Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The NYT podcast is very telling.

However, I don’t think he ever thought he’d win it, but wanted discovery.

The billionaire is also Bahai and his wife is involved with Wayfair, so $ spigot is not going to be turned off soon.

How was it telling?

Duh, if they feared losing, they would not publicize it further, now would they?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a tale as old as time. A he said she said, the he is a prominent hollywood player who hires a vicious PR firm, the internet rips the woman apart. Zero attempts to look at the situation from both sides. Please provide a single example where in a contentious dispute between a man and a woman in hollywood the woman is believed and the man is injured.

It only happens when someone is SUCH a predator that they assault SO many women that it can't be explained away (weinstein/cosby). And even then they end up getting out of jail!

Prediction: this turns into a 150 page thread talking about what a see you next tuesday you all think she is. Just like all the other multi hundred long page threads in this forum. There isn't one about a man though! It's ALWAYS about the woman. Examine your ingrained misogyny people.

Second prediction: I get a bunch of people replying to me yelling about Blake being awful and Baldoni being her victim and I just blindly take the woman's side.

I'll just get in front of all of those and tell you what I would say in response. These situations are almost always complex with different levels of power at play (in this case, while Lively and Reynolds have significantly higher household name recognition, Baldoni has extremely powerful industry connections, so is not the david to their goliath). And I believe that almost every celebrity is somewhat egotistical/narcissistic almost by the nature of the gig. Therefore it is my belief that there is almost NEVER a party completely innocent here. There is always blame to be found on both sides because it is almost always giant egos fighting with each other. But here, there is never nuance, it is always the woman sucks and the poor man we had a crush on 10 years ago because he was hot in that movie that one time is innocent.

lol at Baldoni being considered a Hollywood power player with "extremely powerful industry connections." Baldoni is backed by a billionaire with no ties to Hollywood. That matters, and is why Blake and Ryan were able to throw around their weight so much. You seem to acknowledge the complicated dynamics here yet are getting so many basic things wrong.

Thanks for the bolded, exactly. While blake attended the film with other cast members, baldoni attended with sony execs. He has a whole production studio with deep deep pockets. I'm glad you gave me the opportunity to further expound upon that.

Yeah, he's so powerful that he was sent to the basement during his own premiere.

He watched the premiere at the same time but in a different theatre. He didn't watch it in a basement.

Right, he was just in the basement for the party part of the premiere, and a different theater for the movie screening. That isn’t any better.

I don’t understand how he let this happen in the first place. How did BL expect that to be viewed by the general public once the details came out that she forced the director to watch the premier of his own film segregated from his cast in a basement?

It's really misleading to say Baldoni "spent" or "watched" the premiere in the basement. That's not what happened.

Baldoni walked the red carpet, with his wife and friends and people from the studio and Wayfarer. I have seen interviews of him on the red carpet as well as photos of him with his wife and friends.

It sounds like then he and his family went into a basement area while Lively and the rest of the cast walked the carpet, to avoid them running into each other in the building as they came in. I don't know how long this went on though. That's when Baldoni and co. took the photos they've posted.

Then they both watched the movie, but in separate theaters. Lively and the rest of the cast in one theater, Baldoni with studio execs in the other theater. Sounds like the theaters were pretty much the same.

I don't know if there was a party afterwards but if so it wouldn't have been at the theater anyway (the theater is not really set up for that kind of thing, I have been there). I could see someone associated with the movie having a post-premier party at a restaurant or someone's house but I'm betting that due to all the bad blood, they didn't do this.

So Baldoni didn't spend the premier in the basement. He didn't watch the premier in the basement. He spent some amount of time in the basement while Lively and the rest of the cast walked the carpet, posed for photos, and talked to press that was there. I can see how this would be upsetting and why he would be bothered not to be able to walk with the cast, and also why he'd be worried that the segregated premier would be be bad for his public image. But let's be honest about what happened. It's not like he was locked in a basement for the duration. He had a fairly normal premiere experience except for the fact that he was kept separate from the cast of the movie, apparently at their collective request.

So, in fact, he was in the basement and a separate screening room. We agree.

