisis team on hand for anything – engage with audiences in the right way, start threads
of theories (discuss) this is the way to be fully 100% protected.” Ms. Nathan also proposed the
“creation of social fan engagement to go back and forth with any negative accounts, helping to
change [sic] narrative and stay on track.” Per Ms. Nathan, “All of this will be most importantly
untraceable.” As Ms. Abel described it, the plan was to engage in “social media mitigation and
proactive fan posting to counter the negative” as well as “social manipulation.”3

10. This plan went well beyond standard crisis PR. What Ms. Nathan proposed
included a practice known as “Astroturfing,” which has been defined as “the practice of publishing
opinions or comments on the internet, in the media, etc. that appear to come from ordinary
members of the public but actually come from a particular company or political group.”4

11. On August 2, 2024, TAG circulated a “SCENARIO PLANNING”
document to Mr. Baldoni, Mr. Heath, and others, which described preparations and strategy
“should [Ms. Lively] and her team make her grievances public” (the “Scenario Planning
Document”), and is attached hereto as Exhibit D. To “get ahead of this narrative,” Ms. Nathan’s
plan proposed strategies to advance misleading counternarratives, including pushing Ms. Nathan’s
narrative that Ms. Lively had “less than favorable reputation,” proposing to “explore planting
stories about the weaponization of feminism…,” and misleadingly blaming Ms. Lively for
production members’ job losses.

16. Ms. Abel responded that she had just “spoke[n] to Melissa about this…
about what we discussed last night for social and digital.” Ms. Abel added, “Focus on reddit,
TikTok, IG.” With reassurance that Ms. Lively would be “destroy[ed]” and “buried,” Wayfarer
Case 1:24-cv-10049 Document 1 Filed 12/31/24 Page 9 of 93Deadline

Yes, I hold skepticism based on the timing of the (repeatedly copied) post, but even if a PR planted/bought comment, the anticipation of a NYT story months before it actually happened and prior to evidence of texts, is just intriguing. Back then, would a NYT story have been the sexual harassment angle alone? Without evidence of a smear campaign? And/or a male director not listening to female cast perspective on a (female audience targeted) film about domestic violence, as evidence of misogyny?

DP to add that this poster and "insider scoop" very much appears to be a PR plant on Baldoni's behalf. That same comment was posted repeatedly and the account was created Aug 12, no posts since that time other than the same story repeatedly (even started a thread with it), and never again since Aug.

Heh, good catch.

Another interesting and sort of "eery" post from back in August. Talking about threatening to "Amber Heard" Blake but posted months before the nyt article. PR plant or insider from the Wayfarer company? I posted this one here before I think.

Another interesting and sort of "eery" post from back in August. Talking about threatening to "Amber Heard" Blake because of what she did to Baldoni, but posted months before the nyt article. PR plant or insider from the Wayfarer company who knew about the PR smear back then? I posted this one here before I think. On the same account, the person complained about financing Blake.

https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/s/87nzy7VX0t

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting reddit post from four months ago, but at that time it is hard to know if it is a PR plant (the same person posted the same comment a couple of times).The most interesting part to me is that Blake was talking about going to the NY Times months ago (prior to obtaining the text messages and evidence of smear campaign?)

https://www.reddit.com/r/popculturechat/s/5gDvrprhq8

Thanks, that was interesting. Really shows how insidious this all is.

If I'd read that first, when the Lively lawsuit story broke out I'd be primed to think "oh, I heard about that, he called her sexy and then she threatened to cry harassment if they didn't go with her edit." Most people won't read the full complaint or even articles, just headlines.

Having read this after I've seen the lawsuit, naturally I'm thinking "ok, he harassed her and they wanted to get ahead of the story and plant seeds of doubt for when the inevitable hit."

But which is right? I'm still tending to go with the second version, because the lawsuit literally cites texts from Abel and Nathan discussing getting ahead of the story and creating alternate theories using reddit, so that's more credible than an anonymous reddit poster (but of course, that poster is using a throwaway account because they are spilling inside dirt - which is both what an actual insider and a paid troll would do!).

