Behind the Spin: Blake Lively, Justin Baldoni, and the High-Stakes PR Showdown

Amid the glamorous yet ruthless world of Hollywood, Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni find themselves embroiled in a high-profile legal battle stemming from the adaptation of Colleen Hoover’s novel, “It Ends With Us.” The episode explores the tangled web of celebrity relations, PR strategies, and serious allegations of misconduct that threaten to overshadow their professional endeavors and alter the public's perception of both stars.

• Overview of the legal feud between Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni
• The role of social media in shaping public opinion
• Ryan Reynolds’ impactful presence in the narrative
• Analysis of the sexual harassment claims made by Lively 
• Discussion on PR tactics and their ethical implications
• The fallout from the New York Times article detailing the smear campaign
• Exploring themes of power dynamics and accountability in Hollywood
• Reflection on whether lawsuits can salvage deteriorating reputations

Do you think lawsuits solve reputation problems? Will the reputation problems of Justin Baldoni and Blake Lively be solved by these lawsuits, or do they just pour gasoline on the fire?

Want More Behind the Breakdown?
Follow The PR Breakdown with Molly McPherson on Substack for early access to podcast episodes, exclusive member chats, weekly lives, and monthly workshops that go deeper than the mic. It's the insider’s hub for communicators who want strategy with spine—and a little side-eye where it counts.

Follow Molly → @MollyMcPherson
Subscribe to PR Breakdown on Substack → prbreakdown.media

Need a Keynote Speaker? Drawing from real-world PR battles, Molly delivers the same engaging stories and hard-won crisis insights from the podcast to your live audience. Click here to book Molly for your next meeting.

Follow & Connect with Molly:

• https://www.youtube.com/mollymcpherson
• https://www.tiktok.com/@mollybmcpherson
• https://www.instagram.com/molly.mcpherson/
• https://www.linkedin.com/in/mollymcpherson/
  
  

© 2025 The PR Breakdown with Molly McPherson

Episode Transcript

Molly McPherson (00:00):
Hello and welcome to the PR Breakdown.
I'm your host, molly McPherson,and in this episode we're
diving into one of Hollywood'sbiggest and messiest legal
battles, involving Blake Lively,justin Baldoni and the film
adaptation of Colleen Hoover'sbest-selling novel.
It Ends With Us.
Now we are talking millions ofdollars in lawsuits, accusations

(00:21):
of sexual harassment,retaliation claims, alleged
smear campaigns and a powerhousecelebrity couple that might tip
the scales in one star's favor.
Now, in this episode, I'msharing the context clues I've
gathered from my online researchand full disclosure sources

(00:42):
close to the situation who'veshed light on how a powerful
Hollywood couple and a directorwho once championed this film
ended up embroiled in a fightfor credibility.
And if you want to know thereal crisis behind this crisis,
then this episode is for you.
Let's set the stage when youbreak down the ongoing legal

(01:03):
battle between Blake Lively thestage.
When you break down the ongoinglegal battle between Blake
Lively, it becomes clear that atthe heart of the crisis, two
damage reputation.
Now, despite the gravity ofLively's sexual harassment
claims more on that in a bit thepublic's attention and the
press's attention shifted to thebehind-the-scenes PR strategies
that fuel this feud.
Now, in my experience, nearlyevery crisis begins when one

(01:27):
side feels powerless after aperceived injustice.
That frustration often goespublic and spirals into the kind
of high-profile conflict thatwe're witnessing now.
So let's look at the basictimeline.
It Ends With Us begins as apassion project for Justin
Baldoni.
If you hear interviews fromBaldoni about the project,

(01:48):
hearing about the book he doesadmit that there was a lot of
commercial viability to theproject, but the author, colleen
Hoover, allowed him to takecontrol of the title back in
2019.
She wanted him to bring themovie to life In 2023, blake
Lively signs on to star as Lilyand at that point everything

(02:11):
seems golden.
August 2024, the release Alittle bumpier than expected.
A lot of cracks in theproduction team's relationship
had erupted into a lot ofchatter, not only online but in
the press.
We have drops in the pressabout problems behind the scene.

(02:33):
At first we don't know wherethe problems are coming from.
Then we have our internetTikTok sleuths mixed in with
some tabloid drops, peoplenoticing that there doesn't seem
to be any conversation orinteraction between the co-stars
.
People are pulling outsoundbites from interviews.
When people ask, cast members,notably like Jenny Slate, who's

(02:56):
a co-star in the film, was askeddirectly about Justin Baldoni
and she demurred and talkedabout the process in general.
So it was clear that somethingwas a mess behind the scenes.
I published a piece forForbescom about the
behind-the-scenes trouble.
The title Social Media Hints atReasons Behind.

