Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims

[Anonymous]

If the best stuff they have on Baldoni is what is in today’s article, they really have nothing. It’s all been packaged by them elsewhere, but this new pr agency has gotten better placement for her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like Blake’s new pr firm has a story in the LA Times. She does love the media.

Absolutely my first impression was it was planted by her team, with mostly stuff I knew being repackaged (Freedman representing Flores was a revelation though). I give her PR team props for being much more professional. The NYT and LA Times articles are well sourced and written and speak to relevant qualities of Baldoni. Much better than the Reddit and TikTok garbage and pushing the same tired narratives about Weinstein, baby bump interview, plantation wedding etc. The kind of stuff that is there to make you dislike her in general but isn't really relevant to her claims and just makes you dismissive personally.

Now I know someone will call me a Blake shill for that. I'm not. I would love to read a well written expose on her along those lines, like with actual examples of her being unprofessional and trying to take credit for things she hasn't done. That would be relevant to her tactics of taking over the movie and I'd be interested to know if she's pulled those tricks before in a real article, by a journalist, even understanding they can be biased. Just as I don't like reading nastiness about her being a middle aged big woman with a gay husband and would similarly not want to read digs at Baldoni’s nose and sex life (and I have defended him when people bring up his religion).

I appreciate what you’re saying, but I think the public in general is just going to see it is the same tired tactics people are sick of both from his team and hers even if it is well sourced and blah blah blah. I also think unless some real revelations come forward, most people are probably dug in at this point. I would be surprised if making us all like Justin Baldoni a little bit less is really going to help Blake’s career and vice versa.

I’m a poster who thinks they both exhibited harassing behavior, but who thinks it should never have gotten this far and both are losing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s enough grey area here to accept we need to wait for the trial for answers. I know the uncertainty is hard, and we want to crack it. I just don’t think it’s possible. We keep arguing because it is murky.

Most of us have stopped arguing but don’t think it’s murky at all. There was no sexual harassment and no retaliation.

It’s not actually a great character trait to have a verdict before a trial.

Sometimes the public evidence is overwhelming. Also most of what she alleges isn’t sexual harassment even if true. But after months of this, I have no desire to play ring around the rosy with you again today,

I have been on Justin’s “side” this whole time and have probably even argued with the poster you think I am. I believe that Blake has given us every reason to be skeptical, but when people are 100% “I know what happened” and everything is black and white, before the trial, I start to push back. I believe everyone deserves a fair trial and I think the country is F’d if we can’t start trying to understand one another.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s enough grey area here to accept we need to wait for the trial for answers. I know the uncertainty is hard, and we want to crack it. I just don’t think it’s possible. We keep arguing because it is murky.

Most of us have stopped arguing but don’t think it’s murky at all. There was no sexual harassment and no retaliation.

It’s not actually a great character trait to have a verdict before a trial.

Sometimes the public evidence is overwhelming. Also most of what she alleges isn’t sexual harassment even if true. But after months of this, I have no desire to play ring around the rosy with you again today,

I have been on Justin’s “side” this whole time and have probably even argued with the poster you think I am. I believe that Blake has given us every reason to be skeptical, but when people are 100% “I know what happened” and everything is black and white, before the trial, I start to push back. I believe everyone deserves a fair trial and I think the country is F’d if we can’t start trying to understand one another.

I couldn’t care less. Some cases are obvious, this is one of them. But if you enjoy arguing the same points day after day with the same people, have at it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s enough grey area here to accept we need to wait for the trial for answers. I know the uncertainty is hard, and we want to crack it. I just don’t think it’s possible. We keep arguing because it is murky.

Most of us have stopped arguing but don’t think it’s murky at all. There was no sexual harassment and no retaliation.

It’s not actually a great character trait to have a verdict before a trial.

DP but just wanted to say I agree. And agree with the prior post that most of this is way to shades-of-gray to draw firm conclusions on at this point.

DP but I also agree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s enough grey area here to accept we need to wait for the trial for answers. I know the uncertainty is hard, and we want to crack it. I just don’t think it’s possible. We keep arguing because it is murky.