No, we don't. Because you are skipping over the part where he arrived at the red carpet, took photos, enjoyed the experience with his wife and their friends, did press interviews, etc. He did all of that and then went inside. And then they waited in that basement area while Lively and the rest of the cast did the exact same thing he had just finished doing.

Then they all went into screening rooms and watched the movie.

The only differences in their experience is that Lively and others waited in vehicles outside the venue until Baldoni was done with his red carpet, versus waiting in the basement. But if they'd reversed the order so that it was Lively et al who were in the basement, it would have been worse for Baldoni because some press would not have bothered to stick around for his red carpet once all the actual famous people had already gone inside. By going first, Baldoni got better exposure and more press there for his portion of the event.

If he wanted to walk the red carpet with the cast, he should have been a better director which might have led any member of the cast to actually want to be there with him. They didn't. That is on him, I'm sorry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The NYT podcast is very telling.

However, I don’t think he ever thought he’d win it, but wanted discovery.

The billionaire is also Bahai and his wife is involved with Wayfair, so $ spigot is not going to be turned off soon.

How was it telling?

Duh, if they feared losing, they would not publicize it further, now would they?

Nah, it’s not unusual to double down on reporting

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a tale as old as time. A he said she said, the he is a prominent hollywood player who hires a vicious PR firm, the internet rips the woman apart. Zero attempts to look at the situation from both sides. Please provide a single example where in a contentious dispute between a man and a woman in hollywood the woman is believed and the man is injured.

It only happens when someone is SUCH a predator that they assault SO many women that it can't be explained away (weinstein/cosby). And even then they end up getting out of jail!

Prediction: this turns into a 150 page thread talking about what a see you next tuesday you all think she is. Just like all the other multi hundred long page threads in this forum. There isn't one about a man though! It's ALWAYS about the woman. Examine your ingrained misogyny people.

Second prediction: I get a bunch of people replying to me yelling about Blake being awful and Baldoni being her victim and I just blindly take the woman's side.

I'll just get in front of all of those and tell you what I would say in response. These situations are almost always complex with different levels of power at play (in this case, while Lively and Reynolds have significantly higher household name recognition, Baldoni has extremely powerful industry connections, so is not the david to their goliath). And I believe that almost every celebrity is somewhat egotistical/narcissistic almost by the nature of the gig. Therefore it is my belief that there is almost NEVER a party completely innocent here. There is always blame to be found on both sides because it is almost always giant egos fighting with each other. But here, there is never nuance, it is always the woman sucks and the poor man we had a crush on 10 years ago because he was hot in that movie that one time is innocent.

lol at Baldoni being considered a Hollywood power player with "extremely powerful industry connections." Baldoni is backed by a billionaire with no ties to Hollywood. That matters, and is why Blake and Ryan were able to throw around their weight so much. You seem to acknowledge the complicated dynamics here yet are getting so many basic things wrong.

Thanks for the bolded, exactly. While blake attended the film with other cast members, baldoni attended with sony execs. He has a whole production studio with deep deep pockets. I'm glad you gave me the opportunity to further expound upon that.

Yeah, he's so powerful that he was sent to the basement during his own premiere.

He watched the premiere at the same time but in a different theatre. He didn't watch it in a basement.

Right, he was just in the basement for the party part of the premiere, and a different theater for the movie screening. That isn’t any better.

I don’t understand how he let this happen in the first place. How did BL expect that to be viewed by the general public once the details came out that she forced the director to watch the premier of his own film segregated from his cast in a basement?

It's really misleading to say Baldoni "spent" or "watched" the premiere in the basement. That's not what happened.

Baldoni walked the red carpet, with his wife and friends and people from the studio and Wayfarer. I have seen interviews of him on the red carpet as well as photos of him with his wife and friends.

It sounds like then he and his family went into a basement area while Lively and the rest of the cast walked the carpet, to avoid them running into each other in the building as they came in. I don't know how long this went on though. That's when Baldoni and co. took the photos they've posted.

Then they both watched the movie, but in separate theaters. Lively and the rest of the cast in one theater, Baldoni with studio execs in the other theater. Sounds like the theaters were pretty much the same.

I don't know if there was a party afterwards but if so it wouldn't have been at the theater anyway (the theater is not really set up for that kind of thing, I have been there). I could see someone associated with the movie having a post-premier party at a restaurant or someone's house but I'm betting that due to all the bad blood, they didn't do this.

