Forum Index
»
Entertainment and Pop Culture
There is a difference between protecting himself and saying he wants to bury her. Thats unhinged. There is no context where that's ever okay. |
You don't protect yourself in that way. What kind of narcissistic douche thinks he's going to get away with that behavior? |
Bury her with her own words? It’s okay to repost someone’s actual words. Do you disagree? |
Why would someone go after someone to "bury" them to cover their own misdeeds? Let's start there. |
|
I read the complaint and here are my takeaways:
- Baldoni and Heath (the CEO of the production company) do seem to have done a lot of shady ands/or unprofessional stuff on set - Some of this conduct may have risen to the level of an incident of sexual harassment although some also seems to be Lively being overly sensitive and exaggerating and/or diva-ish. And legally sexual harassment has to be “severe and pervasive” so it’s not clear it meets that standard even if they made a few inappropriate comments, especially given the nature of the work activity (ie inherently sexual). - Despite my skepticism about the underlying legal claim for sexual harassment, it does appear that Lively was legitimately concerned and made a bona fide complaint of sexual harassment. - As with all workplace harassment complaints, once the complaint is made, it is VERY tricky to avoid retaliation complaints - However … the gravamen of retaliation is that it is caused by the complaint, which I think is somewhat murky to show here - That’s because Lively made her complaint over a year before the allegedly retaliatory behavior then returned to the set and completed filming and began marketing the film - What triggered the events is the seemingly concerted efforts of Lively and her supporters to publicly ice out Baldoni during marketing (again - this is almost a year after Lively’s complaints). - Then Baldoni and Health hired the crisis PR team to shape the narrative - Notably absent from the complaint of course is any mention of what Lively did to also shape the narrative. It claims that she didn’t even tell her publicist about the HR complaint she made, which I find very hard to believe and lends itself to the viewpoint that in fact she was on a campaign against Baldoni during the marketing phase of the movie, and that is conduct was to protect himself from her, not vice versa - IF a court found Baldoni’s actions to be retaliatory then the damages could be extensive and could include a claim related to Lively’s hair product line (tortious interference, so fun!). - The allegations of social media manipulation are eye-popping for those of us Reddit and DCUM addicts. I know I will be very, very skeptical from now on. Personally I have always felt that the Health and SN forums have industry shilling going on in particular. But I will also have my eyes open to see if sudden shifts in popular opinion about a celebrity seem to be playing out here on DCUM - It is surprisingly cheap do to a takedown PR campaign. $175k lol! I probably spend that much time on DCUM and Reddit that I could do that myself. maybe I should hang a shingle … - Finally … I’m curious about how the anonymity and troll-factory aspect of the case intersects with defamation law. Does the fact that these stories and posts were made for money and anonymously with the express goal of “changing the narrative” impact the first amendment analysis? commentary welcome! |
Can you just speak squarely? I have no idea what you mean. I don’t understand how person A harms person b’s reputation by republishing person b’s actual words. |
The context is that she made a 90% spurious claim of sexual harassment that he thought he had resolved. Then a whole year later she and her minions start to publicly ice him out right when all eyes were on him - and also start to plant their own stories (remember the story about Ryan Renolds rewriting the script?) So he panicked and responded as he did. Whether or not this would legally be held to be retaliation or defamation I do not know but doesn’t look great for him. |
Are you for real? What mature professional person sets out on this type of campaign in the first place? What is normal about this? |
I agree with you on most things except damages. That’s actually going to be much tricker for her to show. |
90% spurious? Based on what? |
Because all publicity is good publicity? I dunno. Not sure if you saw this allegation but they claim that the hired trolls brigaded her social media campaign for her hair care line. |
based on my experience as a plaintiffs lawyer and 5 decades of being a woman. I read the complaint and my impression is that Baldoni is a weirdo and Heath possibly a bit creepy but I’m not sure either of them did anything that far outside the norm for filming sex scenes. I also know that this happened right when Hollywood was transitioning to a more structured approach (ie intimacy coordinators). And some of the complaints she makes sound totally spurious. Others if she has witnesses are stronger (like Heath refusing to leave her trailer when she was naked) BUT may also be normal for Hollywood. |
(and to clarify I think her retaliation theory could be correct though and I think this depends on what other witnesses would say as well.) |
Ok. So you just have an opinion but no facts. Thanks for playing. |
One's own words and posted info/pics can be used at any time. That's why the need to be mindful of what we say and do. |