Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While Blake and Ryan undoubtably were difficult clients who made things worse, one has to think Gottlieb isn't going to have much future success in the "crisis management" sector, which he currently lists as one of his areas of expertise.

Who is Gottlieb again? What firm?

Michael Gottlieb, Wilkie Farr. One of Blake’s lead attorneys.

Anonymous wrote:Just like every other year, you say?

There are, as I’m writing this, just shy of 500 reader comments on our recap of our 15 favorite looks from the Met Gala on Monday. The top comments are almost all negative.

“I’m sorry. I find this display of ‘fashion’ disgusting and I wish the NYT wouldn’t celebrate it,” reads the most recommended comment. “I’m struck by how out of touch and unrelatable this feels for the average American,” Is the one just below that. A few down we get the first of many comparisons to the elitist incongruity captured in “The Hunger Games.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/08/style/why-everyone-was-so-mad-about-the-met-gala.html

Kim Kardashian, Hailey Bieber and Beyoncé were among the A-listers who hit the red carpet at Monday night’s Met Gala – but the annual fundraiser was somewhat overshadowed by controversy this year, as numerous big names skipped the event amid criticism of its co-chairs.

Overseen by former Vogue editor Anna Wintour, who now serves as global chief content officer for publisher Condé Nast, the gala raises millions of dollars for the Metropolitan Museum of Art’s Costume Institute.

But in a highly-controversial move, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos and his wife Lauren Sanchez-Bezos this year paid a rumoured $10 million to sponsor and co-host the prestigious evening.

One of the organnisers, who asked to remain anonymous, told The Independent that Bezos was using the event to “launder his image”, adding: “He’s sipping champagne, while his actions are affecting people all over the world. He’s buying favour, quite literally.”

https://www.the-independent.com/life-style/met-gala-controversy-jeff-bezos-b2970507.html

But this year, the Met Gala is facing stiff headwinds, most notably for the decision to name Jeff Bezos, the Amazon founder and one of the world’s wealthiest men, and his wife, Lauren Sánchez Bezos, as honorary chairs.

Opposition to the Bezoses started almost immediately after they were announced as financial sponsors in February, and comes amid a surging anti-rich sentiment nationwide and in New York City, the event’s liberal home. The outrage seemingly gained momentum after the city’s newly elected mayor, Zohran Mamdani, a democratic socialist, declared in mid-April that he would skip the gala, breaking with many of his predecessors, saying that his focus is on “affordability.”

And in the weeks leading up to the event on Monday, an avid anti-Bezos campaign has erupted on New York’s streets, in subways and online, where social media users have described the event as the “Amazon Prime Gala” or “Bezos Ball.” Reports of skittish stars and upset fashionistas have peppered tabloid pages, including rumors of some past guests steering clear.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/04/style/met-gala-jeff-bezos-backlash.html

However, the Met Gala fashion wasn't the only thing turning heads on Monday. Bezos' involvement drew significant attention to this year's gala, provoking considerable criticism beyond the traditional fashion commentary. The Met Gala has previously come under fire for revelling in ostentatious opulence while the rest of the world burns, drawing comparisons to the severe class divide in dystopic YA novel The Hunger Games.
Now that the fourth richest man in the world has reportedly dropped $10 million to sponsor the event, the vibes for the 2026 Met Gala were even more off than usual.

https://mashable.com/article/met-gala-2026-fashion-jeff-bezos-reaction-protest-boycott

This rings more true. We are in the age of billionaires and steep economic decline. The average American is hurting, and so yes, the Met Gala is going to be viewed differently than it was even just a few years ago.

Anyone who thinks Anna Wintour is setting the tone for the culture is probably around Anna Wintour‘s age. The Met Gala used to be more fun just like the Oscars used to be more fun, because it used to be more rare to see celebrities, but with social media, we are inundated. That’s exactly why the Oscars are going to streaming. These things just seem really dated today.

Anonymous wrote:While Blake and Ryan undoubtably were difficult clients who made things worse, one has to think Gottlieb isn't going to have much future success in the "crisis management" sector, which he currently lists as one of his areas of expertise.

Who is Gottlieb again? What firm?

While Blake and Ryan undoubtably were difficult clients who made things worse, one has to think Gottlieb isn't going to have much future success in the "crisis management" sector, which he currently lists as one of his areas of expertise.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Huh, lively's leas attorney is on The Town, the Matt Bellamy podcast about Hollywood. I'm a long time listener of the town and actually a little surprised because I thought Bellamy was very over this case.

Anyway, listening now, just letting people know if they are interesting.

Gottlieb made an interesting comment towards the end of this interview, when Bellamy asks him if he thinks the lawsuit might have disrupted the way PR works in Hollywood, with the sort of behind the scenes smearing, leaking, and gossip that we saw in this case. While answering, Gottlieb suggested that maybe more celebrities, and their PR teams, will consider that there are more direct and less deceptive ways to promote themselves or even to criticize a colleague or try to get the public on "their side." Like you can just issue a statement, write an op-ed, or do an interview, rather than hiring a crisis team to try and manipulate social media comments or spread rumors against a professional rival.

