Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims

[Anonymous]

*unless they’re medical or security records etc, but I don’t think those are the kids of texts we’re really interested in anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also the above comment that Lively is trying to prevent a trial by filing MTDs is bananas. Baldoni isn’t even trying to dismiss any of the suits against him. Unless he settles, there will be a trial lol.

Nope, she could also withdraw her complaint.

I mean. That seems unlikely. But the statement that she is trying to avoid a trial by filing motions to dismiss avoids the reality that her complaint is on its own very much on schedule to go forward and Freedman is t even challenging it. (He says he doesn’t want to give them a roadmap lol but I think he pretty clearly has his hands full.)

[Anonymous]

Like, the scenario you are putting forward is that all the Lively team’s MTDs succeed and none of Baldini’s claims remain, but to avoid a trial, they withdraw their own complaint.

To put it mildly, I do not think that is going to happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Like, the scenario you are putting forward is that all the Lively team’s MTDs succeed and none of Baldini’s claims remain, but to avoid a trial, they withdraw their own complaint.

To put it mildly, I do not think that is going to happen.

I just don’t really see this going to trial, and I think the Lively parties want to avoid a trial the most. I think a jury is a big risk for them. I think there will be a combination of summary judgments and settlements. That’s my prediction.

[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:The appropriate way to handle behavior like this is to file a complete with HR and sag. Nothing that happened to Blake is worthy of a lawsuit and an article in New York Times.

Especially since a list of complaints were raised halfway through, and there were no other incidents. As someone said up thread, that’s an HR success story. We never should’ve heard about it beyond that point. But Blake decided to burn it all down in August and start rumors about him and ice him out of the premiere which caused rampant speculation and damaged his reputation. She started the smear campaign, didn’t see the intense backlash against her coming, maybe didn’t think he’d hire a crisis communications firm to deal with it, and then seems like had a meltdown, and felt backed up against the wall.

Her team should have stopped her, but her lawyers must be making a killing.

I wonder if her hair product line has made a comeback.

The reason the NYT found it newsworthy was the PR campaign, with those texts between Nathan, Abel, and Baldoni.

I also think it's highly unlikely Blake would have sued were it not for the texts. Her retaliation claims are stronger than the SH claims. And it's very problematic that Wayfarer agreed NOT to retaliate when they signed the 17-point list.

I’m curious to see how this gets argued in court. I think Baldoni can argue that he did NOT retaliate against her for SH at any point and that his actions were in response to what SHE did to HIM during the premiere. Let’s put this in corporate terms. If someone alleges SH at work, they can’t be fired for bringing those allegations but they can still be fired for cause. For example, if that person just starts coming to work late everyday, they can’t say oh you can’t fire me b/c once upon a time I alleged SH and that would be retaliation.

Some of the texts are very problematic for Baldoni. There is a text where he he essentially acknowledges that she believes her own allegations, and that they have to do something or "she'll never give up " it undercuts his argument that she was lying and just trying to steal the movie. And the texts about how he wants her buried (though those might be hearsay, we'll see), and him texting a tweet about Hailey Bieber being accused of being a mean girl and saying "this is what we need." I think there are others too, and can't remember.

The texts are a real problem for him

Just remember we’ve only really seen texts from the wayfarer parties—the ones taken from Abel’s phone and those JB released. Discovery will tell us what BL was saying, what RR was saying, what LS was saying and maybe what TS was saying. Some online believe Blake has texts about how to subtly smear JB. You do have to remember she iced him out, had the entire cast unfollow him etc. Do you really think there’s no paper trail of her own activities? JB has a right to defend himself. SH allegations are not a free pass to do what ever you want to another person.

Potentially, yeah. But it's all speculation at this point. That's why some of us have urged open mindedness. What will Lively stans do if her texts make her look really bad? On the other hand, what will JB-stans do if her texts exonerate her, show she wasn't plotting anything against him?

We still don't really know what happened. People assume a lot.

Sure, but if her texts exonerate her, why not put them out there like JB did? They did the opposite—sought to gag BF, requested AEO and are trying at every turn to stay discovery.

She'd have to release literally all her texts and emails to prove it at this stage, to prove a negative -- no one would do that. But if it happens in the discovery process with a PO in place, any personal texts will be kept private unless relevant.

And Lively hasn't sought to delay discovery. She's been participating in it. Other parties have requested stays, but they don't apply to Lively's own texts or emails.

Also, I'll note JB of course did not release all his communications. He cherry picked. And he's objected to Lively's very broad discovery request. So obviously he hasn't released everything.