(03:17):
It Ends With Us Cast Riff.
In this article I mentioned inthe first paragraph that the
film is a box office hit.
It raked in a global total of$80 million over the weekend.
But behind the scenes there wasa different story unfolding.
There were rumors of a riftbetween Baldoni, who was not

(03:38):
only the co-star, also thedirector and co-star, blake
Lively.
In this piece I highlightedwhat was happening online.
There were a lot of cluesscattered across social media
showing that there was a riftbehind the scenes.
Now, from this article, some ofthe things that I noted
premiere night ghost Baldoni'sabsence fuels speculation.

(04:02):
At last week's premiere in NewYork City, baldoni's absence
from key press events and groupphotos was glaring.
While Baldoni walked the redcarpet with family and friends,
lively posed with the cast herhusband, ryan Reynolds, his
mother and Hugh Jackman.
Adding to the speculation,lively Baldoni giving separate
media interviews.

(04:23):
Also Colleen Hoover, who was ahuge champion of Justin Baldoni
in the beginning.
She handed over this belovedproject to Justin Baldoni, after
he reached out to her Now, hehad read the book and in media
interviews he had stated that hehad never read a romance title

(04:43):
before.
This was his first, but he saidthat he was moved by it reached
out to Colleen Hoover toacquire the title to be a
director of the title.
At that point, he wasn't set toact in the piece and he did
admit that there was commercialviability to this title because
it was a hotly, hotlyanticipated book when it came

(05:06):
out, and so everybody waswaiting for this story to end up
on the big screen.
Now, as a side note aboutauthors and self-published
authors, colleen Hoover issimilar to a lot of other
self-published authors out thereand I know something a little
bit about this because in mywork as a crisis communication

(05:26):
strategist, I've worked withself-published authors who've
been picked up by mainstreampublishers because their books
seem to capture, you know,either a trope or a mood that
hit with a lot of people,particularly coming out of the
pandemic In 2020, reading justspiked.

(05:49):
Now, quick side note here In mywork as a crisis communication
strategist, I've worked withauthors before self-published
authors who have kind of made itbig time and picked up by a big
publishing house.
I've also worked withpublishers.
Book talk is a thing y'allbecause there's a lot of passion
and public opinion aroundBookTok.

(06:11):
It is a very profitableindustry because there's a lot
of emotion behind it.
There are a lot of super fansbehind a lot of the genres out
there.
Colleen Hoover represents, inmy opinion, one of those typical
self-published authors whobecome huge because people find

(06:31):
them and then their titles justskyrocket and they're on the New
York Times bestselling list.
Something that I've noticed inmy research and in my work that
a lot of these titles speak totrauma and stress that the
author is able to bring out.
Many times it's from their ownpersonal experience.

(06:52):
When they're able to capture aharrowing journey of oftentimes
a heroine and they can put itinto content that resonates with
people, it affords them fansthe ability to escape.
So maybe they just want it forkind of fun, something to read,

(07:14):
just to escape from theirproblems.
But some people want to escapefrom real problems.
They really connect with theseauthors Colleen Hoover has said
you know she's one of theseauthors who grew up in a very
traumatic environment.
The book it Ends With Us wasinspired by Colleen Hoover and
her mother, like fleeing anabusive parent-slash-husband

(07:37):
situation.
Like a lot of authors out there, their trauma is put into the
book and I mention this becauseit's important.
Colleen Hoover felt it was safeto put this book that was
written from her perspective,her and her mother's perspective
into the hands of JustinBaldoni.
She trusted Justin Baldoni withthis story.

(08:03):
Now back to the premiere.
There was a fissure betweenColleen Hoover, the author, and
Justin Baldoni.
Hoover was on stage with BlakeLively at the premiere to
announce the movie, so the lackof interaction between Hoover
and Lively was definitely noted.
Was definitely noted.
Also noted was Ryan Reynolds,the spouse of Blake Lively.

(08:29):
My subtitle here Ryan Reynoldsstealing the spotlight.
It shouldn't be a question mark.
It should have been anexplanation point.
Lively dropped in Peoplemagazine that there was this
revelation that Reynolds wrote apivotal scene and she had
dropped during this time, in theweeks after the release, when

(08:51):
her PR was going sidewaysquickly, she made it known that
her husband, ryan Reynolds, hadpenned pivotal scenes within the
film.
Also, if you remember, therewas another big premiere the
same weekend and that wasDeadpool and Wolverine Ryan
Reynolds and Hugh Jackmanco-star Hugh Jackman's movie.

(09:14):
That was huge, like thatcleared $1 billion global box
office less than two weeks afterthe premiere date.
So now we have Blake Livelyleveraging her husband and Hugh
Jackman in her marketing.
We have Ryan Reynolds beingbrought into not just the

(09:38):
marketing of it Ends With Us,but also the narrative of it
Ends with us, and if you watchedthe press back and forth or
social media chatter, you'renoticing that there is a
breakdown in the relationship.
The co-stars, for the most part, seem to align themselves with
Blake Lively and Ryan Reynolds.