I thought it was interesting because it made me think what might have happened if instead whatever it is that Melissa Nathan and Jed Wallace did for Baldoni and Wayfarer, they had just had Baldoni do an interview where he shared his story or had him release a statement where he defended himself and made the accusations he wanted to make about Blake stealing the movie or holding them hostage. It's an interesting thought exercise. I actually think this might have worked a lot better?

You mean, something novel like going to The NY Times with explosive allegations about sexual harassment and selectively releasing stolen texts?

And then having Gottlieb try to shut down the efforts of the subject of those rumors to release facts in their defense?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Huh, lively's leas attorney is on The Town, the Matt Bellamy podcast about Hollywood. I'm a long time listener of the town and actually a little surprised because I thought Bellamy was very over this case.

Anyway, listening now, just letting people know if they are interesting.

Gottlieb made an interesting comment towards the end of this interview, when Bellamy asks him if he thinks the lawsuit might have disrupted the way PR works in Hollywood, with the sort of behind the scenes smearing, leaking, and gossip that we saw in this case. While answering, Gottlieb suggested that maybe more celebrities, and their PR teams, will consider that there are more direct and less deceptive ways to promote themselves or even to criticize a colleague or try to get the public on "their side." Like you can just issue a statement, write an op-ed, or do an interview, rather than hiring a crisis team to try and manipulate social media comments or spread rumors against a professional rival.

I thought it was interesting because it made me think what might have happened if instead whatever it is that Melissa Nathan and Jed Wallace did for Baldoni and Wayfarer, they had just had Baldoni do an interview where he shared his story or had him release a statement where he defended himself and made the accusations he wanted to make about Blake stealing the movie or holding them hostage. It's an interesting thought exercise. I actually think this might have worked a lot better?

Just, No. This industry is full of middle schoolers so that’s never going to work.

I’m not a Blake lively fan, but if Justin Baldoni done this before any of the texts and emails came out, I would’ve thought he was mentally unstable and immediately sided with her. This is a case where we really needed to see Ryan and Blake in their own words.

Just like every other year, you say?

Anonymous wrote:OMG, who s the weirdo that just posted five nearly identical responses about Vogue back to back? Touch grass.

The Met Gala has lost its cache, many were calling it the billionaires’s ball because Bezos paid $10 million for it this year (and that has in fact not happened before ) Vogue is on its way out as that too will be shortly ruined by the tacky Mrs. Bezos.

Blake can say she was a star at the Met Gala back in the day, but they both have seen better days.

$10 million isn't even that much money for Bezos. He paid $1 million in 2012 but, you know, inflation. Anna probably charged him more to make Lauren a co-chair, which is good because the extra $9 million can do a lot at the Met and all they had to do for it is let Lauren Bezos walk around in designer gown and pose for a few photos. Whatever, rich people have been laundering their reps by using cultural institutions for centuries, this is not new.

The public's relationship with the Met Gala is about what it's always been. I feel like anyone who thinks otherwise is very young or just hasn't been paying attention very long.

Also my responses were not identical, they were addressing different points and in response to different comments. There's just a lot of BS being posted in this thread about the Met Gala and Anna Wintour and Vogue for some reason and I happen to know a lot about it. If you don't want to read them, don't.

Anonymous wrote:Huh, lively's leas attorney is on The Town, the Matt Bellamy podcast about Hollywood. I'm a long time listener of the town and actually a little surprised because I thought Bellamy was very over this case.

Anyway, listening now, just letting people know if they are interesting.

Gottlieb made an interesting comment towards the end of this interview, when Bellamy asks him if he thinks the lawsuit might have disrupted the way PR works in Hollywood, with the sort of behind the scenes smearing, leaking, and gossip that we saw in this case. While answering, Gottlieb suggested that maybe more celebrities, and their PR teams, will consider that there are more direct and less deceptive ways to promote themselves or even to criticize a colleague or try to get the public on "their side." Like you can just issue a statement, write an op-ed, or do an interview, rather than hiring a crisis team to try and manipulate social media comments or spread rumors against a professional rival.

I thought it was interesting because it made me think what might have happened if instead whatever it is that Melissa Nathan and Jed Wallace did for Baldoni and Wayfarer, they had just had Baldoni do an interview where he shared his story or had him release a statement where he defended himself and made the accusations he wanted to make about Blake stealing the movie or holding them hostage. It's an interesting thought exercise. I actually think this might have worked a lot better?

OMG, who s the weirdo that just posted five nearly identical responses about Vogue back to back? Touch grass.

The Met Gala has lost its cache, many were calling it the billionaires’s ball because Bezos paid $10 million for it this year (and that has in fact not happened before ) Vogue is on its way out as that too will be shortly ruined by the tacky Mrs. Bezos.

Blake can say she was a star at the Met Gala back in the day, but they both have seen better days.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Btw Why does Anna Wintour love Blake Lively?