LS was the first of the lively parties to request an MTD and stay of discovery. The stay was denied by the judge, so there was no point in the lawyers requesting a stay of discovery in the MTDs that came later.

DP but PP above said Lively is “trying at every turn to stay discovery” where they had two opportunities to attempt to stay discovery (Lively and Reynolds) that they haven’t taken. The only parties trying to stay discovery were NYT, which was entirely successful, and Sloane/PR company, which was not.

Definitely not “trying at every turn” to stay discovery. And (not to belabor the point) the AEO protective order was successful as well, so Gottlieb is coming out of discovery so far with a pretty even record of wins and losses.

If LS’s request wasn’t successful, there was no reason to believe BL’s and RR’s would be, so there just wasn’t any point to request more stays. Had she been successful, BL and RR would’ve requested the same imo. Fact remains they haven’t been forthcoming and the only texts we have to go off of right now are those from the wayfarer parties. The lively parties are doing everything they can to prevent the public from seeing their texts. Because of the AEO it’s unlikely we’ll see them before trial, and of course they’re all trying to prevent a trial by filing MTDs. There’s a chance we’ll never see their texts, so it’s a bit unfair to draw conclusions based on just Abel’s and Justin’s texts when we haven’t seen what the other side was saying.

Claiming it’s unlikely we will see any Lively texts before trial shows a clear lack of comprehension of the PO, but I won’t bore you with why. But I would certainly expect some relevant Lively texts to come out of the depositions.

We won’t see them before trial unless they’re leaked and the point of AEO is to add extra protection against leaks. What’s not being comprehended?

The Lively texts that are relevant to the lawsuit won’t be AEO. You said “because of the AEO it’s unlikely we’ll see them before trial.” The AEO provision provides no additional protection to relevant Lively texts before trial than the regular PO, so your “because of the AEO” assertion is wrong.

Ok so because of AEO it’s even less likely we’ll see the texts before trial. Doesn’t change the point they’re not exactly being forthcoming.

This is still wrong as I explained above, unless the texts you’re really keen on seeing are medical, security, or the ones that aren’t relevant. Also, Freedman still gets to see these materials, so saying Lively isn’t being forthcoming is weird. I mean, I understand that you would like FedEx to drop all Lively’s discovery off on your doorstep, but that isn’t the way discovery usually works.

[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:The appropriate way to handle behavior like this is to file a complete with HR and sag. Nothing that happened to Blake is worthy of a lawsuit and an article in New York Times.

Especially since a list of complaints were raised halfway through, and there were no other incidents. As someone said up thread, that’s an HR success story. We never should’ve heard about it beyond that point. But Blake decided to burn it all down in August and start rumors about him and ice him out of the premiere which caused rampant speculation and damaged his reputation. She started the smear campaign, didn’t see the intense backlash against her coming, maybe didn’t think he’d hire a crisis communications firm to deal with it, and then seems like had a meltdown, and felt backed up against the wall.

Her team should have stopped her, but her lawyers must be making a killing.

I wonder if her hair product line has made a comeback.

The reason the NYT found it newsworthy was the PR campaign, with those texts between Nathan, Abel, and Baldoni.

I also think it's highly unlikely Blake would have sued were it not for the texts. Her retaliation claims are stronger than the SH claims. And it's very problematic that Wayfarer agreed NOT to retaliate when they signed the 17-point list.

I’m curious to see how this gets argued in court. I think Baldoni can argue that he did NOT retaliate against her for SH at any point and that his actions were in response to what SHE did to HIM during the premiere. Let’s put this in corporate terms. If someone alleges SH at work, they can’t be fired for bringing those allegations but they can still be fired for cause. For example, if that person just starts coming to work late everyday, they can’t say oh you can’t fire me b/c once upon a time I alleged SH and that would be retaliation.

Some of the texts are very problematic for Baldoni. There is a text where he he essentially acknowledges that she believes her own allegations, and that they have to do something or "she'll never give up " it undercuts his argument that she was lying and just trying to steal the movie. And the texts about how he wants her buried (though those might be hearsay, we'll see), and him texting a tweet about Hailey Bieber being accused of being a mean girl and saying "this is what we need." I think there are others too, and can't remember.

The texts are a real problem for him

Just remember we’ve only really seen texts from the wayfarer parties—the ones taken from Abel’s phone and those JB released. Discovery will tell us what BL was saying, what RR was saying, what LS was saying and maybe what TS was saying. Some online believe Blake has texts about how to subtly smear JB. You do have to remember she iced him out, had the entire cast unfollow him etc. Do you really think there’s no paper trail of her own activities? JB has a right to defend himself. SH allegations are not a free pass to do what ever you want to another person.