Most of us have stopped arguing but don’t think it’s murky at all. There was no sexual harassment and no retaliation.

It’s not actually a great character trait to have a verdict before a trial.

Sometimes the public evidence is overwhelming. Also most of what she alleges isn’t sexual harassment even if true. But after months of this, I have no desire to play ring around the rosy with you again today,

I have been on Justin’s “side” this whole time and have probably even argued with the poster you think I am. I believe that Blake has given us every reason to be skeptical, but when people are 100% “I know what happened” and everything is black and white, before the trial, I start to push back. I believe everyone deserves a fair trial and I think the country is F’d if we can’t start trying to understand one another.

I couldn’t care less. Some cases are obvious, this is one of them. But if you enjoy arguing the same points day after day with the same people, have at it.

DP, but if someone has already made up their mind and views the current thread as “arguing the same points day after day with the same people,” it’s not clear to me why they would keep returning. Views like that are the least interesting ones in the thread as far as I’m concerned.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s enough grey area here to accept we need to wait for the trial for answers. I know the uncertainty is hard, and we want to crack it. I just don’t think it’s possible. We keep arguing because it is murky.

Most of us have stopped arguing but don’t think it’s murky at all. There was no sexual harassment and no retaliation.

It’s not actually a great character trait to have a verdict before a trial.

Sometimes the public evidence is overwhelming. Also most of what she alleges isn’t sexual harassment even if true. But after months of this, I have no desire to play ring around the rosy with you again today,

I have been on Justin’s “side” this whole time and have probably even argued with the poster you think I am. I believe that Blake has given us every reason to be skeptical, but when people are 100% “I know what happened” and everything is black and white, before the trial, I start to push back. I believe everyone deserves a fair trial and I think the country is F’d if we can’t start trying to understand one another.

I couldn’t care less. Some cases are obvious, this is one of them. But if you enjoy arguing the same points day after day with the same people, have at it.

DP, but if someone has already made up their mind and views the current thread as “arguing the same points day after day with the same people,” it’s not clear to me why they would keep returning. Views like that are the least interesting ones in the thread as far as I’m concerned.

Of course, there is no doubt that some of you enjoy posting the same things over and over again. Just as some people enjoy listening to themselves talk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s an LA Times article out today on Baldoni. There’s a paywall so some may not be able to read it. What’s fascinating is it’s pretty clear a lot of Lively’s allegations seem to be from his book. To me this makes her look particularly hysterical, which we already knew. I’m guessing a lot of these “uncomfortable conversations” was JB telling BL stories from his book (e.g. being bullied in high school and turning to porn and that his first girlfriend initiated sex without consent—his Bahai faith preaches abstinence). Obviously these were not uncomfortable conversations for JB as he published them for millions of readers and probably also raised them on his podcast. I don’t think he’d see these things as harassment. Blake sounds really delicate. In her complaint she takes these conversations out of context and makes them sound like harassment. She obviously never read his book or iewu for that matter.

Uh, I'm reading the article now and you literally buried the lede. The piece opens by detailing a legal battle with a screenwriter named Travis Flores who wrote a script titled "Three Feet Distance" about his own experiences with cystic fibrosis. Baldoni's directorial debut was a featured called "Five Feet Apart" about cystic fibrosis patients, which Baldoni claims was based on the experiences of a different person.

Also, painting a VERY different portrait of Baldoni than what he puts forth in his complaint:

Yet some former colleagues, in more than a dozen interviews with The Times and a previously unreported 2020 lawsuit against Baldoni and Wayfarer Studios, paint a more complicated picture. Several described a pattern of performative virtue and power plays that, in their view, conflicted with the ideals Baldoni professes to uphold. “They keep talking about [the Baldoni-Lively battle] as David and Goliath but that’s just not my experience,” said one former collaborator, who like numerous others interviewed by the Times declined to be named out of fear of being drawn into litigation. “Justin has a lot of power and a lot of money, and he is not afraid to use them to get his way. We need allies, but we need allies whose personal and business dealings align with who they say they are.” Through a spokesperson, Baldoni declined to be interviewed for this story, as did Wayfarer Studios’ senior leadership. The spokesperson said the company “has always proudly publicized [its] founding mission of harnessing storytelling to champion inspirational stories that act as true agents for social change, and actively strives to maintain a positive workplace environment that is rooted in this mission.”