(09:59):
Justin Baldoni did not receivea lot of support.
Now, in the immediate weeksfollowing the premiere, when
Blake Lively was struggling froma public relations perspective,
you didn't even need to be a PRpractitioner or media savvy,
because it was August, which istraditionally a news desert

(10:21):
month.
There's not a lot of things tocover out there.
Press-wise, there was nothingreally political, even though
it's a political year andthey're still campaigning.
A lot of reporters are onvacation.
A lot of editors and newsoutlets know that other people
are on vacation as well.
August is a huge vacation month, but it's perfect for
entertainment PR and it'sperfect for movie premieres.

(10:43):
However, if you remember, atthe time, the needle of public
opinion was pointed in the favorof Justin Baldoni.
Blake Lively was the one who wasexperiencing a lot of the
negative publicity.
It wasn't just from theheadlines.
If you remember, or if you wereonline at that time, you would
notice that there were a lot ofmedia soundbites pulled from

(11:07):
interviews that Blake Lively haddone in the past where she came
off, some might say, rathercold, sometimes a little snarky,
sometimes a little bitchy.
I felt at that time back inAugust, that this wasn't a story
about two feuding co-stars.
That time, back in August, thatthis wasn't a story about two

(11:27):
feuding co-stars.
This was a battle of reputationvia PR campaigns back and forth
.
Now Ryan Reynolds likelyoffered to jump in and help out
in the market.
So with this narrative we hadthe Blake Lively-Ryan Reynolds
duo versus Justin Baldoni.
Justin Baldoni's social mediaposts at the time were very

(11:51):
humble pie.
He posted video of him beingrecognized in an airport.
He was walking with his family.
Every post and every interviewthat he was doing was about the
movie, praising Blake Lively'swork, and he was sidestepping
some of the areas, particularlyaround Ryan Reynolds, but he was

(12:13):
trying to be a good guy, atleast in the press.
From Camp Reynolds slash Livelythere were a lot of moves.
Lively.
There were a lot of moves,drops in magazines, media
outlets and also on YouTubeitself.
On Ryan Reynolds' page, heposted this video which, frankly

(12:34):
, some people might think it'shysterical.
They think it is peak, ryanReynolds, I find it a little
cringe.
Oh God, this is cool.
It's not every day the husbandgets to interview his wife's
love interest in a film.
It's kind of crazy.
I don't remember seeing this onthe schedule.
Let's dive in, shall we?
So I saw you posing in a photowith Mrs Reynolds and I'm sorry,

(12:55):
what do you call her?
Do you guys have a nickname orsomething?
No, okay, no, just so, it's Mrs.
Okay, anyway, I, how do you?

(13:32):
Your ego when Ryan Reynolds isessentially hijacking your movie
?
It is that feeling that, I feel, is the crux of this PR crisis.
Now, fast forward to December2024, when Blake Lively and her
team and Ryan Reynolds decide todestroy my holiday season and

(13:59):
many other people who work in PR.
But even more than mine, itwould be the people who she
named in a California CivilRights Department complaint,
claiming sexual harassment and ahostile work environment during
the film's production.
So she named Justin Baldoni,jamie Heath he co-founded

(14:22):
Wayfair Studios with JustinBaldoni and a handful of other
PR executives.
Approximately 14 hours later,the New York Times drops a
bombshell of a story titled weCan Bury Anyone Inside a
Hollywood Smear Machine.
With that legal filinghappening on a Friday before the

(14:45):
Christmas holiday, that wouldbe a classic Friday news dump,
even though it happened on aSaturday.
The Friday news dump is astrategy where a big story is
dumped over the weekend, citinga lack of news, to promote any

(15:05):
story.
So there's usually skeletonstuff, people aren't going to
chat about it, it's a time tolet the story die down.
So by Monday there's already anew story there.
But it's also used and I wouldsay more in the social media age
as a way to get ahead of thestory.
People will do a Fridayafternoon sometimes holiday

(15:26):
weekend news dump to control thenarrative of a story when that
story was successful.
I do think to control thenarrative of a story when that
story was successful I do thinkwas with this Blake Lively
campaign that weekend when itdidn't work.
If you remember, back two yearsago Joe Jonas dropped the news
about his divorce from SophieTurner.
He dropped that over Labor Dayweekend and to manipulate the

(15:48):
narrative the entire weekend.
Sophie Turner in her brilliance.
The narrative the entireweekend.
Sophie Turner, in herbrilliance, said nothing.
She just let the Jonas machineget themselves all clogged up in
the PR works.
She probably knew somethingabout Joe Jonas that everybody
else didn't know, that he wouldmuck up the process somehow.
Team Jonas did a lot of drops,with very specific tabloids TMZ