These are some citations from her complaint that seem relevant. Of course, Baldoni may have some other compelling evidence that disputes this. We'll see.

https://deadline.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Blake-Lively-NY-Lawsuit.pdf

9. On July 31, 2024, following the recommendation of their publicist, Jennifer
Abel, Wayfarer and Mr. Baldoni retained a crisis communications specialist named Melissa
Nathan, and her company The Agency Group PR LLC (“TAG”). Ms. Nathan delivered a proposal
to Mr. Baldoni, which included “[a] website (to discuss), full reddit, full social account take downs,
full social crisis team on hand for anything – engage with audiences in the right way, start threads
of theories (discuss) this is the way to be fully 100% protected.” Ms. Nathan also proposed the
“creation of social fan engagement to go back and forth with any negative accounts, helping to
change [sic] narrative and stay on track.” Per Ms. Nathan, “All of this will be most importantly
untraceable.” As Ms. Abel described it, the plan was to engage in “social media mitigation and
proactive fan posting to counter the negative” as well as “social manipulation.”3

10. This plan went well beyond standard crisis PR. What Ms. Nathan proposed
included a practice known as “Astroturfing,” which has been defined as “the practice of publishing
opinions or comments on the internet, in the media, etc. that appear to come from ordinary
members of the public but actually come from a particular company or political group.”4

11. On August 2, 2024, TAG circulated a “SCENARIO PLANNING”
document to Mr. Baldoni, Mr. Heath, and others, which described preparations and strategy
“should [Ms. Lively] and her team make her grievances public” (the “Scenario Planning
Document”), and is attached hereto as Exhibit D. To “get ahead of this narrative,” Ms. Nathan’s
plan proposed strategies to advance misleading counternarratives, including pushing Ms. Nathan’s
narrative that Ms. Lively had “less than favorable reputation,” proposing to “explore planting
stories about the weaponization of feminism…,” and misleadingly blaming Ms. Lively for
production members’ job losses.

16. Ms. Abel responded that she had just “spoke[n] to Melissa about this…
about what we discussed last night for social and digital.” Ms. Abel added, “Focus on reddit,
TikTok, IG.” With reassurance that Ms. Lively would be “destroy[ed]” and “buried,” Wayfarer
Case 1:24-cv-10049 Document 1 Filed 12/31/24 Page 9 of 93Deadline

Yes, I hold skepticism based on the timing of the (repeatedly copied) post, but even if a PR planted/bought comment, the anticipation of a NYT story months before it actually happened and prior to evidence of texts, is just intriguing. Back then, would a NYT story have been the sexual harassment angle alone? Without evidence of a smear campaign? And/or a male director not listening to female cast perspective on a (female audience targeted) film about domestic violence, as evidence of misogyny?

DP to add that this poster and "insider scoop" very much appears to be a PR plant on Baldoni's behalf. That same comment was posted repeatedly and the account was created Aug 12, no posts since that time other than the same story repeatedly (even started a thread with it), and never again since Aug.

Heh, good catch.

Another interesting and sort of "eery" post from back in August. Talking about threatening to "Amber Heard" Blake but posted months before the nyt article. PR plant or insider from the Wayfarer company? I posted this one here before I think.

Another interesting and sort of "eery" post from back in August. Talking about threatening to "Amber Heard" Blake because of what she did to Baldoni, but posted months before the nyt article. PR plant or insider from the Wayfarer company who knew about the PR smear back then? I posted this one here before I think. On the same account, the person complained about financing Blake.

https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/s/87nzy7VX0t

That's just some random person on Reddit.

[Anonymous]

Wow eery!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting reddit post from four months ago, but at that time it is hard to know if it is a PR plant (the same person posted the same comment a couple of times).The most interesting part to me is that Blake was talking about going to the NY Times months ago (prior to obtaining the text messages and evidence of smear campaign?)

https://www.reddit.com/r/popculturechat/s/5gDvrprhq8

Thanks, that was interesting. Really shows how insidious this all is.

If I'd read that first, when the Lively lawsuit story broke out I'd be primed to think "oh, I heard about that, he called her sexy and then she threatened to cry harassment if they didn't go with her edit." Most people won't read the full complaint or even articles, just headlines.

Having read this after I've seen the lawsuit, naturally I'm thinking "ok, he harassed her and they wanted to get ahead of the story and plant seeds of doubt for when the inevitable hit."

But which is right? I'm still tending to go with the second version, because the lawsuit literally cites texts from Abel and Nathan discussing getting ahead of the story and creating alternate theories using reddit, so that's more credible than an anonymous reddit poster (but of course, that poster is using a throwaway account because they are spilling inside dirt - which is both what an actual insider and a paid troll would do!).