Potentially, yeah. But it's all speculation at this point. That's why some of us have urged open mindedness. What will Lively stans do if her texts make her look really bad? On the other hand, what will JB-stans do if her texts exonerate her, show she wasn't plotting anything against him?

We still don't really know what happened. People assume a lot.

Sure, but if her texts exonerate her, why not put them out there like JB did? They did the opposite—sought to gag BF, requested AEO and are trying at every turn to stay discovery.

She'd have to release literally all her texts and emails to prove it at this stage, to prove a negative -- no one would do that. But if it happens in the discovery process with a PO in place, any personal texts will be kept private unless relevant.

And Lively hasn't sought to delay discovery. She's been participating in it. Other parties have requested stays, but they don't apply to Lively's own texts or emails.

Also, I'll note JB of course did not release all his communications. He cherry picked. And he's objected to Lively's very broad discovery request. So obviously he hasn't released everything.

LS was the first of the lively parties to request an MTD and stay of discovery. The stay was denied by the judge, so there was no point in the lawyers requesting a stay of discovery in the MTDs that came later.

DP but PP above said Lively is “trying at every turn to stay discovery” where they had two opportunities to attempt to stay discovery (Lively and Reynolds) that they haven’t taken. The only parties trying to stay discovery were NYT, which was entirely successful, and Sloane/PR company, which was not.

Definitely not “trying at every turn” to stay discovery. And (not to belabor the point) the AEO protective order was successful as well, so Gottlieb is coming out of discovery so far with a pretty even record of wins and losses.

If LS’s request wasn’t successful, there was no reason to believe BL’s and RR’s would be, so there just wasn’t any point to request more stays. Had she been successful, BL and RR would’ve requested the same imo. Fact remains they haven’t been forthcoming and the only texts we have to go off of right now are those from the wayfarer parties. The lively parties are doing everything they can to prevent the public from seeing their texts. Because of the AEO it’s unlikely we’ll see them before trial, and of course they’re all trying to prevent a trial by filing MTDs. There’s a chance we’ll never see their texts, so it’s a bit unfair to draw conclusions based on just Abel’s and Justin’s texts when we haven’t seen what the other side was saying.

Claiming it’s unlikely we will see any Lively texts before trial shows a clear lack of comprehension of the PO, but I won’t bore you with why. But I would certainly expect some relevant Lively texts to come out of the depositions.

We won’t see them before trial unless they’re leaked and the point of AEO is to add extra protection against leaks. What’s not being comprehended?

The Lively texts that are relevant to the lawsuit won’t be AEO. You said “because of the AEO it’s unlikely we’ll see them before trial.” The AEO provision provides no additional protection to relevant Lively texts before trial than the regular PO, so your “because of the AEO” assertion is wrong.

Ok so because of AEO it’s even less likely we’ll see the texts before trial. Doesn’t change the point they’re not exactly being forthcoming.

This is still wrong as I explained above, unless the texts you’re really keen on seeing are medical, security, or the ones that aren’t relevant. Also, Freedman still gets to see these materials, so saying Lively isn’t being forthcoming is weird. I mean, I understand that you would like FedEx to drop all Lively’s discovery off on your doorstep, but that isn’t the way discovery usually works.

She’s not being forthcoming with the public. If she has receipts, she should just release them like Baldoni did. She was happy to release Jen Abel’s texts without her consent but isn’t so willing to share her own.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:The appropriate way to handle behavior like this is to file a complete with HR and sag. Nothing that happened to Blake is worthy of a lawsuit and an article in New York Times.

Especially since a list of complaints were raised halfway through, and there were no other incidents. As someone said up thread, that’s an HR success story. We never should’ve heard about it beyond that point. But Blake decided to burn it all down in August and start rumors about him and ice him out of the premiere which caused rampant speculation and damaged his reputation. She started the smear campaign, didn’t see the intense backlash against her coming, maybe didn’t think he’d hire a crisis communications firm to deal with it, and then seems like had a meltdown, and felt backed up against the wall.

Her team should have stopped her, but her lawyers must be making a killing.

I wonder if her hair product line has made a comeback.

The reason the NYT found it newsworthy was the PR campaign, with those texts between Nathan, Abel, and Baldoni.

I also think it's highly unlikely Blake would have sued were it not for the texts. Her retaliation claims are stronger than the SH claims. And it's very problematic that Wayfarer agreed NOT to retaliate when they signed the 17-point list.