Also, in talking about his porn addition, this jumped out at me as potentially very creepy and problematic:

Years later, in Hollywood, he found himself working alongside actresses he had once fantasized about. “Some of the weirdest moments of my life have happened in the past few years as my teenage fantasies have merged with my midthirties professional life, and some of these women have become friends,” he wrote in “Man Enough.”

This is disturbing, frankly.

Didn’t bury the lead. We covered that case on this thread probably 100 pages ago lol and didn’t want to return to it. The connection between BL’s allegations and the book were new to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s an LA Times article out today on Baldoni. There’s a paywall so some may not be able to read it. What’s fascinating is it’s pretty clear a lot of Lively’s allegations seem to be from his book. To me this makes her look particularly hysterical, which we already knew. I’m guessing a lot of these “uncomfortable conversations” was JB telling BL stories from his book (e.g. being bullied in high school and turning to porn and that his first girlfriend initiated sex without consent—his Bahai faith preaches abstinence). Obviously these were not uncomfortable conversations for JB as he published them for millions of readers and probably also raised them on his podcast. I don’t think he’d see these things as harassment. Blake sounds really delicate. In her complaint she takes these conversations out of context and makes them sound like harassment. She obviously never read his book or iewu for that matter.

Uh, I'm reading the article now and you literally buried the lede. The piece opens by detailing a legal battle with a screenwriter named Travis Flores who wrote a script titled "Three Feet Distance" about his own experiences with cystic fibrosis. Baldoni's directorial debut was a featured called "Five Feet Apart" about cystic fibrosis patients, which Baldoni claims was based on the experiences of a different person.

Also, painting a VERY different portrait of Baldoni than what he puts forth in his complaint:

Yet some former colleagues, in more than a dozen interviews with The Times and a previously unreported 2020 lawsuit against Baldoni and Wayfarer Studios, paint a more complicated picture. Several described a pattern of performative virtue and power plays that, in their view, conflicted with the ideals Baldoni professes to uphold. “They keep talking about [the Baldoni-Lively battle] as David and Goliath but that’s just not my experience,” said one former collaborator, who like numerous others interviewed by the Times declined to be named out of fear of being drawn into litigation. “Justin has a lot of power and a lot of money, and he is not afraid to use them to get his way. We need allies, but we need allies whose personal and business dealings align with who they say they are.” Through a spokesperson, Baldoni declined to be interviewed for this story, as did Wayfarer Studios’ senior leadership. The spokesperson said the company “has always proudly publicized [its] founding mission of harnessing storytelling to champion inspirational stories that act as true agents for social change, and actively strives to maintain a positive workplace environment that is rooted in this mission.”

Also, in talking about his porn addition, this jumped out at me as potentially very creepy and problematic:

Years later, in Hollywood, he found himself working alongside actresses he had once fantasized about. “Some of the weirdest moments of my life have happened in the past few years as my teenage fantasies have merged with my midthirties professional life, and some of these women have become friends,” he wrote in “Man Enough.”

This is disturbing, frankly.

Didn’t bury the lead. We covered that case on this thread probably 100 pages ago lol and didn’t want to return to it. The connection between BL’s allegations and the book were new to me.

Huh. We hadn’t covered the fact that Bryan Freedman represented Travis Flores, convinced him to drop his suit against billionaire-funded Baldini because the fight would take too long, and the. Only months after Flores died, Freedman conveniently took Baldoni and Wayfarer as his own clients. Good thing for Freedman that Flores dropped the case and died, or Freedman wouldn’t have been able to take on the much more lucrative Baldoni/Sarowitz/Wayfarer team, so I guess that worked out for Freedman.

You left this out of your “rah rah Baldoni” summary somehow — reading your description I thought it was a pro-Baldoni piece, which it decidedly was not. lol okay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If the best stuff they have on Baldoni is what is in today’s article, they really have nothing. It’s all been packaged by them elsewhere, but this new pr agency has gotten better placement for her.