So Baldoni didn't spend the premier in the basement. He didn't watch the premier in the basement. He spent some amount of time in the basement while Lively and the rest of the cast walked the carpet, posed for photos, and talked to press that was there. I can see how this would be upsetting and why he would be bothered not to be able to walk with the cast, and also why he'd be worried that the segregated premier would be be bad for his public image. But let's be honest about what happened. It's not like he was locked in a basement for the duration. He had a fairly normal premiere experience except for the fact that he was kept separate from the cast of the movie, apparently at their collective request.

So, in fact, he was in the basement and a separate screening room. We agree.

No, we don't. Because you are skipping over the part where he arrived at the red carpet, took photos, enjoyed the experience with his wife and their friends, did press interviews, etc. He did all of that and then went inside. And then they waited in that basement area while Lively and the rest of the cast did the exact same thing he had just finished doing.

Then they all went into screening rooms and watched the movie.

The only differences in their experience is that Lively and others waited in vehicles outside the venue until Baldoni was done with his red carpet, versus waiting in the basement. But if they'd reversed the order so that it was Lively et al who were in the basement, it would have been worse for Baldoni because some press would not have bothered to stick around for his red carpet once all the actual famous people had already gone inside. By going first, Baldoni got better exposure and more press there for his portion of the event.

If he wanted to walk the red carpet with the cast, he should have been a better director which might have led any member of the cast to actually want to be there with him. They didn't. That is on him, I'm sorry.

Also different is that Baldoni was backed up by the studio execs and Blake was not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The NYT podcast is very telling.

However, I don’t think he ever thought he’d win it, but wanted discovery.

The billionaire is also Bahai and his wife is involved with Wayfair, so $ spigot is not going to be turned off soon.

Totally disagree, I just listened to it and would like that half hour back. Listen if you want to hear Twohey regurgitate her article while her co worker barely reacts. She doesn’t say one word about how Blake’s complaint came to her attention (CA complaint was not public) nor does she say anything about how she investigated the story. It’s a complete joke, about what you would expect from a newspaper interviewing their own reporter about an article they are being sued for.

I read the transcript in 5 minutes. It’s a good summary for anyone who’s not dialed in.

Do you have a link to it? I can’t find it on the NYT app

Babe, are you trolling with all these questions about where basic things are? I was able to pull up the episode with the transcript after a quick google search.

Huh? What other questions?

DP but there have been multiple questions about this podcast that are like "please summarize it for me here" or "can you link I can't possibly find it." It's weird.

Especially in light of the fact it’s a complete nothing burger, I’d be interested in Twomey being interviewed by another outlet, instead of a NY Times recitation of her article.

NP. I just listened to it. Pretty astounding that the NYT gave all of them just 14 hours to respond. You can argue Baldoni would have a lawyer on call, but the PR people? So weird that they felt the need to rush this story. There was nothing urgent about it that I can see.

That doesn't strike me as "astounding." It sounds pretty typical. If a newspaper does a deeply researched piece on your wrongdoing which includes actual text messages they have verified as true, they aren't going to give you days to get ahead of that narrative and undermine their reporting. They are going to give you enough time to respond and then publish.

But in any case, Baldoni actually responded with a statement within just a couple hours, so it turns out that 14 hours was more than enough.

I don't think we know how much time they gave the PR people, actually. It's not like Baldoni lives with Melissa Nathan. Presumably they contacted people separately.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a tale as old as time. A he said she said, the he is a prominent hollywood player who hires a vicious PR firm, the internet rips the woman apart. Zero attempts to look at the situation from both sides. Please provide a single example where in a contentious dispute between a man and a woman in hollywood the woman is believed and the man is injured.

It only happens when someone is SUCH a predator that they assault SO many women that it can't be explained away (weinstein/cosby). And even then they end up getting out of jail!

Prediction: this turns into a 150 page thread talking about what a see you next tuesday you all think she is. Just like all the other multi hundred long page threads in this forum. There isn't one about a man though! It's ALWAYS about the woman. Examine your ingrained misogyny people.

Second prediction: I get a bunch of people replying to me yelling about Blake being awful and Baldoni being her victim and I just blindly take the woman's side.

