As someone who has spent years navigating the murky waters of Hollywood, I can’t help but feel a mix of disbelief and disappointment upon reading about Blake Lively‘s allegations against Justin Baldoni. The revelation that crisis management teams are now part of the problem is a bitter pill to swallow, especially when they claim to be there to protect and guide their clients through difficult times.

In Blake Lively’s explosive sexual harassment allegation against Justin Baldoni, it appears that the ‘fixers’ have become part of the issue instead.

The revelation of Lively’s lawsuit over alleged misconduct on the set of “It Ends with Us” uncovers the hidden practice in Hollywood: the employment of costly PR specialists who manipulate public perception and bolster their clients. This process usually takes place behind closed doors.

Lawyers representing Lively obtained multiple text conversations between Jennifer Abel, Baldoni’s personal representative, and the crisis team he hired this summer, headed by Melissa Nathan. The documents and messages suggest that Baldoni took these actions to be ready for a potential situation where Lively would make allegations from the set, as well as stories suggesting that key cast members were distancing themselves from Baldoni during the promotion of the Sony Pictures release. The conversations show open – or “awkward,” according to one rival crisis expert who spoke with EbMaster – attempts to counter Lively by enlisting friendly journalists and reportedly hiring a digital expert to create and boost negative content about her.

Attorney Bryan Freedman, representing Baldoni, criticized the presented evidence, such as texts and a detailed plan, as selectively chosen to construct a story that overlooks crucial details and, particularly relevant to Baldoni’s case, lack of action against Lively. Although the complaint is being scrutinized by Freedman, he expressed confidence that the entire situation will ultimately demonstrate “no inappropriate actions” took place between Lively and Baldoni’s team. He also emphasized that “reputation management,” a term often used in the digital spheres of celebrities, is a common practice for numerous public figures.

Over the weekend, Abel responded to the concern raised by Lively in a private Facebook group specifically for PR and marketing experts, which was confirmed by EbMaster. In his post, he stated that the information gathered did not aim to tarnish the actress’s reputation. “No negative media coverage was orchestrated, no social media strategy against her, although we were always prepared for such situations since it’s our duty to be ready for any eventuality, but we didn’t need to act on it because the internet was already handling things for us,” Abel clarified.

In a statement, Freedman explained that Nathan functioned much like any other crisis management firm would when they’re employed by a client who is facing threats from two highly influential individuals, in this case Lively and her husband Ryan Reynolds. “The usual strategy planning that TAG PR developed turned out to be unnecessary because the public found Lively’s own actions, interviews, and promotional efforts distasteful during the tour, and reacted spontaneously to what the media naturally picked up on.

High-influence figures expressed concern over the aggressive strategies proposed by Abel and Nathan to tarnish Lively’s reputation. Nathan suggested a four-month strategic approach at a cost of $175,000, involving the creation of discussions on platforms like Reddit and TikTok in support of Baldoni, as well as encouraging “social interaction” with negative accounts to shift the narrative back in Lively’s favor. Furthermore, there were plans to hire Jed Wallace, operator of Street Relations, who is often referred to as a “Ray Donovan”-style fixer for influential individuals. However, another source described him more accurately as someone with extensive resources for handling unusual situations (for example, he knows how to arrange a helicopter for medical evacuation in remote regions of Italy). Freedman, who has worked closely with Wallace, prefers to describe him not as a fixer, but rather as an individual with unique resources for dealing with extraordinary circumstances.

Lively’s complaint filed with the California Civil Rights Department said Wallace weaponized “a digital army around the country from New York to Los Angeles to create, seed, and promote content that appeared to be authentic.” While the suit does not specify which stories might have targeted Lively, numerous unflattering pieces about the actress were resurfaced during the press tour for “It Ends with Us.”  They included problematic past comments about the trans community (using the phrase “trannies”), and an attempted lifestyle brand launch in which Lively promoted the “allure” of an Antebellum South aesthetic.  

Initially, Nathan emphasized that the attempts he made would remain “invisible.” However, things have changed now.

A seasoned media broker, who has worked with crisis management firms for clients, often finds that individuals in a crisis tend to react and handle situations as they arise. However, orchestrating an entire campaign like this, putting it into written form – that’s quite unusual,” the veteran media broker commented.

The source mentioned that “fix-it stores typically have individuals, often referred to as cyber warriors, on staff to handle online discussions. However, it’s an unspoken rule not to engage external companies or social media provocateurs to create a new narrative.

In various industries, managing public relations during crises is quite prevalent among individuals, companies, and political groups. However, what’s causing shock among experts in this field is the character of the communication exchanges.

Nathan wrote to Abel in a February message, “You understand that we can hide anything,” which was mentioned in the complaint. This quote became the headline in The New York Times. In an early statement on Monday, Freedman stated that it was ironic how The New York Times, while attempting to ‘uncover’ a questionable PR strategy, ended up using the same tactics accused of them by Lively, by publishing private text messages lacking crucial context – the very tactics she is accusing the firm of employing.

Some Public Relations specialists showed understanding towards Abel and Nathan, considering the uncommon leak of confidential messages and documents that probably fell under non-disclosure contracts.

One top studio executive stated, “Two defamatory tactics are being employed here.” They accused Lively and the PR team, but it doesn’t necessarily mean Jen Abel and Melissa Nathan are guilty. The question is, who betrayed them? There are certain boundaries that must not be crossed. Another figure often entangled in high-profile disagreements commented, “That’s just crisis management speak, isn’t it? Everyone uses such language. Everyone enjoys sounding authoritative.

The intensity of the suggested campaign against Lively raises doubts about whether such services can be effectively utilized in a court of law.

Ryan Baker, a co-founding partner at Waymaker LLP, expressed that people might view Baldoni’s actions as unfair at the very least, potentially harmful or even illegal regarding future harassment or retaliation. This situation is under closer examination because it occurred in a back-and-forth context between Lively and Baldoni.

An unnamed PR expert commented, stating that the attention-grabbing aspect of the accusation is overshadowing a true industry issue.

“These days, all PR is crisis PR,” they said.   

Read More

2024-12-24 02:46