Agree, and I think the public is just going to get increasingly tired of this. The problem Blake has is she’s much, much, much more famous, and given her marriage and just how high profile she and Ryan are, it’s frankly just a lot more interesting for influencers and the media to focus on the skeletons that are starting to come out of their closets.

Frankly, this is where Justin’s over sharing might benefit him. People are going to skim these things and be like yeah year I know about his p addiction, yeah I know there were some lawsuits in the past. But an intern from 20 years ago, saying Blake made her crying and got her fired on the set of sisterhood of the traveling pants? Yeah, people are gonna pause and watch that video for a couple minutes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the best stuff they have on Baldoni is what is in today’s article, they really have nothing. It’s all been packaged by them elsewhere, but this new pr agency has gotten better placement for her.

Agree, and I think the public is just going to get increasingly tired of this. The problem Blake has is she’s much, much, much more famous, and given her marriage and just how high profile she and Ryan are, it’s frankly just a lot more interesting for influencers and the media to focus on the skeletons that are starting to come out of their closets.

Frankly, this is where Justin’s over sharing might benefit him. People are going to skim these things and be like yeah year I know about his p addiction, yeah I know there were some lawsuits in the past. But an intern from 20 years ago, saying Blake made her crying and got her fired on the set of sisterhood of the traveling pants? Yeah, people are gonna pause and watch that video for a couple minutes.

I am a member of the public and I really liked the LA Times piece. It was refreshing to read actual journalism that felt pretty balanced and nuanced, and that gave some insight into Baldoni that wasn't reductive. I get the sense from the article that he's a complex person, has plenty of close friends and supporters (so can't be a horrible person) but can also rub people the wrong way. I though the detail about Freedman having represented that screenwriter against Baldoni/Wayfarer before was interesting, but the article doesn't weigh in on what it means -- the present it factually and you are left to decide for yourself if it matters.

I'd be thrilled if most of the news coverage of this case looked like this -- balanced, well-reported, not inflammatory.

I don't actually know how some of you can watch the "content creator" videos on this subject. I tried watching a few because I am interested in the case itself but I find them painful. Regardless of whose "side" they're on. I think having a side in this is weird unless you actually know the people involved.

Whereas a video of an intern saying Lively got her fired 20 years ago doesn't feel relevant to me at all. I don't get the appeal of that.

FTR, I would happily read a similarly nuanced article about Lively and Reynolds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s an LA Times article out today on Baldoni. There’s a paywall so some may not be able to read it. What’s fascinating is it’s pretty clear a lot of Lively’s allegations seem to be from his book. To me this makes her look particularly hysterical, which we already knew. I’m guessing a lot of these “uncomfortable conversations” was JB telling BL stories from his book (e.g. being bullied in high school and turning to porn and that his first girlfriend initiated sex without consent—his Bahai faith preaches abstinence). Obviously these were not uncomfortable conversations for JB as he published them for millions of readers and probably also raised them on his podcast. I don’t think he’d see these things as harassment. Blake sounds really delicate. In her complaint she takes these conversations out of context and makes them sound like harassment. She obviously never read his book or iewu for that matter.

Uh, I'm reading the article now and you literally buried the lede. The piece opens by detailing a legal battle with a screenwriter named Travis Flores who wrote a script titled "Three Feet Distance" about his own experiences with cystic fibrosis. Baldoni's directorial debut was a featured called "Five Feet Apart" about cystic fibrosis patients, which Baldoni claims was based on the experiences of a different person.

Also, painting a VERY different portrait of Baldoni than what he puts forth in his complaint:

Yet some former colleagues, in more than a dozen interviews with The Times and a previously unreported 2020 lawsuit against Baldoni and Wayfarer Studios, paint a more complicated picture. Several described a pattern of performative virtue and power plays that, in their view, conflicted with the ideals Baldoni professes to uphold. “They keep talking about [the Baldoni-Lively battle] as David and Goliath but that’s just not my experience,” said one former collaborator, who like numerous others interviewed by the Times declined to be named out of fear of being drawn into litigation. “Justin has a lot of power and a lot of money, and he is not afraid to use them to get his way. We need allies, but we need allies whose personal and business dealings align with who they say they are.” Through a spokesperson, Baldoni declined to be interviewed for this story, as did Wayfarer Studios’ senior leadership. The spokesperson said the company “has always proudly publicized [its] founding mission of harnessing storytelling to champion inspirational stories that act as true agents for social change, and actively strives to maintain a positive workplace environment that is rooted in this mission.”

