Blake Lively Lawsuit Reveals the Scale of Online Smear Campaigns
How digital culture is amplifying misogyny and weaponizing public opinion
This holiday weekend, my feed was flooded with headlines about actress Blake Lively suing director Justin Baldoni over alleged misconduct and an orchestrated smear campaign against her.
While this might seem like just another entertainment scandal, it highlights a deeper issue. As someone who covers the intersection of popular culture and the digital world, this story gives us an example of how social media and digital manipulation can shape and sometimes destroy public perception.
Let’s unpack why this matters beyond Hollywood.
The alleged smear campaign against Blake Lively isn’t unprecedented, but it feels like a masterclass in digital defamation. Rumors can spread fast, and once they go viral, it’s almost impossible to stop them and for people to know what's real and what isn't. Social media, as we all know, is a breeding ground for these types of hate-trains. It takes one viral post, one headline, or one resurfaced video to set off a storm.
Some context: Last summer, as the release of It Ends With Us approached, tensions behind the scenes escalated into a full-blown crisis. Blake Lively, one of the film’s stars, accused her co-star and director Justin Baldoni and producer Jamey Heath of crossing boundaries, including making inappropriate comments and violating her physical space. Following her complaints, the studio, Wayfarer, implemented safeguards, including hiring a full-time intimacy coordinator and adding a non-retaliation clause to Lively’s contract.
Despite these measures, by August, Baldoni and Heath allegedly feared Lively would go public with her accusations. According to a legal complaint filed by Lively, they responded by launching a calculated campaign to damage her reputation. This campaign, detailed in subpoenaed text messages and emails reviewed by The New York Times, included hiring a crisis PR expert with the intent to discredit Lively online.
Now, the idea of weaponizing public perception (including in Hollywood) is not new, as seen in the online targeting of Amber Heard during the Depp-Heard trial. Trolls amplified damaging narratives that often disregarded facts, turning public opinion against her in ways that were deeply rooted in misogyny and disinformation. The Heard case revealed the darker side of digital culture, where smear campaigns not only discredit individuals but also fuel larger systemic biases.
In Lively’s case, text messages allegedly exchanged by Justin Baldoni’s PR team suggest that reputations can be weaponized. Promises to “bury anyone” show a willingness to play dirty, regardless of the truth. Smear campaigns thrive because they exploit weaknesses in trust.
Even journalist Kjersti Flaa, whose old interview with Lively went viral, denied involvement in any scheme. She called the allegations against her an insult, insisting she’d never risk her integrity.
The legal filings expose the lengths Hollywood power players will go to protect their images, leveraging digital platforms to fuel undetectable smear campaigns. As Lively faced a surge of online criticism and rumors, the film went on to gross nearly $350 million worldwide.
These campaigns also reveal how easily public perception can be manipulated. Whether by repurposing old content or fueling rumors, they leave lasting damage.
Recommended by LinkedIn
🔥 My Hot Take 🔥: As a woman in entertainment, this story is deeply disturbing. Disinformation isn’t just a political problem—it infiltrates every industry, exploiting news cycles and public opinion on social media. Every comment, share, or like contributes to shaping narratives that can uplift or destroy, especially when it comes to women. While it’s easy to point fingers, the real challenge lies in holding ourselves accountable. In an age of virality, fostering empathy and critical thinking isn’t just important—it’s essential.
Other headlines to check out:
AI
Creator Economy
Web3
Gentle reminder 🤲
Remember, I'm Bullish on you! Happy Holidays!
With gratitude,
| Belgrade | Business Development | Business Consulting | Events | Content Creator |
5hWhat I found interesting is that most smear campaigns are targeted towards women. Women and girls reputation can easily be ruined and under patriarchy and capitalism, we cannot rely on the kindness and media literacy of people. So we need to be smarter. Unfortunately, we need to guard our reputation and assume people (especially men), will ruin our reputation, our careers, our professional opportunities, and relationships.
Founder, True Stars ✨ Artist & Web3 Creator ✨ Helping Creators Build Dream Brands
2dI read that negative press can be disproportionately damaging to women, and while I haven’t experienced it to the same extent as Blake, I can empathize on a smaller scale. Regardless of the outcome, this likely won’t impact Justin’s career much, but it will probably hurt her for speaking out. Thinking back, I remember buying into some of the criticism: she was mean to an interviewer, she seemed rude at times, or maybe a bit out of touch. I wondered why I was constantly seeing this “Blake Lively is the Devil” narrative when I didn’t even care about it. Looking back, it feels like an intentional smear campaign.
#1 Performance Coach for Forward-Facing Professionals | Global Speaker | 100M+ Video Views | USC Trojan | Special Olympics Coach
3dI think there are so many additional and embedded conversations at play here: - How quickly the public is to jump at allegations with little to no evidence and especially without the opposing side to the story (see: Duke lacrosse files) - The role or liability the media has in perpetuating the narrative with misleading headlines (see: John Benet Ramsey) - The role of a publicist and/or crisis publicist, and whether it really is focusing on the positive of their client and/or if it's ethical, legal, plausible to bring someone else down in the process (like every political campaign that exists) - The reality that victims can also be bullies, and that inclusion can also be executed and perceived as manipulation/predatory - Is it legally tarnishing or defamatory of one's reputation or really a "smear" if their own actions and words used in the allegations are real/true (see: many of Blake's interviews, where she's blatantly rude, both from current and resurfaced clips) - The role and necessity of consent (and presence of intimacy coordinators), as it pertains to improvisation of content with violence or intimacy. I'm curious to see if they'll decide to settle, go to court, and/or if Justin/Wayferer will also file a counter suit.
You Can't Crush My Spirit, Don't Even Try
6dThe weaponization of digital culture continues to put children and youth at risk. The behavior is accepted and promilgated through social media. How to balance 1st Amendment rights with damaging use.
Retired at Somerby at St. Vincent's One Nineteen
6dSmearing someone with social media is despicable.