(16:14):
being one of them trying tocontrol the narrative, and it
did not work.
They backed themselves into thecorner and every single time
they noticed that the publicopinion was shifting away from
them and towards Turner.
It was clear that Team Jonaswas trying to smear Sophie
Turner.
So we're seeing the samemachinations happen with this.
Blake Lively, justin BaldoniHollywood smear machine Fast

(16:40):
forward again.
Lively launches legalproceedings against Baldoni in
the Southern District of NewYork.
Man, they are busy with Diddyand everybody else.
My goodness, jay-z.
So that happened on December31st.
In addition to Baldoni, theactress also sued the publicist,
melissa Nathan and JenniferAbel, along with Wayfair Studios

(17:02):
and Jed Wallace, independentcontractor, was named in the
filing.
He was working for MelissaNathan.
Now Melissa Nathan is part ofthe agency group.
Wallace has since been removedfrom Lively's lawsuit, but the
PR people remain.
After that, justin Baldoni firesback with a $250 million

(17:23):
lawsuit against the New YorkTimes, accusing them of libel
and false light.
Invasion of privacy for a piecepublished about the so-called
Hollywood smear machine.
He also sued Lively personally.
So these two are nowhere nearfinished with their legal
skirmishes Now.
She alleged three major issuesagainst Justin Baldoni Sexual

(17:46):
harassment, she claims Baldoniintroduced unscripted sexual
content during filming, crossedprofessional boundaries by
improvising physical contact anddisregarded protocols such as
using a licensed intimacycoordinator.
Also, a hostile workenvironment.
Lively said that Baldoni andthe producer, jamie Heath,
repeatedly entered her trailerwithout warning, even while she

(18:08):
was breastfeeding, causing herdistress and compromising her
sense of safety.
But a big part of thatcomplaint was the retaliatory
campaign After the film wrapped.
Lively alleged that Baldoni'sPR team orchestrated a plan to
quote bury her reputation.
Melissa Nathan is behind theagency group.

(18:31):
There's her team there.
Ralph Reynolds was drawn intothe conflict and confronted

(18:55):
Baldoni about the accusations.
Now, one day after that filing,I mentioned the New York Times
piece you know, titled we CanBury Anyone Inside a Hollywood
Smear Machine.
That title we Can Bury Anyonewas lifted from a text from
Melissa Nathan which wasincluded in the New York Times

(19:16):
story.
Then, december 31st, new Year'sEve, lively files suit with the
Southern District of New York,naming Baldoni, wayfair Studios
publicists Melissa Nathan andJennifer Abel and others as
defendants.
So now she's ratcheting it upin federal court.
Now, in her statement to theNew York Times.
The language is importantbecause I think it reveals what

(19:40):
is really going on here.
Listen, quote I hope that mylegal action helps pull back the
curtain on these sinisterretaliatory tactics and helps
protect others who may betargeted.
End quote.
That was just an excerpt from alonger statement.
Now, from a crisis communicationperspective, it's easy to see

(20:00):
how such strong allegationsovershadow the film's original
message, focusing instead on theoff-scene drama and turning the
conversation into a he-sa shesaid spectacle.
But within that state it showsthat there is so much focus on
the PR and not so much on thesexual harassment.

(20:21):
Now Justin Baldoni denies everyone of Lively's accusations.
He paints a much differentpicture, one of a star who's
weaponizing her clout and herfamous husband's clout to
overshadow his role as adirector and producer.
And from Baldoni's point ofview, the text messages used
against him were cherry-picked,edited or sarcastic in tone.

(20:41):
But via the New York Timesarticle, he is saying that there
was no orchestrated campaign tosmear Blake Lively.
It was standard scenarioplanning and that the New York
Times edited the text in agraphic design to make it appear
that it was a part of a biggervicious smear machine.

(21:04):
He stated that the film'sproduction company, wayfair, and
its principals Baldoni andHeath, and the PR
representatives Nathan and andAbel.
They were asked to provide aquote on the record comment and
to notify the times of anyinaccuracies by noon eastern
standard time the next day onDecember 21st.
They had absolutely no time.
Like they said, they had 14hours to not only come up with a

(21:26):
statement but they had to readthe entire article and note any
inaccuracies.
So this Baldoni's lawyer cameup with a comment but it didn't
give them any time.
I mean, the damage was done.
Now an interesting thing to notein the New York Times story
three byline One of thereporters, megan Toohey.
Pulitzer Prize winning reporter, megan Toohey.

