Why is Blake Lively so overrated?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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."

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.

Only now it jumped the shark, not after the misogynistic PP who called her a slut then an aging whore and fat? The one who Insinuated breastfeeding/pumping is sexual? The one who keeps referencing "Harvey's girl"? The homophobic post about RR?

Ok.

Well she is aging (like the rest of us). But she seems to have a delusional belief that she's still as hot as she was during Gossip Girl and is still "America's sweetheart." The America's sweetheart thing usually describes an actress in the early to mid-teenties not a married thirtysomething with four kids.

It was more the whore comment than the aging but ignore that part.

OK next time be more precise then. You sId it was the aging and the whore part.

You chose which part to comment on, only saying I thought it was odd that this was the part you took issue with. I was precise in quoting the person who posted "aging whore"

+1

I don't know if there is a name for this. It's similar to gaslighting but not quite, when the conversation goes like:
"You shouldn't call someone an aging whore."
"What do you mean? Of course she's aging and it's totally normal. Why would you have a problem with that?!"
"I meant the part about being an aging WHORE."
"Oh you weren't specific enough."

It's clearly not a conversation in good faith.

If it makes you feel any better I think she was pretty slutty in the past. She allegedly sent naked photos to Ben Affleck after she worked with him in The Town. Jennifer Garner found the photos and released them. There is my "good faith" opinion.

The use of the word "slut" belongs back in 1995. Please keep it there. I don't care if she did p*rn, still not calling a woman a slut.

I am not here for the word police. Sending naked photos to a married guy is slutty. Slut, slut, slut

[Anonymous]

What about avowed porn addicts like Baldoni, who look at naked photos of women? Is he a slut?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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."

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.

Only now it jumped the shark, not after the misogynistic PP who called her a slut then an aging whore and fat? The one who Insinuated breastfeeding/pumping is sexual? The one who keeps referencing "Harvey's girl"? The homophobic post about RR?

Ok.

Well she is aging (like the rest of us). But she seems to have a delusional belief that she's still as hot as she was during Gossip Girl and is still "America's sweetheart." The America's sweetheart thing usually describes an actress in the early to mid-teenties not a married thirtysomething with four kids.

It was more the whore comment than the aging but ignore that part.

OK next time be more precise then. You sId it was the aging and the whore part.

You chose which part to comment on, only saying I thought it was odd that this was the part you took issue with. I was precise in quoting the person who posted "aging whore"

+1

I don't know if there is a name for this. It's similar to gaslighting but not quite, when the conversation goes like:
"You shouldn't call someone an aging whore."
"What do you mean? Of course she's aging and it's totally normal. Why would you have a problem with that?!"
"I meant the part about being an aging WHORE."
"Oh you weren't specific enough."

It's clearly not a conversation in good faith.

If it makes you feel any better I think she was pretty slutty in the past. She allegedly sent naked photos to Ben Affleck after she worked with him in The Town. Jennifer Garner found the photos and released them. There is my "good faith" opinion.

The use of the word "slut" belongs back in 1995. Please keep it there. I don't care if she did p*rn, still not calling a woman a slut.

I am not here for the word police. Sending naked photos to a married guy is slutty. Slut, slut, slut

And adamantly believing that this happened because of some "insider" article on the internet is complete idiocy. Idiot, idiot, idiot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What about avowed porn addicts like Baldoni, who look at naked photos of women? Is he a slut?

No, we only attack women based on made up In Touch or Daily Mail creative writing articles! Shhhh!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What about avowed porn addicts like Baldoni, who look at naked photos of women? Is he a slut?

No he's just a feminist who loves women so much he likes looking at their naked photos as often as he can. He never stopped to think about the objectification and sexualization of the female body, proud male feminist as he is. It's part of undefining his masculinity or some BS.

[Anonymous]

A poll in a New York Post article showed that 60 percent of their readers side with Justin Baldoni..I am really sorry for the Blake Lively fan club that the relentless arguing with those who do not like Blake has not resulted in a more positive image for her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A poll in a New York Post article showed that 60 percent of their readers side with Justin Baldoni..I am really sorry for the Blake Lively fan club that the relentless arguing with those who do not like Blake has not resulted in a more positive image for her.

A poll in in thr NY Post??

Hahahaha

Hold on...

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A poll in a New York Post article showed that 60 percent of their readers side with Justin Baldoni..I am really sorry for the Blake Lively fan club that the relentless arguing with those who do not like Blake has not resulted in a more positive image for her.

That's a little low considering we're told everyone at TT feels a certain way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A poll in a New York Post article showed that 60 percent of their readers side with Justin Baldoni..I am really sorry for the Blake Lively fan club that the relentless arguing with those who do not like Blake has not resulted in a more positive image for her.

Actually the point repeatedly being obscured is that whether she is likeable is irrelevant.

Her legit RETALIATION claim and evidence of that is and will be absolutely relevant, legally speaking

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A poll in a New York Post article showed that 60 percent of their readers side with Justin Baldoni..I am really sorry for the Blake Lively fan club that the relentless arguing with those who do not like Blake has not resulted in a more positive image for her.

Actually the point repeatedly being obscured is that whether she is likeable is irrelevant.

Her legit RETALIATION claim and evidence of that is and will be absolutely relevant, legally speaking

But people judge the demeanor of witnesses in court and it does matter if people like them. They are less likely to believe people they do not like.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A poll in a New York Post article showed that 60 percent of their readers side with Justin Baldoni..I am really sorry for the Blake Lively fan club that the relentless arguing with those who do not like Blake has not resulted in a more positive image for her.

Actually the point repeatedly being obscured is that whether she is likeable is irrelevant.

Her legit RETALIATION claim and evidence of that is and will be absolutely relevant, legally speaking

But people judge the demeanor of witnesses in court and it does matter if people like them. They are less likely to believe people they do not like.

And they are supposed to make those judgments on what they directly observe in court not reddit or Tiktok BS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A poll in a New York Post article showed that 60 percent of their readers side with Justin Baldoni..I am really sorry for the Blake Lively fan club that the relentless arguing with those who do not like Blake has not resulted in a more positive image for her.

Actually the point repeatedly being obscured is that whether she is likeable is irrelevant.

Her legit RETALIATION claim and evidence of that is and will be absolutely relevant, legally speaking

But people judge the demeanor of witnesses in court and it does matter if people like them. They are less likely to believe people they do not like.

Facts of the case matter most. Keep trying though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about avowed porn addicts like Baldoni, who look at naked photos of women? Is he a slut?

No he's just a feminist who loves women so much he likes looking at their naked photos as often as he can. He never stopped to think about the objectification and sexualization of the female body, proud male feminist as he is. It's part of undefining his masculinity or some BS.

Lol!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about avowed porn addicts like Baldoni, who look at naked photos of women? Is he a slut?

No he's just a feminist who loves women so much he likes looking at their naked photos as often as he can. He never stopped to think about the objectification and sexualization of the female body, proud male feminist as he is. It's part of undefining his masculinity or some BS.

Lol!

Totally!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A poll in a New York Post article showed that 60 percent of their readers side with Justin Baldoni..I am really sorry for the Blake Lively fan club that the relentless arguing with those who do not like Blake has not resulted in a more positive image for her.

Actually the point repeatedly being obscured is that whether she is likeable is irrelevant.

Her legit RETALIATION claim and evidence of that is and will be absolutely relevant, legally speaking

But people judge the demeanor of witnesses in court and it does matter if people like them. They are less likely to believe people they do not like.

Facts of the case matter most. Keep trying though.

Dp, but those don’t appear to be in her favor either.