Also, in talking about his porn addition, this jumped out at me as potentially very creepy and problematic:

Years later, in Hollywood, he found himself working alongside actresses he had once fantasized about. “Some of the weirdest moments of my life have happened in the past few years as my teenage fantasies have merged with my midthirties professional life, and some of these women have become friends,” he wrote in “Man Enough.”

This is disturbing, frankly.

Didn’t bury the lead. We covered that case on this thread probably 100 pages ago lol and didn’t want to return to it. The connection between BL’s allegations and the book were new to me.

Huh. We hadn’t covered the fact that Bryan Freedman represented Travis Flores, convinced him to drop his suit against billionaire-funded Baldini because the fight would take too long, and the. Only months after Flores died, Freedman conveniently took Baldoni and Wayfarer as his own clients. Good thing for Freedman that Flores dropped the case and died, or Freedman wouldn’t have been able to take on the much more lucrative Baldoni/Sarowitz/Wayfarer team, so I guess that worked out for Freedman.

You left this out of your “rah rah Baldoni” summary somehow — reading your description I thought it was a pro-Baldoni piece, which it decidedly was not. lol okay.

Also, is it ethical for Baldoni to be represented by the attorney who previously sued him and convinced his client to settle? Seems like Freedman could have an ABA/legal ethics issue, but shouldn't this have set off alarm bells for Mr. So Much Love Baldoni? The whole thing smells rotten.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s an LA Times article out today on Baldoni. There’s a paywall so some may not be able to read it. What’s fascinating is it’s pretty clear a lot of Lively’s allegations seem to be from his book. To me this makes her look particularly hysterical, which we already knew. I’m guessing a lot of these “uncomfortable conversations” was JB telling BL stories from his book (e.g. being bullied in high school and turning to porn and that his first girlfriend initiated sex without consent—his Bahai faith preaches abstinence). Obviously these were not uncomfortable conversations for JB as he published them for millions of readers and probably also raised them on his podcast. I don’t think he’d see these things as harassment. Blake sounds really delicate. In her complaint she takes these conversations out of context and makes them sound like harassment. She obviously never read his book or iewu for that matter.

Uh, I'm reading the article now and you literally buried the lede. The piece opens by detailing a legal battle with a screenwriter named Travis Flores who wrote a script titled "Three Feet Distance" about his own experiences with cystic fibrosis. Baldoni's directorial debut was a featured called "Five Feet Apart" about cystic fibrosis patients, which Baldoni claims was based on the experiences of a different person.

Also, painting a VERY different portrait of Baldoni than what he puts forth in his complaint:

Yet some former colleagues, in more than a dozen interviews with The Times and a previously unreported 2020 lawsuit against Baldoni and Wayfarer Studios, paint a more complicated picture. Several described a pattern of performative virtue and power plays that, in their view, conflicted with the ideals Baldoni professes to uphold. “They keep talking about [the Baldoni-Lively battle] as David and Goliath but that’s just not my experience,” said one former collaborator, who like numerous others interviewed by the Times declined to be named out of fear of being drawn into litigation. “Justin has a lot of power and a lot of money, and he is not afraid to use them to get his way. We need allies, but we need allies whose personal and business dealings align with who they say they are.” Through a spokesperson, Baldoni declined to be interviewed for this story, as did Wayfarer Studios’ senior leadership. The spokesperson said the company “has always proudly publicized [its] founding mission of harnessing storytelling to champion inspirational stories that act as true agents for social change, and actively strives to maintain a positive workplace environment that is rooted in this mission.”

Also, in talking about his porn addition, this jumped out at me as potentially very creepy and problematic:

Years later, in Hollywood, he found himself working alongside actresses he had once fantasized about. “Some of the weirdest moments of my life have happened in the past few years as my teenage fantasies have merged with my midthirties professional life, and some of these women have become friends,” he wrote in “Man Enough.”