(21:49):
She was a person who, throughher reporting, fueled a lot of
the Me Too movement and bringingpeople down, including Harvey
Weinstein.
She is a champion of that MeToo movement, so a choice by the
New York Times to include herin this story likely strategic,
also in the very complaint thatLively is making against Baldoni

(22:16):
and his PR team that they areorchestrating a negative PR
smear campaign against LivelyBlake.
Lively herself is utilizing apublic relations smear campaign
by working in a coordinatedeffort to drop a story with the
New York Times.
It was approximately a4,000-word story.

(22:37):
You do not write that storyovernight.
That is a story that has to beresearched, it has to be vetted.
You need interviews, you haveto edit it.
Every lawyer is going to belooking over every single word.
Every lawyer is going to belooking over every single word.
And then to give Baldoni's sideless than a day to come up with

(22:58):
a response, that is part of acoordinated campaign.
They were setting Baldoni up tolose and in other parts of his
lawsuit he's simply saying thata lot of the things that the
Times reported was inaccurate.
In fact, there was a portion inthis New York Times interview,
when I read it, that jumped outat me and that is the inclusion

(23:19):
of the Norwegian entertainmentreporter.
It says here meanwhile, anonline backlash against Ms
Lively was underway.
It is impossible to know howmuch of the negative publicity
was seeded by Ms Nathan, mrWallace and their team and how
much they noticed and amplifiedOn August 10th.

(23:40):
Kirstie Fla she was theNorwegian entertainment reporter
that you likely saw online.
She uploaded a YouTube videofrom a 2016 interview in which
Ms Lively snapped back when shecommented on her baby bump and
remained testy for the rest ofthe conversation.
So Ms Flaw titled it the BlakeLively interview that made me
want to quit my job, and shetold the Daily Mail that it's

(24:01):
quote.
It's time that people behavingbadly in Hollywood, or anywhere
else for that matter, getscalled out for it.
I remember seeing video andthat definitely influenced my
opinion of Blake Lively at thetime.
So, after the publication of theNew York Times article on
Saturday, kirstie Fla if I'msaying her name correctly
contacted the Times and said shehad not participated in any

(24:24):
orchestrated effort to harm MsLively's reputation.
In the email, she said that shehad resurfaced the 2016
interview independently thispast August.
It was neither coordinated norinfluenced by anyone associated
with the alleged campaign.
She wrote Okay.
So New York Times adds thatinto the story, following
paragraph from the originalpiece.

(24:45):
It wasn't the first time shehad posted a video aligned with
a client of Ms Nathan.
In 2022, in the midst of MrDepp's legal battle with Ms
Heard, ms Fla posted clips ofher interviews with the actor
tagged hashtag justice forJohnny Depp.
In my opinion, when I saw that,I thought that is speculative
reporting.

(25:05):
Now let's talk about the cancelculture fallout.
If you are someone who hassided with Blake Lively, for
instance, and no shame whatever.
But if you're someone whoreally feels that Blake Lively
was wronged or you're reallysupporting the sexual harassment
claims, I think it's importantto note the fallout.

(25:26):
Cancel culture is still aliveand well because it happened to
Justin Baldoni is still aliveand well because it happened to
Justin Baldoni.
So, in rapid succession, thisis what happened when this story
came out, his podcast host, lizPlank, exited the podcast WME.

(25:49):
His talent agency dropped himimmediately and the Vital Voices
Award was rescinded to him.
So that was an award for hisadvocacy on women's issue that
was pulled once the loss hit thenews.
By Monday, all these things hadhappened to Justin Baldone and
it happened because of claimsthat were made.
They were never proven claimsFor people who are watching
Beyonce perform at an NFLhalftime show produced by her

(26:12):
husband, jay-z.
With what he's going throughand what he's been accused of in
lawsuits tying him to SeanDiddy Combs, it really makes you
look now at what happened toJustin Baldoni differently.
These are claims from acomplaint, a legal complaint and
he lost a lot.
Now let's talk about the legalversus the PR strategy.

(26:34):
Now, in my work as a crisiscommunication strategist, when
I'm working with a client who isdealing with a cancel culture
type of a crisis or they've beencalled out for something,
oftentimes they'll tell me thatthey want to take legal action,
they want to sue.
They can't say this about me.
It happens a lot.

(26:55):
There is legal, but alsothere's using legal as a PR
strategy.
If you look at this caseclosely and you look at the
specific charges and where theyare resting where Lively is
resting a lot of claims and herenergy and her team's energy

(27:16):
it's around the PR campaign.
It really isn't as much aboutthe sexual harassment.
So when you think of publicfigures in a lawsuit, there's a
very high bar that you have tomeet in order to prove harm.
So when you're in PR, you knowthat this is very tricky
territory.
When people want to sue, Ialways, always steer them away

(27:40):
from a legal action because tome it's very reactionary,
because usually things are never100% right and 100% wrong.
There's messiness on both sidesand it's all just going to come
out.
You've truly been defamed andthere is significant damage,
then a lawsuit is your onlyrecourse.