These are some citations from her complaint that seem relevant. Of course, Baldoni may have some other compelling evidence that disputes this. We'll see.

https://deadline.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Blake-Lively-NY-Lawsuit.pdf

9. On July 31, 2024, following the recommendation of their publicist, Jennifer
Abel, Wayfarer and Mr. Baldoni retained a crisis communications specialist named Melissa
Nathan, and her company The Agency Group PR LLC (“TAG”). Ms. Nathan delivered a proposal
to Mr. Baldoni, which included “[a] website (to discuss), full reddit, full social account take downs,
full social crisis team on hand for anything – engage with audiences in the right way, start threads
of theories (discuss) this is the way to be fully 100% protected.” Ms. Nathan also proposed the
“creation of social fan engagement to go back and forth with any negative accounts, helping to
change [sic] narrative and stay on track.” Per Ms. Nathan, “All of this will be most importantly
untraceable.” As Ms. Abel described it, the plan was to engage in “social media mitigation and
proactive fan posting to counter the negative” as well as “social manipulation.”3

10. This plan went well beyond standard crisis PR. What Ms. Nathan proposed
included a practice known as “Astroturfing,” which has been defined as “the practice of publishing
opinions or comments on the internet, in the media, etc. that appear to come from ordinary
members of the public but actually come from a particular company or political group.”4

11. On August 2, 2024, TAG circulated a “SCENARIO PLANNING”
document to Mr. Baldoni, Mr. Heath, and others, which described preparations and strategy
“should [Ms. Lively] and her team make her grievances public” (the “Scenario Planning
Document”), and is attached hereto as Exhibit D. To “get ahead of this narrative,” Ms. Nathan’s
plan proposed strategies to advance misleading counternarratives, including pushing Ms. Nathan’s
narrative that Ms. Lively had “less than favorable reputation,” proposing to “explore planting
stories about the weaponization of feminism…,” and misleadingly blaming Ms. Lively for
production members’ job losses.

16. Ms. Abel responded that she had just “spoke[n] to Melissa about this…
about what we discussed last night for social and digital.” Ms. Abel added, “Focus on reddit,
TikTok, IG.” With reassurance that Ms. Lively would be “destroy[ed]” and “buried,” Wayfarer
Case 1:24-cv-10049 Document 1 Filed 12/31/24 Page 9 of 93Deadline

Yes, I hold skepticism based on the timing of the (repeatedly copied) post, but even if a PR planted/bought comment, the anticipation of a NYT story months before it actually happened and prior to evidence of texts, is just intriguing. Back then, would a NYT story have been the sexual harassment angle alone? Without evidence of a smear campaign? And/or a male director not listening to female cast perspective on a (female audience targeted) film about domestic violence, as evidence of misogyny?

DP to add that this poster and "insider scoop" very much appears to be a PR plant on Baldoni's behalf. That same comment was posted repeatedly and the account was created Aug 12, no posts since that time other than the same story repeatedly (even started a thread with it), and never again since Aug.

Heh, good catch.

Another interesting and sort of "eery" post from back in August. Talking about threatening to "Amber Heard" Blake but posted months before the nyt article. PR plant or insider from the Wayfarer company? I posted this one here before I think.

Another interesting and sort of "eery" post from back in August. Talking about threatening to "Amber Heard" Blake because of what she did to Baldoni, but posted months before the nyt article. PR plant or insider from the Wayfarer company who knew about the PR smear back then? I posted this one here before I think. On the same account, the person complained about financing Blake.

https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/s/87nzy7VX0t

That's just some random person on Reddit.

Yes, posting about "Amber Hearding" her back in early August in response to her ruining Baldini's rep. That is definitely an odd post for before months before the NYT article broke.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting reddit post from four months ago, but at that time it is hard to know if it is a PR plant (the same person posted the same comment a couple of times).The most interesting part to me is that Blake was talking about going to the NY Times months ago (prior to obtaining the text messages and evidence of smear campaign?)

https://www.reddit.com/r/popculturechat/s/5gDvrprhq8

Thanks, that was interesting. Really shows how insidious this all is.

If I'd read that first, when the Lively lawsuit story broke out I'd be primed to think "oh, I heard about that, he called her sexy and then she threatened to cry harassment if they didn't go with her edit." Most people won't read the full complaint or even articles, just headlines.

Having read this after I've seen the lawsuit, naturally I'm thinking "ok, he harassed her and they wanted to get ahead of the story and plant seeds of doubt for when the inevitable hit."