I’m curious to see how this gets argued in court. I think Baldoni can argue that he did NOT retaliate against her for SH at any point and that his actions were in response to what SHE did to HIM during the premiere. Let’s put this in corporate terms. If someone alleges SH at work, they can’t be fired for bringing those allegations but they can still be fired for cause. For example, if that person just starts coming to work late everyday, they can’t say oh you can’t fire me b/c once upon a time I alleged SH and that would be retaliation.

Some of the texts are very problematic for Baldoni. There is a text where he he essentially acknowledges that she believes her own allegations, and that they have to do something or "she'll never give up " it undercuts his argument that she was lying and just trying to steal the movie. And the texts about how he wants her buried (though those might be hearsay, we'll see), and him texting a tweet about Hailey Bieber being accused of being a mean girl and saying "this is what we need." I think there are others too, and can't remember.

The texts are a real problem for him

Just remember we’ve only really seen texts from the wayfarer parties—the ones taken from Abel’s phone and those JB released. Discovery will tell us what BL was saying, what RR was saying, what LS was saying and maybe what TS was saying. Some online believe Blake has texts about how to subtly smear JB. You do have to remember she iced him out, had the entire cast unfollow him etc. Do you really think there’s no paper trail of her own activities? JB has a right to defend himself. SH allegations are not a free pass to do what ever you want to another person.

Potentially, yeah. But it's all speculation at this point. That's why some of us have urged open mindedness. What will Lively stans do if her texts make her look really bad? On the other hand, what will JB-stans do if her texts exonerate her, show she wasn't plotting anything against him?

We still don't really know what happened. People assume a lot.

Sure, but if her texts exonerate her, why not put them out there like JB did? They did the opposite—sought to gag BF, requested AEO and are trying at every turn to stay discovery.

She'd have to release literally all her texts and emails to prove it at this stage, to prove a negative -- no one would do that. But if it happens in the discovery process with a PO in place, any personal texts will be kept private unless relevant.

And Lively hasn't sought to delay discovery. She's been participating in it. Other parties have requested stays, but they don't apply to Lively's own texts or emails.

Also, I'll note JB of course did not release all his communications. He cherry picked. And he's objected to Lively's very broad discovery request. So obviously he hasn't released everything.

LS was the first of the lively parties to request an MTD and stay of discovery. The stay was denied by the judge, so there was no point in the lawyers requesting a stay of discovery in the MTDs that came later.

DP but PP above said Lively is “trying at every turn to stay discovery” where they had two opportunities to attempt to stay discovery (Lively and Reynolds) that they haven’t taken. The only parties trying to stay discovery were NYT, which was entirely successful, and Sloane/PR company, which was not.

Definitely not “trying at every turn” to stay discovery. And (not to belabor the point) the AEO protective order was successful as well, so Gottlieb is coming out of discovery so far with a pretty even record of wins and losses.

If LS’s request wasn’t successful, there was no reason to believe BL’s and RR’s would be, so there just wasn’t any point to request more stays. Had she been successful, BL and RR would’ve requested the same imo. Fact remains they haven’t been forthcoming and the only texts we have to go off of right now are those from the wayfarer parties. The lively parties are doing everything they can to prevent the public from seeing their texts. Because of the AEO it’s unlikely we’ll see them before trial, and of course they’re all trying to prevent a trial by filing MTDs. There’s a chance we’ll never see their texts, so it’s a bit unfair to draw conclusions based on just Abel’s and Justin’s texts when we haven’t seen what the other side was saying.

Claiming it’s unlikely we will see any Lively texts before trial shows a clear lack of comprehension of the PO, but I won’t bore you with why. But I would certainly expect some relevant Lively texts to come out of the depositions.

We won’t see them before trial unless they’re leaked and the point of AEO is to add extra protection against leaks. What’s not being comprehended?

The Lively texts that are relevant to the lawsuit won’t be AEO. You said “because of the AEO it’s unlikely we’ll see them before trial.” The AEO provision provides no additional protection to relevant Lively texts before trial than the regular PO, so your “because of the AEO” assertion is wrong.

Ok so because of AEO it’s even less likely we’ll see the texts before trial. Doesn’t change the point they’re not exactly being forthcoming.

This is still wrong as I explained above, unless the texts you’re really keen on seeing are medical, security, or the ones that aren’t relevant. Also, Freedman still gets to see these materials, so saying Lively isn’t being forthcoming is weird. I mean, I understand that you would like FedEx to drop all Lively’s discovery off on your doorstep, but that isn’t the way discovery usually works.

She’s not being forthcoming with the public. If she has receipts, she should just release them like Baldoni did. She was happy to release Jen Abel’s texts without her consent but isn’t so willing to share her own.