(28:02):
For Justin Baldoni, suing BlakeLively and Ryan Reynolds and
her team makes sense, because helost almost everything in the
course of one weekend because ofBlake Lively's not even the
lawsuit, this was just thecomplaint.
He lost everything from thecomplaint.
Now that you've made it this far, I want to reveal what I think

(28:26):
is the core of this entirecrisis for Blake Lively and
Justin Baldoni, and it's notfrom Justin Baldoni or Blake
Lively.
It is the Ryan Reynolds factor.
Now, officially he doesn't havea producer credit in the film,
but we do know that he wrote orrevised some key scenes After
all, that's what Blake Livelytold People magazine

(28:47):
Specifically a rooftop momentwhere Lily first meets Ryle.
That's the character whoBaldoni portrays.
So, depending on whose account,you believe, reynolds'
involvement either saved thescript from disaster or
overshadowed Baldoni's creativecontrol.
Add to that that Blake Livelyand Ryan Reynolds a Hollywood
power couple.

(29:08):
When you're Justin Baldoni, thismight feel like a losing battle
.
You have one well-connectedactor with an A-list spouse,
both commanding huge fan bases,and Ryan Reynolds commanding a
huge paycheck.
I often see this in a crisissituation all the time.
Who has more brand equity andstar power often has an
automatic advantage in the media.

(29:29):
Star power often has anautomatic advantage in the media
.
If you're the lesser knownfigure, no matter how genuine
your story, you risk gettingdrowned out or labeled the
villain.
And in the case of JustinBaldoni, he was already playing
a villain in the movie, so hewas likely far more sensitive to

(29:50):
being cast as one.
But it's Ryan Reynolds and theabsence of Ryan Reynolds really
in this lawsuit that tells me heis the one who is propelling
that, he is the one who isfueling a lot of this.
Now, this is no hate on RyanReynolds.
I don't have an opinion aboutRyan or Blake or Justin.

(30:11):
I'm not on any side of it.
I'm on the side of PR, becausethis is a PR war.
At the heart of this PR war,blake Lively is referencing
messages between publicists in aplot to bury her reputation.
I've seen the actual text or atleast what is being sent to me

(30:37):
as the actual text that was usedfrom the PR team.
I think Ryan Reynolds isfueling the campaign against
Justin Baldone.
I think Ryan Reynolds wanted towrest control of this film and
hijack it to be able to marketBlake and Ryan together.

(30:59):
He did not want Justin Baldoneto have the power in this movie.
The heart of the PR war is BlakeLively's complaint referencing
the messages between publicistJennifer Abel and Melissa
Nathland and, I think, thesexual harassment allegations.
Justin Baldoni has denied eachone of them.
Now, if they're true, ifthey're proven true, that's

(31:21):
going to be a significant storyand that's one that should be
the primary story.
But the heart of this crisis isthe PR war.
Blake Lively's complaintreferences messages between
publicist Jennifer Abel andMelissa Nathan, plus executive
Jamie Heath, allegedly plottinghow to bury Lively's reputation.
How to bury Lively's reputation.

(31:42):
She said in her lawsuit thatone text apparently reads we can
bury anyone, which probablybecame the headline for the New
York Times piece.
However, when you see theseactual texts and I've seen the
text they're taken wildly out ofcontext.
You know they never say theword smear campaign.
There was no actual smearcampaign that was ever launched.

(32:03):
But from a crisis perspective,even standard crisis scenario
planning, once a text messagesees the light of day, the
average person is going toassume the worst.
And when you have a newspaperusing graphic design and pulling
out pieces of text to format ita certain way to frame the

(32:25):
story.
Of a certain way, it's just alose-lose for PR.
The press picked up the storyand it became a huge story that
immediately labeled not onlyJustin Baldoni but the PR
industry really as evil.
Everything looks damning butfor your consideration, megan

(32:50):
Toohey was a choice as areporter.
She was a perfect intermediaryfor Blake Lively's team.
She was behind HarveyWeinstein's downfall that helped
fuel Me Too.
That was a deliberate,intentional choice to use her.
If you read the complaintsreally on both sides you see a

(33:11):
lot of earned media happening.
You see a lot of pitching andplanting of stories.
That's going to happen in anytype of you know, big campaign
like this.
But the accusation, one termthat is being thrown around, is
astroturfing Blake Livelyaccusing Baldoni's crisis team

(33:31):
of astroturfing her.
Well, one.
That's not even the correctdefinition of astroturfing.
Astroturfing is considered alike a deceptive widespread
campaign that's rooted inadvocacy.
So think a renewable actionplan, think renewable energy.
Let's say they wanted to have ablanket, a marketing,