I'll just get in front of all of those and tell you what I would say in response. These situations are almost always complex with different levels of power at play (in this case, while Lively and Reynolds have significantly higher household name recognition, Baldoni has extremely powerful industry connections, so is not the david to their goliath). And I believe that almost every celebrity is somewhat egotistical/narcissistic almost by the nature of the gig. Therefore it is my belief that there is almost NEVER a party completely innocent here. There is always blame to be found on both sides because it is almost always giant egos fighting with each other. But here, there is never nuance, it is always the woman sucks and the poor man we had a crush on 10 years ago because he was hot in that movie that one time is innocent.

lol at Baldoni being considered a Hollywood power player with "extremely powerful industry connections." Baldoni is backed by a billionaire with no ties to Hollywood. That matters, and is why Blake and Ryan were able to throw around their weight so much. You seem to acknowledge the complicated dynamics here yet are getting so many basic things wrong.

Thanks for the bolded, exactly. While blake attended the film with other cast members, baldoni attended with sony execs. He has a whole production studio with deep deep pockets. I'm glad you gave me the opportunity to further expound upon that.

Yeah, he's so powerful that he was sent to the basement during his own premiere.

The basement with the sony execs? He showed up in a pink suit and posed with his wife this is absurd

https://pagesix.com/2024/08/09/entertainment/justin-baldoni-made-blake-lively-uncomfortable-sources/

At the New York premiere, Baldoni, 40, arrived with his wife, Emily, who has a small role as a doctor in the movie. Lively, meanwhile, posed on the carpet with co-star Brandon Sklenar as well as her husband Reynolds and pal Hugh Jackman.

Sources said Baldoni sat in his one theater at AMC Lincoln Square with family, friends and execs from Sony and Baldoni’s production company, while Lively watched the movie in a different theater with her own guests, including sister Robyn Lively and her nieces and nephews.

What don’t you get? He watched the movie in a different screening room than Blake and the rest of the cast and was sent to the basement after walking the red carpet while Blake and the rest of the cast milled about the theater, for the hour or so before the screenings began.

I get that he watched the movie with the execs, the people with real power in hollywood. And was put in a different location when the rest of the cast walked the carpet, including the author, at their request.

again:

At the New York premiere, Baldoni, 40, arrived with his wife, Emily, who has a small role as a doctor in the movie. Lively, meanwhile, posed on the carpet with co-star Brandon Sklenar as well as her husband Reynolds and pal Hugh Jackman.

Sources said Baldoni sat in his one theater at AMC Lincoln Square with family, friends and execs from Sony and Baldoni’s production company, while Lively watched the movie in a different theater with her own guests, including sister Robyn Lively and her nieces and nephews.

Rights and so when he wasn’t in the screening room, he was in the basement and it was not for a super short period of time as you are trying to suggest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The NYT podcast is very telling.

However, I don’t think he ever thought he’d win it, but wanted discovery.

The billionaire is also Bahai and his wife is involved with Wayfair, so $ spigot is not going to be turned off soon.

Totally disagree, I just listened to it and would like that half hour back. Listen if you want to hear Twohey regurgitate her article while her co worker barely reacts. She doesn’t say one word about how Blake’s complaint came to her attention (CA complaint was not public) nor does she say anything about how she investigated the story. It’s a complete joke, about what you would expect from a newspaper interviewing their own reporter about an article they are being sued for.

I read the transcript in 5 minutes. It’s a good summary for anyone who’s not dialed in.

Do you have a link to it? I can’t find it on the NYT app

Babe, are you trolling with all these questions about where basic things are? I was able to pull up the episode with the transcript after a quick google search.

Huh? What other questions?

DP but there have been multiple questions about this podcast that are like "please summarize it for me here" or "can you link I can't possibly find it." It's weird.

Especially in light of the fact it’s a complete nothing burger, I’d be interested in Twomey being interviewed by another outlet, instead of a NY Times recitation of her article.

NP. I just listened to it. Pretty astounding that the NYT gave all of them just 14 hours to respond. You can argue Baldoni would have a lawyer on call, but the PR people? So weird that they felt the need to rush this story. There was nothing urgent about it that I can see.