This is disturbing, frankly.

Didn’t bury the lead. We covered that case on this thread probably 100 pages ago lol and didn’t want to return to it. The connection between BL’s allegations and the book were new to me.

Huh. We hadn’t covered the fact that Bryan Freedman represented Travis Flores, convinced him to drop his suit against billionaire-funded Baldini because the fight would take too long, and the. Only months after Flores died, Freedman conveniently took Baldoni and Wayfarer as his own clients. Good thing for Freedman that Flores dropped the case and died, or Freedman wouldn’t have been able to take on the much more lucrative Baldoni/Sarowitz/Wayfarer team, so I guess that worked out for Freedman.

You left this out of your “rah rah Baldoni” summary somehow — reading your description I thought it was a pro-Baldoni piece, which it decidedly was not. lol okay.

Also, is it ethical for Baldoni to be represented by the attorney who previously sued him and convinced his client to settle? Seems like Freedman could have an ABA/legal ethics issue, but shouldn't this have set off alarm bells for Mr. So Much Love Baldoni? The whole thing smells rotten.

Lawyer here and no, it's not an ethics violation. It would be problematic if it was the same parties in both representations and the attorney just changed sides -- you'd need the parties to agree to that and I doubt the party who had been represented previously would agree.

But if it's a totally different case with a different party, there's nothing wrong with it. It happens more than you think, because people who litigate a lot will encounter a lawyer they think is really tough and then the next time they need an attorney they'll remember: hey, that person was really hard to go up against. Not insanely common but not unheard of.

The thing about Freedman that is frankly weirding me out at this point is that his past representations have so much overlap among multiple parties with this case that it seems bizarre. Like by my count:

- Represented Jed Wallace previously AND, long before the thing with Baldoni, had even been accused in court of having Wallace smear an opponent in another case on his behalf.
- Represented Perez Hilton and Meghyn Kelly, both of whom are now riding hard for JB in their coverage of the conflict.
- Represented Travis Flores in his action against Wayfarer.
- Appears to have been mentioned/suggested by Melissa Nathan to JB in August 2024 (she references JB getting a lawyer and that it may be time to call "BF"). I had previously thought this made it likely that Freedman was recommended to Baldoni/Wayfarer by Nathan, and thought she might have known of him through Wallace.

But now I know Baldoni/Wayfarer must have known of Freedman before they even filmed IEWU, because of the Travis Flores lawsuit. When did they hire Freedman? Was it before or after hiring Jed Wallace? Are those two hires just a coincidence? That seems insane.

[Anonymous]

Related to above, if Travis Flores was poor and relying on donations how did he connect with an expensive celebrity lawyer and did Freedman ever consider reppinghi pro Bono instead of having him withdraw the case due to lack of funds?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s an LA Times article out today on Baldoni. There’s a paywall so some may not be able to read it. What’s fascinating is it’s pretty clear a lot of Lively’s allegations seem to be from his book. To me this makes her look particularly hysterical, which we already knew. I’m guessing a lot of these “uncomfortable conversations” was JB telling BL stories from his book (e.g. being bullied in high school and turning to porn and that his first girlfriend initiated sex without consent—his Bahai faith preaches abstinence). Obviously these were not uncomfortable conversations for JB as he published them for millions of readers and probably also raised them on his podcast. I don’t think he’d see these things as harassment. Blake sounds really delicate. In her complaint she takes these conversations out of context and makes them sound like harassment. She obviously never read his book or iewu for that matter.

Uh, I'm reading the article now and you literally buried the lede. The piece opens by detailing a legal battle with a screenwriter named Travis Flores who wrote a script titled "Three Feet Distance" about his own experiences with cystic fibrosis. Baldoni's directorial debut was a featured called "Five Feet Apart" about cystic fibrosis patients, which Baldoni claims was based on the experiences of a different person.