(33:56):
advertising, PR campaign.
But in their PR campaign theycreate websites and have
different narratives.
That may not be true and theyjust want to just plaster it
everywhere.
It's like the astroturf is likeartificial grass, so they're
putting artificial storiesaround truthful stories to

(34:17):
create negative publicity, tocreate negative press for fossil
fuels.
That's what astroturfing is.
It isn't planting negativestories about a person or trying
to hype up your client.
That's wrong.
Justin Baldoni and his team andhis lawyers have been very
adamant that Blake Lively andher team is off the mark in what

(34:39):
they try to do and they'resaying in fact it was Blake
Lively's side who was planting alot of the negative stories
against Justin Baldoni.
So in the end it comes down tothis that the sense of injustice
is what fuels the crisis.
In addition to Ryan Reynoldshijacking a lot of the market
and trying to demean JustinBaldoni, there was a scene.

(35:03):
Allegedly Justin Baldoni saidthat he was called to the
penthouse of Ryan Reynolds andBlake Lively and Ryan Reynolds
dressed him down in front ofother celebrities, like he
really called him out.
That type of a scene is goingto create that sense of
injustice.
So for a Justin Baldoni, whenhe sees what Ryan Reynolds is

(35:26):
likely trying to do, it's notunusual that there would be a
retaliatory feeling there.
But through these texts thathave now come out in the
countersuit of Justin Baldoni,he's saying who is behind this
campaign.
I do not want to bury, you know, blake Lively, you know this

(35:53):
looks really, really bad, but itwas that injustice that created
the fissure between Baldoni andBlake Lively.
And when you say Blake Livelyyou say Ryan Reynolds at the
same time.
And when it comes to co-stars,behind the scenes, when you look
at text messages, apparentlythere wasn't any conflict
whatsoever.
Behind the scenes.
Nobody had a problem withJustin Baldoni.
If you were to believe a lot ofthese text messages that are

(36:13):
coming out and a lot of thestories that are coming, a lot
of that was fabricated andBaldoni's camp is saying it was
fabricated by Lively'spublicists.
They were planting thosestories.
So always there's a sense ofinjustice that fuels a PR
campaign.
Justin Baldoni sensed it fromRyan Reynolds, but Ryan Reynolds

(36:33):
probably also sensed it as well.
He thought he may have thought.
You know what this guy doesn'tdeserve to have all the fame
from this.
We want to wrestle some of it.
I want to give Blake some ofthat glow.
In the weeks following thepremiere, when Blake Lively was
really through it, when she wasgoing through the hard time over
this movie release and all thenegative PR, ryan Reynolds

(36:57):
jumped in.
He wanted to use his star powerto shift the balance back to
them.
He was planting stories as well.
You saw, right in the middle ofall of this, he sat down for an
interview with People Magazine,in publicity, about a story
talking about his father andAlzheimer's.
He also spoke with Willie Geiston the Today Show about that,
but Ryan Reynolds' father haddied nine years earlier.

(37:19):
So, yes, it's nice to highlightAlzheimer's and what we can do
to prevent Alzheimer's and howwe can focus on fundraising,
sure.
But why are we doing it at thevery week that your wife is at
her PR nadir?
That's publicity.
That is campaigning to supportBlake Lively.

(37:39):
So that star power shift washappening and it was really
being driven by Ryan Reynolds.
Three and this is incrediblyimportant.
Pr ethics matter.
Pitching the press a story isnot unethical.
Planting stories that are true,not unethical.

(38:01):
Planting negative storiesunethical.
Any type of transactionalsocial media manipulation,
social engineering, socialmanipulation I find it unethical
.
But a smear tactic is unethical.
But campaigning for yourclients, well, that's just PR.

(38:26):
Next, legal actions amplifyeverything.
As I mentioned.
So many people, when they're atthe center of a PR crisis, they
reflexively want to sue.
But you know what I noticed?
The people who want to sue fordefamation or libel, you know,
whatever it is.
They usually have their handsin some part of the crisis not

(38:47):
fully, but there is some faultthere, some gaps, and they don't
want to have to acknowledgethose gaps, oftentimes so they
want to resort to defamation.
I mean rarely it does happenwhere I've worked with clients
and they want to sue fordefamation.
I think, oh, okay, well, youprobably have a case here, you
know, based on this.
But for the most part, just agenuine, authentic state is

(39:09):
going to get you through.
But when you see a lot of theseknee jerk legal moves, look to
that being not necessarily alegal move but also a PR move.
And, lastly, collaboration candevolve.
It Ends With Us started as acollaboration with Colleen
Hoover and Justin Baldoni, thetwo of them working together to
bring this very importantpersonal story of Hoover to life