That is not the way discovery works. At this point the judge has basically put the kibosh on either side selectively releasing materials, and in general the majority of real, respected lawyers do not “try” their case with the public before doing so in court. I know Team Baldoni loves Freedman but this is not the way.

I think the evidence she already put in her complaint will be enough for her to move to the next stage of the litigation, which is more than can be said for Freedman, but somehow you aren’t demanding that he release, you know, any actual evidence to support his extortion etc claims. Hmmm.

[Anonymous]

SNL definitely made fun of Baldoni tonight. In the jury duty sketch they had a guy with dark curly hair in man bun wearing a cardigan and talking about how sensitive he is and then telling the judge (Ego Nwodim) that he appreciates a strong black woman.

She dismissed him

[Anonymous]

Someone posted a rolling stone article on Reddit from end of August. I hadn’t read before so don’t know if it’s already been discussed here. Thought this part was interesting:

CREW MEMBERS WHO spoke to Rolling Stone say they noticed a shift in Lively’s demeanor and enthusiasm during filming. She was initially excited to begin the project, they say, bringing in scrapbooks of ideas and notes regarding the details of her character’s wardrobe and set decorations. According to members of production, Lively had her own vision of how she wanted Lily to dress, which conflicted with the costume department’s ideas.
“We went dark because of picket lines and [in that time] the costume department was running around with their heads cut off trying to figure out how they could change everything to make sure Blake was happy,” one crew member says. “There were a lot of returns, exchanges, and repurchasing of an entire wardrobe.”
Another crew member says the production designer was put on the spot when Lively asked them to change the initial plan for Lily’s flower store in the film. They say the lookbook for the original set design was “almost Gothic” with rich, dark violet and deep red colors — what the crew member describes as “a moody vibe.” But when Lively came into the production office, they say, she said she didn’t think that look aligned with Lily’s character or style. (The production designer did not respond to Rolling Stone’s request to discuss the project.) While the design ultimately didn’t change much, the crew member says the incident was one example of the pressure that was felt behind the scenes over conflicting ideas.
The three crew members say Lively was not the presence on set they expected. She often had schedule conflicts, they say, which is common for actors but not usually for the principal actor who is also a producer on the project. Not long after photos of her on set leaked in the press, her passion for the project seemed to drop off precipitously, all three noted. It was widely discussed among the line members of production, these sources say, that Lively lacked a desire to be on set.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Heath allegations are continuing to be problematic. Im seeing commentary that Blake just did the typical rich southern white lady who thinks everything the Black man does is sexual.

That is very unfair, because she also makes complaints about being uncomfortable with Baldoni and the OBGYN guy, who has a Jewish name. She pretty clearly articulates the issues with Heath are that he said he wouldn't turn around and face her while she was undressed but then he did, and that he should her an unwanted video of his wife. Those might be a stretch, but no more so than what she says about Baldoni, and there is no reason to make it a race thing. I'm 100% sure that if Baldoni or Sarowitz or the OBGYN actor had turned around and looked at her while she was breastfeeding or having makeup removed, she also would have complained.

It may be unfair, but you can’t deny the public perception is not good for Blake. She already has the nickname plantation princess because of her wedding venue choice. There’s been at least two other video interviews that have surfaced that have problematic comments on race for Blake.

But yes, there is a perception out there that is not helping Blake’s image. It is what it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The appropriate way to handle behavior like this is to file a complete with HR and sag. Nothing that happened to Blake is worthy of a lawsuit and an article in New York Times.

Especially since a list of complaints were raised halfway through, and there were no other incidents. As someone said up thread, that’s an HR success story. We never should’ve heard about it beyond that point. But Blake decided to burn it all down in August and start rumors about him and ice him out of the premiere which caused rampant speculation and damaged his reputation. She started the smear campaign, didn’t see the intense backlash against her coming, maybe didn’t think he’d hire a crisis communications firm to deal with it, and then seems like had a meltdown, and felt backed up against the wall.

Her team should have stopped her, but her lawyers must be making a killing.

I wonder if her hair product line has made a comeback.

The reason the NYT found it newsworthy was the PR campaign, with those texts between Nathan, Abel, and Baldoni.

I also think it's highly unlikely Blake would have sued were it not for the texts. Her retaliation claims are stronger than the SH claims. And it's very problematic that Wayfarer agreed NOT to retaliate when they signed the 17-point list.

I’m curious to see how this gets argued in court. I think Baldoni can argue that he did NOT retaliate against her for SH at any point and that his actions were in response to what SHE did to HIM during the premiere. Let’s put this in corporate terms. If someone alleges SH at work, they can’t be fired for bringing those allegations but they can still be fired for cause. For example, if that person just starts coming to work late everyday, they can’t say oh you can’t fire me b/c once upon a time I alleged SH and that would be retaliation.