That doesn't strike me as "astounding." It sounds pretty typical. If a newspaper does a deeply researched piece on your wrongdoing which includes actual text messages they have verified as true, they aren't going to give you days to get ahead of that narrative and undermine their reporting. They are going to give you enough time to respond and then publish.

But in any case, Baldoni actually responded with a statement within just a couple hours, so it turns out that 14 hours was more than enough.

I don't think we know how much time they gave the PR people, actually. It's not like Baldoni lives with Melissa Nathan. Presumably they contacted people separately.

They asked him to confirm or deny an entire article, add he denied it and that ended their inquiry. I’d like Twomey to explain how she “meticulously investigated” the article but not a whiff of that in the 30 minute puff piece. Which is why it’s a joke,

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The NYT podcast is very telling.

However, I don’t think he ever thought he’d win it, but wanted discovery.

The billionaire is also Bahai and his wife is involved with Wayfair, so $ spigot is not going to be turned off soon.

How was it telling?

Duh, if they feared losing, they would not publicize it further, now would they?

Obviously not, it would open them up to further damages.

Quite the signal from their lawyers re: strength of case today.

[Anonymous]

It’s been over a month and The NY Times still has done no additional investigation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a tale as old as time. A he said she said, the he is a prominent hollywood player who hires a vicious PR firm, the internet rips the woman apart. Zero attempts to look at the situation from both sides. Please provide a single example where in a contentious dispute between a man and a woman in hollywood the woman is believed and the man is injured.

It only happens when someone is SUCH a predator that they assault SO many women that it can't be explained away (weinstein/cosby). And even then they end up getting out of jail!

Prediction: this turns into a 150 page thread talking about what a see you next tuesday you all think she is. Just like all the other multi hundred long page threads in this forum. There isn't one about a man though! It's ALWAYS about the woman. Examine your ingrained misogyny people.

Second prediction: I get a bunch of people replying to me yelling about Blake being awful and Baldoni being her victim and I just blindly take the woman's side.

I'll just get in front of all of those and tell you what I would say in response. These situations are almost always complex with different levels of power at play (in this case, while Lively and Reynolds have significantly higher household name recognition, Baldoni has extremely powerful industry connections, so is not the david to their goliath). And I believe that almost every celebrity is somewhat egotistical/narcissistic almost by the nature of the gig. Therefore it is my belief that there is almost NEVER a party completely innocent here. There is always blame to be found on both sides because it is almost always giant egos fighting with each other. But here, there is never nuance, it is always the woman sucks and the poor man we had a crush on 10 years ago because he was hot in that movie that one time is innocent.

lol at Baldoni being considered a Hollywood power player with "extremely powerful industry connections." Baldoni is backed by a billionaire with no ties to Hollywood. That matters, and is why Blake and Ryan were able to throw around their weight so much. You seem to acknowledge the complicated dynamics here yet are getting so many basic things wrong.

Thanks for the bolded, exactly. While blake attended the film with other cast members, baldoni attended with sony execs. He has a whole production studio with deep deep pockets. I'm glad you gave me the opportunity to further expound upon that.

Yeah, he's so powerful that he was sent to the basement during his own premiere.

The basement with the sony execs? He showed up in a pink suit and posed with his wife this is absurd

https://pagesix.com/2024/08/09/entertainment/justin-baldoni-made-blake-lively-uncomfortable-sources/

At the New York premiere, Baldoni, 40, arrived with his wife, Emily, who has a small role as a doctor in the movie. Lively, meanwhile, posed on the carpet with co-star Brandon Sklenar as well as her husband Reynolds and pal Hugh Jackman.

Sources said Baldoni sat in his one theater at AMC Lincoln Square with family, friends and execs from Sony and Baldoni’s production company, while Lively watched the movie in a different theater with her own guests, including sister Robyn Lively and her nieces and nephews.

What don’t you get? He watched the movie in a different screening room than Blake and the rest of the cast and was sent to the basement after walking the red carpet while Blake and the rest of the cast milled about the theater, for the hour or so before the screenings began.

I get that he watched the movie with the execs, the people with real power in hollywood. And was put in a different location when the rest of the cast walked the carpet, including the author, at their request.

again:

At the New York premiere, Baldoni, 40, arrived with his wife, Emily, who has a small role as a doctor in the movie. Lively, meanwhile, posed on the carpet with co-star Brandon Sklenar as well as her husband Reynolds and pal Hugh Jackman.