She was seated at Anna Wintour’s table at the MET ball too.

Who cares? If Harvey Weinstein wasn't in prison, he'd be at the table too.

Yes but why was Blake invited to the Met Gala and sitting at Anna’s table?

I don’t this matters as much as you think it does. Anna is old and about to hand over Vogue to Bezos/Sanchez.

Wintour already stepped down as EIC of Vogue and gave the job to a protege -- Chloe Malle -- while staying on as Condé Nast's "chief content officer" which is a kind of figurehead retirement job for her where she still wields influence but doesn't have formal duties. So Anna is already basically retired from Vogue BUT the Met Gala remains her baby. In fact I would bet Anna spends more time on the Gala now than she did when she was running the magazine and is more involved in the Met as an Elective Trustee, because she has more time and this is the aspect of her legacy over which she still has near total control. Anna will continue to run the gala as lead chair for as long as she wishes to -- she was the one who brought in Bezos and he (and Lauren) need her stamp of approval to be there, and that won't change.

Yes, very interesting that she has chosen to embrace Blake Lively and show her support so publicly right after the lawsuit scandal. She just think Blake will recover her reputation.

Anna was EIC of Vogue for 37 years. I imagine she takes a much longer view on celebrity and influence than most people. She's seen plenty of people dead and then resurrected. She also gatekeepers with a different set of values than others assume. She absolutely does gatekeep, but the qualities she appreciates aren't just being connected or beautiful or even being beloved by the public. She likes people who work hard (because she has always worked hard). She likes people with a personal sense of style even if it is often criticized by others. The likes people who love fashion and art and view fashion as art and believe it's every bit as important as sports and politics. Yes she likes Blake, personally. She also likes Kim Kardashian. I suspect she also likes Lauren Bezos. Because they all share these values. There are models and actresses considered by many to be far more "fashionable" and popular than those three, but Anna actively dislikes them because she views them as lazy, unoriginal, with no real appreciation for what Anna does. Many, actually.

Anonymous wrote:The Met Gala was sort of random probably because of the Bezos problem.

In the one have Beyoncé and Rhiana were there, but so were the Kardashians.

The Kardashians and Rhianna have been attending for years. Beyonce used to go every year but stopped attending after the big dust up where her sister attacked her husband in an elevator, reportedly over Jay's cheating. This was her first year back in a decade.

None of this had anything to do with Bezos, who has also attended several times. It's not even his first year sponsoring it -- he was a guest of honor and sponsor back in 2012. It's just that Amazon and Bezos were not considered to be evil entities by so many people back then. That was back when Instagram was considered the height of cool and Bezos and other billionaires were admired by most.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Btw Why does Anna Wintour love Blake Lively?

She was seated at Anna Wintour’s table at the MET ball too.

Who cares? If Harvey Weinstein wasn't in prison, he'd be at the table too.

Yes but why was Blake invited to the Met Gala and sitting at Anna’s table?

I don’t this matters as much as you think it does. Anna is old and about to hand over Vogue to Bezos/Sanchez.

Wintour already stepped down as EIC of Vogue and gave the job to a protege -- Chloe Malle -- while staying on as Condé Nast's "chief content officer" which is a kind of figurehead retirement job for her where she still wields influence but doesn't have formal duties. So Anna is already basically retired from Vogue BUT the Met Gala remains her baby. In fact I would bet Anna spends more time on the Gala now than she did when she was running the magazine and is more involved in the Met as an Elective Trustee, because she has more time and this is the aspect of her legacy over which she still has near total control. Anna will continue to run the gala as lead chair for as long as she wishes to -- she was the one who brought in Bezos and he (and Lauren) need her stamp of approval to be there, and that won't change.

Yes, very interesting that she has chosen to embrace Blake Lively and show her support so publicly right after the lawsuit scandal. She just think Blake will recover her reputation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Btw Why does Anna Wintour love Blake Lively?

She was seated at Anna Wintour’s table at the MET ball too.

Who cares? If Harvey Weinstein wasn't in prison, he'd be at the table too.

Yes but why was Blake invited to the Met Gala and sitting at Anna’s table?

I don’t this matters as much as you think it does. Anna is old and about to hand over Vogue to Bezos/Sanchez.

Wintour already stepped down as EIC of Vogue and gave the job to a protege -- Chloe Malle -- while staying on as Condé Nast's "chief content officer" which is a kind of figurehead retirement job for her where she still wields influence but doesn't have formal duties. So Anna is already basically retired from Vogue BUT the Met Gala remains her baby. In fact I would bet Anna spends more time on the Gala now than she did when she was running the magazine and is more involved in the Met as an Elective Trustee, because she has more time and this is the aspect of her legacy over which she still has near total control. Anna will continue to run the gala as lead chair for as long as she wishes to -- she was the one who brought in Bezos and he (and Lauren) need her stamp of approval to be there, and that won't change.

The Met Gala was sort of random probably because of the Bezos problem.

In the one have Beyoncé and Rhiana were there, but so were the Kardashians.