(39:31):
.
She trusted Justin Baldoni.
They brought on Blake Lively.
Justin Baldoni probably saw inher that she was perfect casting
.
She comes with the glow of RyanReynolds, but also she happens
to come with song from her buddy, taylor Swift.
She would be a name who wouldhelp make that movie viable.
He said he wanted her, you know, and he certainly paid for that

(39:55):
, but collaborations can fallapart.
If you find yourself in themiddle of a collaboration that's
falling apart, if you findyourself in the middle of a

(40:19):
collaboration that's fallingapart, look to this case study
the Baldoni-Lively case studyand look of support.
Within days of her complaintcoming out, gwyneth Paltrow, amy
Schumer supported her Peoplewho also deal with some
polarizing press out there andfeedback.
Paltrow included a link toBlake Lively's hair care line

(40:41):
off of a coop.
Now in the middle of it isColleen Hoover seeing one of her
titles completely blow up.
There also is a question of youknow what happens with?
It Ends With Us in theMarketplace.
It's on Netflix right now, buthow well is it doing?
How many people watch that filmand see Blake Lively and Justin
Baldoni as two sparring co-starsand not as characters in a book

(41:05):
?
This saga is a textbook exampleof how a project with noble
intentions can go completelyawry.
Here we have a book aboutdomestic violence.
There could have been so muchconversation about that topic
within the release and premiereof this movie and the success of
this movie and then going tostreaming, but instead the

(41:28):
conversation is just about thebreakdown between the two
co-stars.
I mean it was derailed by thisperfect storm of ego and
personal conflicts and powerplays and PR miscalculations.
It's ridiculous for one, butfor me it underscores also the

(41:55):
importance of ethical and soundcrisis communication.
What this case needed wasauthenticity.
That's what was missing.
No one ever heard directly fromBlake Lively.
No one ever heard directly fromJustin Belton.
We had these planted stories,we had these drops, we had news
stories like the New York Times,we had legal filings, we have
social media and public opinionand then all the fallout in the

(42:18):
press, but we still haven'theard from Blake Lively.
We still haven't heard reallyfrom Justin Baldoni.
If we could hear from one ofthem and we likely won't Now I
would suspect that we wouldprobably hear from Justin
Baldoni before we hear fromBlake Lively, because Blake
Lively likely doesn't want tospeak to any of this.
Legal experts now say that thecase might head to trial because

(42:41):
the personal animosity.
Both sides claim they havereceipts, text messages, emails,
behind-the-scenes anecdotes andneither party appears eager to
settle quietly.
There's also the question ofwhat happens to it Ends With Us
in the marketplace.
It's on Netflix right now.
When you watch it, are youwatching the characters of Lily

(43:02):
Ryle or are you seeing theconflict between Justin and
Blake?
Colleen Hoover has expressedunwavering support for Blake
Lively, but we haven't heardmuch about her stance since the
lawsuit.
But will that change?
And Colleen Hoover has a lotmore titles that are coming out
Meanwhile.
Fans of the book are in for thismoral dilemma Watch the film to

(43:22):
support Hoover's message orboycott it due to the alleged
misconduct.
So look at how many people arehurt by this PR campaign.
So this saga is a textbookexample of how a project with
noble intentions raisingawareness for domestic violence
can be derailed by personalconflicts, power plays and PR
miscalculations.

(43:43):
For me, it underscores oneeternal lesson of crisis
communication, and that isclarity.
Authenticity and sincerity canoften diffuse the biggest
controversies before they spiral.
Conversely, if you feelpowerless or disrespected, you
might respond with that nuclearoption you know, like a lawsuit.

(44:05):
But that choice might unleasheven more chaos.
If nothing else, this is a casestudy in how the perfect storm
of high-profile stars, a belovedsource, novel and
behind-the-scenes tension canexplode into a full-blown crisis
.
But what is missing which Ithink is the reason why it's

(44:25):
still fueled to this day, is oneof the most important tenets
principles of good PO, andthat's accountability.
It's just admitting a downfall,a shortcoming where we might
have done it differently, ashortcoming where we might have
done it differently, a gap.

(44:45):
Whatever it is, an authenticinterview explaining what
happened.
That would have gone a long way.
I want to thank you for tuninginto the PR Breakdown.
If you found today's dive intothe lively Baldoni showdown
helpful or eye-opening, pleaseshare this episode with a friend
or colleague and make sureyou're subscribed so you don't

(45:06):
miss future episodes on medialiteracy, pr fiascos and crisis
management tips.
And I would like to hear yourthoughts.
Do you think lawsuits solvereputation problems?
Will the reputation problems ofJustin baldoni and blake lively
be solved by these lawsuits, ordo they just pour gasoline on

(45:26):
the fire?
So you can drop me a message onmy social channels and we can
keep that conversation going.