But which is right? I'm still tending to go with the second version, because the lawsuit literally cites texts from Abel and Nathan discussing getting ahead of the story and creating alternate theories using reddit, so that's more credible than an anonymous reddit poster (but of course, that poster is using a throwaway account because they are spilling inside dirt - which is both what an actual insider and a paid troll would do!).

These are some citations from her complaint that seem relevant. Of course, Baldoni may have some other compelling evidence that disputes this. We'll see.

https://deadline.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Blake-Lively-NY-Lawsuit.pdf

9. On July 31, 2024, following the recommendation of their publicist, Jennifer
Abel, Wayfarer and Mr. Baldoni retained a crisis communications specialist named Melissa
Nathan, and her company The Agency Group PR LLC (“TAG”). Ms. Nathan delivered a proposal
to Mr. Baldoni, which included “[a] website (to discuss), full reddit, full social account take downs,
full social crisis team on hand for anything – engage with audiences in the right way, start threads
of theories (discuss) this is the way to be fully 100% protected.” Ms. Nathan also proposed the
“creation of social fan engagement to go back and forth with any negative accounts, helping to
change [sic] narrative and stay on track.” Per Ms. Nathan, “All of this will be most importantly
untraceable.” As Ms. Abel described it, the plan was to engage in “social media mitigation and
proactive fan posting to counter the negative” as well as “social manipulation.”3

10. This plan went well beyond standard crisis PR. What Ms. Nathan proposed
included a practice known as “Astroturfing,” which has been defined as “the practice of publishing
opinions or comments on the internet, in the media, etc. that appear to come from ordinary
members of the public but actually come from a particular company or political group.”4

11. On August 2, 2024, TAG circulated a “SCENARIO PLANNING”
document to Mr. Baldoni, Mr. Heath, and others, which described preparations and strategy
“should [Ms. Lively] and her team make her grievances public” (the “Scenario Planning
Document”), and is attached hereto as Exhibit D. To “get ahead of this narrative,” Ms. Nathan’s
plan proposed strategies to advance misleading counternarratives, including pushing Ms. Nathan’s
narrative that Ms. Lively had “less than favorable reputation,” proposing to “explore planting
stories about the weaponization of feminism…,” and misleadingly blaming Ms. Lively for
production members’ job losses.

16. Ms. Abel responded that she had just “spoke[n] to Melissa about this…
about what we discussed last night for social and digital.” Ms. Abel added, “Focus on reddit,
TikTok, IG.” With reassurance that Ms. Lively would be “destroy[ed]” and “buried,” Wayfarer
Case 1:24-cv-10049 Document 1 Filed 12/31/24 Page 9 of 93Deadline

Yes, I hold skepticism based on the timing of the (repeatedly copied) post, but even if a PR planted/bought comment, the anticipation of a NYT story months before it actually happened and prior to evidence of texts, is just intriguing. Back then, would a NYT story have been the sexual harassment angle alone? Without evidence of a smear campaign? And/or a male director not listening to female cast perspective on a (female audience targeted) film about domestic violence, as evidence of misogyny?

DP to add that this poster and "insider scoop" very much appears to be a PR plant on Baldoni's behalf. That same comment was posted repeatedly and the account was created Aug 12, no posts since that time other than the same story repeatedly (even started a thread with it), and never again since Aug.

Heh, good catch.

Another interesting and sort of "eery" post from back in August. Talking about threatening to "Amber Heard" Blake but posted months before the nyt article. PR plant or insider from the Wayfarer company? I posted this one here before I think.

Another interesting and sort of "eery" post from back in August. Talking about threatening to "Amber Heard" Blake because of what she did to Baldoni, but posted months before the nyt article. PR plant or insider from the Wayfarer company who knew about the PR smear back then? I posted this one here before I think. On the same account, the person complained about financing Blake.

https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/s/87nzy7VX0t

That's just some random person on Reddit.

Agree this thread has officially jumped the shark.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting reddit post from four months ago, but at that time it is hard to know if it is a PR plant (the same person posted the same comment a couple of times).The most interesting part to me is that Blake was talking about going to the NY Times months ago (prior to obtaining the text messages and evidence of smear campaign?)

https://www.reddit.com/r/popculturechat/s/5gDvrprhq8

Thanks, that was interesting. Really shows how insidious this all is.

If I'd read that first, when the Lively lawsuit story broke out I'd be primed to think "oh, I heard about that, he called her sexy and then she threatened to cry harassment if they didn't go with her edit." Most people won't read the full complaint or even articles, just headlines.