Also, painting a VERY different portrait of Baldoni than what he puts forth in his complaint:

Yet some former colleagues, in more than a dozen interviews with The Times and a previously unreported 2020 lawsuit against Baldoni and Wayfarer Studios, paint a more complicated picture. Several described a pattern of performative virtue and power plays that, in their view, conflicted with the ideals Baldoni professes to uphold. “They keep talking about [the Baldoni-Lively battle] as David and Goliath but that’s just not my experience,” said one former collaborator, who like numerous others interviewed by the Times declined to be named out of fear of being drawn into litigation. “Justin has a lot of power and a lot of money, and he is not afraid to use them to get his way. We need allies, but we need allies whose personal and business dealings align with who they say they are.” Through a spokesperson, Baldoni declined to be interviewed for this story, as did Wayfarer Studios’ senior leadership. The spokesperson said the company “has always proudly publicized [its] founding mission of harnessing storytelling to champion inspirational stories that act as true agents for social change, and actively strives to maintain a positive workplace environment that is rooted in this mission.”

Also, in talking about his porn addition, this jumped out at me as potentially very creepy and problematic:

Years later, in Hollywood, he found himself working alongside actresses he had once fantasized about. “Some of the weirdest moments of my life have happened in the past few years as my teenage fantasies have merged with my midthirties professional life, and some of these women have become friends,” he wrote in “Man Enough.”

This is disturbing, frankly.

Didn’t bury the lead. We covered that case on this thread probably 100 pages ago lol and didn’t want to return to it. The connection between BL’s allegations and the book were new to me.

Huh. We hadn’t covered the fact that Bryan Freedman represented Travis Flores, convinced him to drop his suit against billionaire-funded Baldini because the fight would take too long, and the. Only months after Flores died, Freedman conveniently took Baldoni and Wayfarer as his own clients. Good thing for Freedman that Flores dropped the case and died, or Freedman wouldn’t have been able to take on the much more lucrative Baldoni/Sarowitz/Wayfarer team, so I guess that worked out for Freedman.

You left this out of your “rah rah Baldoni” summary somehow — reading your description I thought it was a pro-Baldoni piece, which it decidedly was not. lol okay.

Also, is it ethical for Baldoni to be represented by the attorney who previously sued him and convinced his client to settle? Seems like Freedman could have an ABA/legal ethics issue, but shouldn't this have set off alarm bells for Mr. So Much Love Baldoni? The whole thing smells rotten.

Lawyer here and no, it's not an ethics violation. It would be problematic if it was the same parties in both representations and the attorney just changed sides -- you'd need the parties to agree to that and I doubt the party who had been represented previously would agree.

But if it's a totally different case with a different party, there's nothing wrong with it. It happens more than you think, because people who litigate a lot will encounter a lawyer they think is really tough and then the next time they need an attorney they'll remember: hey, that person was really hard to go up against. Not insanely common but not unheard of.

The thing about Freedman that is frankly weirding me out at this point is that his past representations have so much overlap among multiple parties with this case that it seems bizarre. Like by my count:

- Represented Jed Wallace previously AND, long before the thing with Baldoni, had even been accused in court of having Wallace smear an opponent in another case on his behalf.
- Represented Perez Hilton and Meghyn Kelly, both of whom are now riding hard for JB in their coverage of the conflict.
- Represented Travis Flores in his action against Wayfarer.
- Appears to have been mentioned/suggested by Melissa Nathan to JB in August 2024 (she references JB getting a lawyer and that it may be time to call "BF"). I had previously thought this made it likely that Freedman was recommended to Baldoni/Wayfarer by Nathan, and thought she might have known of him through Wallace.

But now I know Baldoni/Wayfarer must have known of Freedman before they even filmed IEWU, because of the Travis Flores lawsuit. When did they hire Freedman? Was it before or after hiring Jed Wallace? Are those two hires just a coincidence? That seems insane.

This article says Flores died in May 2024, so it could have been any time after that, likely for this lawsuit. August 2024 would be "a couple" of months after Flores' death, as the LA Times article represented fwiw.

(It doesn't look like Baldoni/Wayfarer were represented by Freedman in the discrimination/retaliation suit back in 2021/2022. https://unicourt.com/case/ca-sca1-norman-v-wayfarer-entertainment-llc-161411 )