Sources said Baldoni sat in his one theater at AMC Lincoln Square with family, friends and execs from Sony and Baldoni’s production company, while Lively watched the movie in a different theater with her own guests, including sister Robyn Lively and her nieces and nephews.

Rights and so when he wasn’t in the screening room, he was in the basement and it was not for a super short period of time as you are trying to suggest.

He walked the red carpet and watched the screening with the execs. I'm sorry this doesn't help back your case but these are facts. I guess he had to wait in some antechamber at the bottom of some stairs for a bit. It wasn't just BLAKE who said they didn't want to be around him. The cast was with her! Hoover supported her! And the guys with the money supported him. And that tells me a lot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The NYT podcast is very telling.

However, I don’t think he ever thought he’d win it, but wanted discovery.

The billionaire is also Bahai and his wife is involved with Wayfair, so $ spigot is not going to be turned off soon.

How was it telling?

Duh, if they feared losing, they would not publicize it further, now would they?

Obviously not, it would open them up to further damages.

Quite the signal from their lawyers re: strength of case today.

I don’t think so. Every sentence out of her month included “according to the complaint.” Apparently nothing was based on independent reporting. I guess we all are suppose to conveniently forget the hours of interviews with Blake mentioned in the original article.

[Anonymous]

There was no sexual harassment. There was no retaliation to a sexual harassment claim. BL tried using the retaliation claim as a get out of jail free card for poor behavior after the harassment claim. She’s a narcissistic list. Baldoni is annoying af.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a tale as old as time. A he said she said, the he is a prominent hollywood player who hires a vicious PR firm, the internet rips the woman apart. Zero attempts to look at the situation from both sides. Please provide a single example where in a contentious dispute between a man and a woman in hollywood the woman is believed and the man is injured.

It only happens when someone is SUCH a predator that they assault SO many women that it can't be explained away (weinstein/cosby). And even then they end up getting out of jail!

Prediction: this turns into a 150 page thread talking about what a see you next tuesday you all think she is. Just like all the other multi hundred long page threads in this forum. There isn't one about a man though! It's ALWAYS about the woman. Examine your ingrained misogyny people.

Second prediction: I get a bunch of people replying to me yelling about Blake being awful and Baldoni being her victim and I just blindly take the woman's side.

I'll just get in front of all of those and tell you what I would say in response. These situations are almost always complex with different levels of power at play (in this case, while Lively and Reynolds have significantly higher household name recognition, Baldoni has extremely powerful industry connections, so is not the david to their goliath). And I believe that almost every celebrity is somewhat egotistical/narcissistic almost by the nature of the gig. Therefore it is my belief that there is almost NEVER a party completely innocent here. There is always blame to be found on both sides because it is almost always giant egos fighting with each other. But here, there is never nuance, it is always the woman sucks and the poor man we had a crush on 10 years ago because he was hot in that movie that one time is innocent.

lol at Baldoni being considered a Hollywood power player with "extremely powerful industry connections." Baldoni is backed by a billionaire with no ties to Hollywood. That matters, and is why Blake and Ryan were able to throw around their weight so much. You seem to acknowledge the complicated dynamics here yet are getting so many basic things wrong.

Thanks for the bolded, exactly. While blake attended the film with other cast members, baldoni attended with sony execs. He has a whole production studio with deep deep pockets. I'm glad you gave me the opportunity to further expound upon that.

Yeah, he's so powerful that he was sent to the basement during his own premiere.

The basement with the sony execs? He showed up in a pink suit and posed with his wife this is absurd

https://pagesix.com/2024/08/09/entertainment/justin-baldoni-made-blake-lively-uncomfortable-sources/

At the New York premiere, Baldoni, 40, arrived with his wife, Emily, who has a small role as a doctor in the movie. Lively, meanwhile, posed on the carpet with co-star Brandon Sklenar as well as her husband Reynolds and pal Hugh Jackman.

Sources said Baldoni sat in his one theater at AMC Lincoln Square with family, friends and execs from Sony and Baldoni’s production company, while Lively watched the movie in a different theater with her own guests, including sister Robyn Lively and her nieces and nephews.