Some of the texts are very problematic for Baldoni. There is a text where he he essentially acknowledges that she believes her own allegations, and that they have to do something or "she'll never give up " it undercuts his argument that she was lying and just trying to steal the movie. And the texts about how he wants her buried (though those might be hearsay, we'll see), and him texting a tweet about Hailey Bieber being accused of being a mean girl and saying "this is what we need." I think there are others too, and can't remember.

The texts are a real problem for him

I disagree here. I actually think some of those texts about how she will never give up and about her state of mind thinking she is right help him. Blakes side has some problematic texts of threats. First of all, she threatened the viability of the movie several times by walking away, clearly showing that she did not care if she blew up the movie and cost her millions. This is showing a pattern of making threats.

Next, there are really problematic text from her team and Sony, one being, about “now the gloves are off.” Another being that he “better play ball.” And the third being the one about “any goodwill we had is now gone.” or something to that effect.

For Justin to be reading these texts and then responding it to his team that he’s unsure what she will do and that she will never give up, that helps him because she was continually making all these threats, creating a pattern, and he was truly fearful about what she was capable of, as anyone in the right mind would be. Add that to the fact that his version did not get released, even though it scored higher, his name and photo were stripped from the film poster, his film by it was stripped away, he was banned from the premier, and she was starting rumors about him and iced out the cast. She also hired her own marketing firm, said that it would be free, charged the film, did not include him in any of the marketing, that is a pattern of aggressive, bullying behavior. I just don’t understand how people expected him to react.

Oh no, actually I do. Ryan and Blake’s team thought he would just roll over and die. It was perfectly reasonable for him to hire a PR crisis team. He was under a major threat and he has the receipts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The appropriate way to handle behavior like this is to file a complete with HR and sag. Nothing that happened to Blake is worthy of a lawsuit and an article in New York Times.

Especially since a list of complaints were raised halfway through, and there were no other incidents. As someone said up thread, that’s an HR success story. We never should’ve heard about it beyond that point. But Blake decided to burn it all down in August and start rumors about him and ice him out of the premiere which caused rampant speculation and damaged his reputation. She started the smear campaign, didn’t see the intense backlash against her coming, maybe didn’t think he’d hire a crisis communications firm to deal with it, and then seems like had a meltdown, and felt backed up against the wall.

Her team should have stopped her, but her lawyers must be making a killing.

I wonder if her hair product line has made a comeback.

The reason the NYT found it newsworthy was the PR campaign, with those texts between Nathan, Abel, and Baldoni.

I also think it's highly unlikely Blake would have sued were it not for the texts. Her retaliation claims are stronger than the SH claims. And it's very problematic that Wayfarer agreed NOT to retaliate when they signed the 17-point list.

I’m curious to see how this gets argued in court. I think Baldoni can argue that he did NOT retaliate against her for SH at any point and that his actions were in response to what SHE did to HIM during the premiere. Let’s put this in corporate terms. If someone alleges SH at work, they can’t be fired for bringing those allegations but they can still be fired for cause. For example, if that person just starts coming to work late everyday, they can’t say oh you can’t fire me b/c once upon a time I alleged SH and that would be retaliation.

Some of the texts are very problematic for Baldoni. There is a text where he he essentially acknowledges that she believes her own allegations, and that they have to do something or "she'll never give up " it undercuts his argument that she was lying and just trying to steal the movie. And the texts about how he wants her buried (though those might be hearsay, we'll see), and him texting a tweet about Hailey Bieber being accused of being a mean girl and saying "this is what we need." I think there are others too, and can't remember.

The texts are a real problem for him

I disagree here. I actually think some of those texts about how she will never give up and about her state of mind thinking she is right help him. Blakes side has some problematic texts of threats. First of all, she threatened the viability of the movie several times by walking away, clearly showing that she did not care if she blew up the movie and cost her millions. This is showing a pattern of making threats.

Next, there are really problematic text from her team and Sony, one being, about “now the gloves are off.” Another being that he “better play ball.” And the third being the one about “any goodwill we had is now gone.” or something to that effect.

For Justin to be reading these texts and then responding it to his team that he’s unsure what she will do and that she will never give up, that helps him because she was continually making all these threats, creating a pattern, and he was truly fearful about what she was capable of, as anyone in the right mind would be. Add that to the fact that his version did not get released, even though it scored higher, his name and photo were stripped from the film poster, his film by it was stripped away, he was banned from the premier, and she was starting rumors about him and iced out the cast. She also hired her own marketing firm, said that it would be free, charged the film, did not include him in any of the marketing, that is a pattern of aggressive, bullying behavior. I just don’t understand how people expected him to react.