Having read this after I've seen the lawsuit, naturally I'm thinking "ok, he harassed her and they wanted to get ahead of the story and plant seeds of doubt for when the inevitable hit."

Good luck to her attorneys proving that the Reddit post is associated with Baldoni or his PR team. Big tech is not exactly known for being forthcoming with information. There are missing persons cases that remain unsolved because Apple won't unlock the missing person's phone. I seriously doubt that Reddit will identify any user.

But which is right? I'm still tending to go with the second version, because the lawsuit literally cites texts from Abel and Nathan discussing getting ahead of the story and creating alternate theories using reddit, so that's more credible than an anonymous reddit poster (but of course, that poster is using a throwaway account because they are spilling inside dirt - which is both what an actual insider and a paid troll would do!).

These are some citations from her complaint that seem relevant. Of course, Baldoni may have some other compelling evidence that disputes this. We'll see.

https://deadline.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Blake-Lively-NY-Lawsuit.pdf

9. On July 31, 2024, following the recommendation of their publicist, Jennifer
Abel, Wayfarer and Mr. Baldoni retained a crisis communications specialist named Melissa
Nathan, and her company The Agency Group PR LLC (“TAG”). Ms. Nathan delivered a proposal
to Mr. Baldoni, which included “[a] website (to discuss), full reddit, full social account take downs,
full social crisis team on hand for anything – engage with audiences in the right way, start threads
of theories (discuss) this is the way to be fully 100% protected.” Ms. Nathan also proposed the
“creation of social fan engagement to go back and forth with any negative accounts, helping to
change [sic] narrative and stay on track.” Per Ms. Nathan, “All of this will be most importantly
untraceable.” As Ms. Abel described it, the plan was to engage in “social media mitigation and
proactive fan posting to counter the negative” as well as “social manipulation.”3

10. This plan went well beyond standard crisis PR. What Ms. Nathan proposed
included a practice known as “Astroturfing,” which has been defined as “the practice of publishing
opinions or comments on the internet, in the media, etc. that appear to come from ordinary
members of the public but actually come from a particular company or political group.”4

11. On August 2, 2024, TAG circulated a “SCENARIO PLANNING”
document to Mr. Baldoni, Mr. Heath, and others, which described preparations and strategy
“should [Ms. Lively] and her team make her grievances public” (the “Scenario Planning
Document”), and is attached hereto as Exhibit D. To “get ahead of this narrative,” Ms. Nathan’s
plan proposed strategies to advance misleading counternarratives, including pushing Ms. Nathan’s
narrative that Ms. Lively had “less than favorable reputation,” proposing to “explore planting
stories about the weaponization of feminism…,” and misleadingly blaming Ms. Lively for
production members’ job losses.

16. Ms. Abel responded that she had just “spoke[n] to Melissa about this…
about what we discussed last night for social and digital.” Ms. Abel added, “Focus on reddit,
TikTok, IG.” With reassurance that Ms. Lively would be “destroy[ed]” and “buried,” Wayfarer
Case 1:24-cv-10049 Document 1 Filed 12/31/24 Page 9 of 93Deadline

Yes, I hold skepticism based on the timing of the (repeatedly copied) post, but even if a PR planted/bought comment, the anticipation of a NYT story months before it actually happened and prior to evidence of texts, is just intriguing. Back then, would a NYT story have been the sexual harassment angle alone? Without evidence of a smear campaign? And/or a male director not listening to female cast perspective on a (female audience targeted) film about domestic violence, as evidence of misogyny?

DP to add that this poster and "insider scoop" very much appears to be a PR plant on Baldoni's behalf. That same comment was posted repeatedly and the account was created Aug 12, no posts since that time other than the same story repeatedly (even started a thread with it), and never again since Aug.

Heh, good catch.

Another interesting and sort of "eery" post from back in August. Talking about threatening to "Amber Heard" Blake but posted months before the nyt article. PR plant or insider from the Wayfarer company? I posted this one here before I think.

Another interesting and sort of "eery" post from back in August. Talking about threatening to "Amber Heard" Blake because of what she did to Baldoni, but posted months before the nyt article. PR plant or insider from the Wayfarer company who knew about the PR smear back then? I posted this one here before I think. On the same account, the person complained about financing Blake.

https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/s/87nzy7VX0t

That's just some random person on Reddit.

Yes, posting about "Amber Hearding" her back in early August in response to her ruining Baldini's rep. That is definitely an odd post for before months before the NYT article broke.