What don’t you get? He watched the movie in a different screening room than Blake and the rest of the cast and was sent to the basement after walking the red carpet while Blake and the rest of the cast milled about the theater, for the hour or so before the screenings began.

I get that he watched the movie with the execs, the people with real power in hollywood. And was put in a different location when the rest of the cast walked the carpet, including the author, at their request.

again:

At the New York premiere, Baldoni, 40, arrived with his wife, Emily, who has a small role as a doctor in the movie. Lively, meanwhile, posed on the carpet with co-star Brandon Sklenar as well as her husband Reynolds and pal Hugh Jackman.

Sources said Baldoni sat in his one theater at AMC Lincoln Square with family, friends and execs from Sony and Baldoni’s production company, while Lively watched the movie in a different theater with her own guests, including sister Robyn Lively and her nieces and nephews.

Rights and so when he wasn’t in the screening room, he was in the basement and it was not for a super short period of time as you are trying to suggest.

He walked the red carpet and watched the screening with the execs. I'm sorry this doesn't help back your case but these are facts. I guess he had to wait in some antechamber at the bottom of some stairs for a bit. It wasn't just BLAKE who said they didn't want to be around him. The cast was with her! Hoover supported her! And the guys with the money supported him. And that tells me a lot.

We don’t actually know what the vast wanted, we just know they attended the main party and Blake claims she wasn’t the only one who wanted it that way. But it wouldn’t be the first instance of her misrepresenting the truth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The NYT podcast is very telling.

However, I don’t think he ever thought he’d win it, but wanted discovery.

The billionaire is also Bahai and his wife is involved with Wayfair, so $ spigot is not going to be turned off soon.

Totally disagree, I just listened to it and would like that half hour back. Listen if you want to hear Twohey regurgitate her article while her co worker barely reacts. She doesn’t say one word about how Blake’s complaint came to her attention (CA complaint was not public) nor does she say anything about how she investigated the story. It’s a complete joke, about what you would expect from a newspaper interviewing their own reporter about an article they are being sued for.

I read the transcript in 5 minutes. It’s a good summary for anyone who’s not dialed in.

Do you have a link to it? I can’t find it on the NYT app

Babe, are you trolling with all these questions about where basic things are? I was able to pull up the episode with the transcript after a quick google search.

Huh? What other questions?

DP but there have been multiple questions about this podcast that are like "please summarize it for me here" or "can you link I can't possibly find it." It's weird.

Especially in light of the fact it’s a complete nothing burger, I’d be interested in Twomey being interviewed by another outlet, instead of a NY Times recitation of her article.

NP. I just listened to it. Pretty astounding that the NYT gave all of them just 14 hours to respond. You can argue Baldoni would have a lawyer on call, but the PR people? So weird that they felt the need to rush this story. There was nothing urgent about it that I can see.

That doesn't strike me as "astounding." It sounds pretty typical. If a newspaper does a deeply researched piece on your wrongdoing which includes actual text messages they have verified as true, they aren't going to give you days to get ahead of that narrative and undermine their reporting. They are going to give you enough time to respond and then publish.

But in any case, Baldoni actually responded with a statement within just a couple hours, so it turns out that 14 hours was more than enough.

I don't think we know how much time they gave the PR people, actually. It's not like Baldoni lives with Melissa Nathan. Presumably they contacted people separately.

True, we don’t know if the PR people got extra time, but if they did, it seems odd it wasn’t mentioned. At all. In fact it’s not clear to me they got any direct heads up from this interview, just Baldoni, even though they are made to look pretty terrible.

I worked in journalism for awhile, and 14 hours is not a lot of time for a piece that isn’t breaking news and which is so detailed and potentially devastating to various people’s reputations. Weinstein was given far more time, as one example.

And Baldonis lawyer statement is fine, but obviously a blanket statement like that isn’t all that compelling- which the NYT knows- and I’m sure Baldoni and the PR people would have preferred to have more time to provide detail of what parts of the piece were incorrect, and to provide their perspective, which is what a good journalist typically tries to do, especially for something so inherently he said/she said. It’s just strangely lazy reporting from the NYT, and it’s not like Hollywood gossip is their typical beat. Why the rush to go out with this story?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a tale as old as time. A he said she said, the he is a prominent hollywood player who hires a vicious PR firm, the internet rips the woman apart. Zero attempts to look at the situation from both sides. Please provide a single example where in a contentious dispute between a man and a woman in hollywood the woman is believed and the man is injured.