Oh no, actually I do. Ryan and Blake’s team thought he would just roll over and die. It was perfectly reasonable for him to hire a PR crisis team. He was under a major threat and he has the receipts.

“These texts showing Baldoni actively participated in the PR smear and wanted his team to go harder actually help him” is not an argument I was expecting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Heath allegations are continuing to be problematic. Im seeing commentary that Blake just did the typical rich southern white lady who thinks everything the Black man does is sexual.

That is very unfair, because she also makes complaints about being uncomfortable with Baldoni and the OBGYN guy, who has a Jewish name. She pretty clearly articulates the issues with Heath are that he said he wouldn't turn around and face her while she was undressed but then he did, and that he should her an unwanted video of his wife. Those might be a stretch, but no more so than what she says about Baldoni, and there is no reason to make it a race thing. I'm 100% sure that if Baldoni or Sarowitz or the OBGYN actor had turned around and looked at her while she was breastfeeding or having makeup removed, she also would have complained.

It may be unfair, but you can’t deny the public perception is not good for Blake. She already has the nickname plantation princess because of her wedding venue choice. There’s been at least two other video interviews that have surfaced that have problematic comments on race for Blake.

But yes, there is a perception out there that is not helping Blake’s image. It is what it is.

Just noting again that Baldoni attended a plantation wedding several years ago where as he recounts in his book, he behaved very insensitively to the black friend who came with his group, negating her concerns about the venue, telling her he didn’t see color, gaslighting her about her concerns, and then ghosting her when she emailed a longer explanation of what was wrong with the the venue but commiserating with fellow attendees instead.

I believe he apologized to her later, but Reynolds also publicly apologized to EVERYONE later on his and Lively’s behalf, explained the site used was chosen bc it was from The Notebook but that they were deeply sorry and deeply regretted the choice. Lively also made an Instagram post announcing a $200k donation to NAACP legal defense fund after the murder of George Floyd stating “We're ashamed that in the past we've allowed ourselves to be uninformed about how deeply rooted systemic racism is. [We] talk to our kids about everything, all of it … including our own complicity. We talk about our bias, blindness and our own mistakes. We look back and see so many mistakes which have led us to deeply examine who we are and want to become.”

It’s more of a problem for Lively because it was her own wedding. At the same time, Baldoni not Lively was also sued for racial discrimination and then retaliation by a black man he lured to his podcast with promises of a long term job, then fired when he actually stood up for the discriminatory way a black guest on the podcast was being treated. This is another example of how Baldoni talked a big game about feminism and racial understanding in Man Enough *in theory* only to run a very different and chaotic set that did not follow through on those ideals *in practice.*. Still, Team Baldoni keeps on with this, maybe not recognizing that it can rear up to hurt Baldini if anyone bothers to look more closely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The appropriate way to handle behavior like this is to file a complete with HR and sag. Nothing that happened to Blake is worthy of a lawsuit and an article in New York Times.

Especially since a list of complaints were raised halfway through, and there were no other incidents. As someone said up thread, that’s an HR success story. We never should’ve heard about it beyond that point. But Blake decided to burn it all down in August and start rumors about him and ice him out of the premiere which caused rampant speculation and damaged his reputation. She started the smear campaign, didn’t see the intense backlash against her coming, maybe didn’t think he’d hire a crisis communications firm to deal with it, and then seems like had a meltdown, and felt backed up against the wall.

Her team should have stopped her, but her lawyers must be making a killing.

I wonder if her hair product line has made a comeback.

The reason the NYT found it newsworthy was the PR campaign, with those texts between Nathan, Abel, and Baldoni.

I also think it's highly unlikely Blake would have sued were it not for the texts. Her retaliation claims are stronger than the SH claims. And it's very problematic that Wayfarer agreed NOT to retaliate when they signed the 17-point list.

I’m curious to see how this gets argued in court. I think Baldoni can argue that he did NOT retaliate against her for SH at any point and that his actions were in response to what SHE did to HIM during the premiere. Let’s put this in corporate terms. If someone alleges SH at work, they can’t be fired for bringing those allegations but they can still be fired for cause. For example, if that person just starts coming to work late everyday, they can’t say oh you can’t fire me b/c once upon a time I alleged SH and that would be retaliation.

Some of the texts are very problematic for Baldoni. There is a text where he he essentially acknowledges that she believes her own allegations, and that they have to do something or "she'll never give up " it undercuts his argument that she was lying and just trying to steal the movie. And the texts about how he wants her buried (though those might be hearsay, we'll see), and him texting a tweet about Hailey Bieber being accused of being a mean girl and saying "this is what we need." I think there are others too, and can't remember.

The texts are a real problem for him

I disagree here. I actually think some of those texts about how she will never give up and about her state of mind thinking she is right help him. Blakes side has some problematic texts of threats. First of all, she threatened the viability of the movie several times by walking away, clearly showing that she did not care if she blew up the movie and cost her millions. This is showing a pattern of making threats.

Next, there are really problematic text from her team and Sony, one being, about “now the gloves are off.” Another being that he “better play ball.” And the third being the one about “any goodwill we had is now gone.” or something to that effect.

For Justin to be reading these texts and then responding it to his team that he’s unsure what she will do and that she will never give up, that helps him because she was continually making all these threats, creating a pattern, and he was truly fearful about what she was capable of, as anyone in the right mind would be. Add that to the fact that his version did not get released, even though it scored higher, his name and photo were stripped from the film poster, his film by it was stripped away, he was banned from the premier, and she was starting rumors about him and iced out the cast. She also hired her own marketing firm, said that it would be free, charged the film, did not include him in any of the marketing, that is a pattern of aggressive, bullying behavior. I just don’t understand how people expected him to react.

Oh no, actually I do. Ryan and Blake’s team thought he would just roll over and die. It was perfectly reasonable for him to hire a PR crisis team. He was under a major threat and he has the receipts.

“These texts showing Baldoni actively participated in the PR smear and wanted his team to go harder actually help him” is not an argument I was expecting.

Not sure how him saying I’m not sure how far she’ll go, and him being terrified of her means that he did a smear campaign. He is clearly hiring a communications firm to get help, which is his right to do. That’s all of those text show.

He was defending himself against her very obvious smear campaign.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Heath allegations are continuing to be problematic. Im seeing commentary that Blake just did the typical rich southern white lady who thinks everything the Black man does is sexual.

That is very unfair, because she also makes complaints about being uncomfortable with Baldoni and the OBGYN guy, who has a Jewish name. She pretty clearly articulates the issues with Heath are that he said he wouldn't turn around and face her while she was undressed but then he did, and that he should her an unwanted video of his wife. Those might be a stretch, but no more so than what she says about Baldoni, and there is no reason to make it a race thing. I'm 100% sure that if Baldoni or Sarowitz or the OBGYN actor had turned around and looked at her while she was breastfeeding or having makeup removed, she also would have complained.

It may be unfair, but you can’t deny the public perception is not good for Blake. She already has the nickname plantation princess because of her wedding venue choice. There’s been at least two other video interviews that have surfaced that have problematic comments on race for Blake.

But yes, there is a perception out there that is not helping Blake’s image. It is what it is.

Just noting again that Baldoni attended a plantation wedding several years ago where as he recounts in his book, he behaved very insensitively to the black friend who came with his group, negating her concerns about the venue, telling her he didn’t see color, gaslighting her about her concerns, and then ghosting her when she emailed a longer explanation of what was wrong with the the venue but commiserating with fellow attendees instead.

I believe he apologized to her later, but Reynolds also publicly apologized to EVERYONE later on his and Lively’s behalf, explained the site used was chosen bc it was from The Notebook but that they were deeply sorry and deeply regretted the choice. Lively also made an Instagram post announcing a $200k donation to NAACP legal defense fund after the murder of George Floyd stating “We're ashamed that in the past we've allowed ourselves to be uninformed about how deeply rooted systemic racism is. [We] talk to our kids about everything, all of it … including our own complicity. We talk about our bias, blindness and our own mistakes. We look back and see so many mistakes which have led us to deeply examine who we are and want to become.”

It’s more of a problem for Lively because it was her own wedding. At the same time, Baldoni not Lively was also sued for racial discrimination and then retaliation by a black man he lured to his podcast with promises of a long term job, then fired when he actually stood up for the discriminatory way a black guest on the podcast was being treated. This is another example of how Baldoni talked a big game about feminism and racial understanding in Man Enough *in theory* only to run a very different and chaotic set that did not follow through on those ideals *in practice.*. Still, Team Baldoni keeps on with this, maybe not recognizing that it can rear up to hurt Baldini if anyone bothers to look more closely.

You said a lot of words, but the fact is going to a plantation wedding and hosting a plantation wedding is very different.

Add that to the fact that she had a lifestyle brand about the antebellum south… And the whole LA face Oakland, booty controversy that she had to apologize for. At the end of the day, he’s not the one accusing a black man of being overly sexual toward him, is he?