It only happens when someone is SUCH a predator that they assault SO many women that it can't be explained away (weinstein/cosby). And even then they end up getting out of jail!

Prediction: this turns into a 150 page thread talking about what a see you next tuesday you all think she is. Just like all the other multi hundred long page threads in this forum. There isn't one about a man though! It's ALWAYS about the woman. Examine your ingrained misogyny people.

Second prediction: I get a bunch of people replying to me yelling about Blake being awful and Baldoni being her victim and I just blindly take the woman's side.

I'll just get in front of all of those and tell you what I would say in response. These situations are almost always complex with different levels of power at play (in this case, while Lively and Reynolds have significantly higher household name recognition, Baldoni has extremely powerful industry connections, so is not the david to their goliath). And I believe that almost every celebrity is somewhat egotistical/narcissistic almost by the nature of the gig. Therefore it is my belief that there is almost NEVER a party completely innocent here. There is always blame to be found on both sides because it is almost always giant egos fighting with each other. But here, there is never nuance, it is always the woman sucks and the poor man we had a crush on 10 years ago because he was hot in that movie that one time is innocent.

lol at Baldoni being considered a Hollywood power player with "extremely powerful industry connections." Baldoni is backed by a billionaire with no ties to Hollywood. That matters, and is why Blake and Ryan were able to throw around their weight so much. You seem to acknowledge the complicated dynamics here yet are getting so many basic things wrong.

Thanks for the bolded, exactly. While blake attended the film with other cast members, baldoni attended with sony execs. He has a whole production studio with deep deep pockets. I'm glad you gave me the opportunity to further expound upon that.

Yeah, he's so powerful that he was sent to the basement during his own premiere.

The basement with the sony execs? He showed up in a pink suit and posed with his wife this is absurd

https://pagesix.com/2024/08/09/entertainment/justin-baldoni-made-blake-lively-uncomfortable-sources/

At the New York premiere, Baldoni, 40, arrived with his wife, Emily, who has a small role as a doctor in the movie. Lively, meanwhile, posed on the carpet with co-star Brandon Sklenar as well as her husband Reynolds and pal Hugh Jackman.

Sources said Baldoni sat in his one theater at AMC Lincoln Square with family, friends and execs from Sony and Baldoni’s production company, while Lively watched the movie in a different theater with her own guests, including sister Robyn Lively and her nieces and nephews.

What don’t you get? He watched the movie in a different screening room than Blake and the rest of the cast and was sent to the basement after walking the red carpet while Blake and the rest of the cast milled about the theater, for the hour or so before the screenings began.

I get that he watched the movie with the execs, the people with real power in hollywood. And was put in a different location when the rest of the cast walked the carpet, including the author, at their request.

again:

At the New York premiere, Baldoni, 40, arrived with his wife, Emily, who has a small role as a doctor in the movie. Lively, meanwhile, posed on the carpet with co-star Brandon Sklenar as well as her husband Reynolds and pal Hugh Jackman.

Sources said Baldoni sat in his one theater at AMC Lincoln Square with family, friends and execs from Sony and Baldoni’s production company, while Lively watched the movie in a different theater with her own guests, including sister Robyn Lively and her nieces and nephews.

Rights and so when he wasn’t in the screening room, he was in the basement and it was not for a super short period of time as you are trying to suggest.

Wrong. He walked the red carpet with his wife, took a bunch of photos with his wife and people from Wayfarer. Look at the Getty red carpet photos of the event -- he is all over them. There are tons of phots of them in different locations and against different backdrops. He was not locked up in the basement -- he had the full premiere experience and then he spent some undefined amount of time between his red carpet and the premiere in a basement location as Lively and Hoover and the rest of the cast did red carpet upstairs, at the request of not only Lively but also Hoover and the rest of the cast.

https://www.gettyimages.com/search/2/image?events=776186834&family=editorial&recommendconfig=none&sort=newest