Reports of Blake Lively's Demise Post-Defamation Judgment: Conclusive or 'It Depends'

Her entertainment career and businesses are at risk, Baldoni has been impacted too and what the two will need to focus on moving forward

Blake Lively, entertainer and entrepreneur and Justin Baldoni, actor and director

For 17 months, the Blake Lively — Justin Baldoni defamation case was regularly in the news. The coverage, one could argue, was excessive. It put both parties and some people around them, under searing heat of scrutiny.

The case didn’t end as Lively would have liked, as the justice she felt like the merits of the case deserved, didn’t result in legal victory and a sense of vindication. Now, in addition, many quoted experts in major media are saying that her entertainment career is over. The question is, how accurate is that determination?

Absolutes are rare, despite what our thinking often leads us to believe. Yet, sometimes, people certainly do “forever” damage to their professional relationships, careers and what-could-have-been, future opportunities.

Lively was no stranger to criticism before this case and there was a segment of people who saw her legal aggression versus Baldoni as yet another example of poor character, even if the actions were not connected.

What happens now to her and Baldoni and what could they choose to do to give themselves the best odds at restoring or rebuilding trust with critics and doubters?

“The idea that Blake Lively’s career is permanently ruined is an absolutist view that rarely holds true in modern entertainment PR,” says Cyndee Harrison, the principal at Synaptic, a public relations, marketing and crisis communications company.

“But her personal brand has undoubtedly suffered a severe, structural shift that won’t be forgotten.”

She focuses on what’s next for Lively.

“Her long-term recovery depends entirely on her willingness to pivot away from the sorts of behaviors and situations that were at the center of this case and focus on avoiding defensive legal maneuvers in the future, leaning into radical accountability and transparency,” Harrison argues.

While Lively reported tens of millions of dollars in lost revenue in her business ventures as a result of her experience with Baldoni and his team, Harrison doesn’t forecast lasting suffering for Lively.

“I think the financial impact, as in many situations like this, is likely to be felt heavily in the short to mid-term,” she says. “Lucky for her, she was operating from a fortified brand position.”

“Will Blake Lively ever work in Hollywood again after this?” asks Jonathon Narvey, chief executive officer at Mind Meld PR. “I don’t see it.”

He explains his professional reasoning.

“She’s already admitted — in fact, was effectively bragging — that her strategy with this film, as in past productions, is to get hired as an actor but then get involved in the writing, directing and other aspects of filmmaking,” Narvey says. “She won’t stay in her own lane. And it seems like in this case, she aggressively and dishonestly sandbagged Justin Baldoni when she didn’t feel like she was getting her way.

“What kind of producer or director would want to work with a self-admitted egomaniac and saboteur?”

He pivots to add the other side of reality.

“That said, she’s a wealthy and famous celebrity married to one of the most bankable Hollywood stars around, Ryan Reynolds,” Narvey says. “She can certainly keep acting in anything they might choose to bankroll. That seems like the only viable route in the short-to-medium term.”

“You learn something early in this business: there are very few absolute binaries,” says says Elie Jacobs, founding partner at Purposeful Advisors, an intelligence-driven strategic communications and public affairs firm with a specialty in crisis communications. “This case is no different.”

He’s optimistic when he looks at Lively’s future.

“Aside from whatever happens in court, it is almost certain by dint of her talent, career, box office success, relationships — especially with her husband and Taylor Swift — Ms. Lively will come out more than intact,” Jacobs forecasts.

“If one side is reduced to Trumpian absolutes like, ‘she ruined her career,’ that’s more than enough evidence they’re fighting from their back foot.”

“I disagree with the ruined forever framing but I think the back to normal framing is also wrong,” says Aaron Evans, president at Story Group, a strategic communications firm advising executives, public figures, and brands on crisis communications and reputation management.

“The honest answer sits in the middle and depends almost entirely on what she does in the next 18 months.”

It’s possible that Lively will experience extended pain.

“The case against her recovery is real,” Evans says. “She filed thirteen claims and walked away with three left standing, then settled before trial with no damages, which in the court of public opinion reads as a loss regardless of how her team frames it.

“The discovery process produced texts and emails. That made the Hollywood inside-baseball look ugly and her image as a controlled, polished, brand-friendly leading lady took a hit that polished, leading ladies don’t usually take.”

Evans says that Hollywood isn’t the primary or sole focus.

“Her business investments, particularly Blake Brown haircare and Betty Buzz, are the more vulnerable assets here, not the acting career,” he argues.

“Lifestyle brands depend on a likability premium that the litigation eroded for a meaningful slice of consumers.”

Evans maintains there is still possibility for redemption.

“The case for her recovery is also real and stronger than the obituaries acknowledge,” he says. “Reputations in entertainment are rebuilt by the work, not by the press.”

Evans continues to explain what he means.

“Lively is 38, married to one of the most strategically careful careers in Hollywood, financially independent of any single studio relationship and still cast-able for the right project,” he says.

“The lifestyle brands are more exposed than the acting career but lifestyle brands can be quietly repositioned, sold or relaunched under new names if necessary.”

So, Evans pushes back on what he sees are the premature expressions of her demise.

“The ‘she’s done’ verdict assumes the public’s attention span exceeds the public’s short attention span. It simply never does,” he says. “There’s always a more scandalous story next week and time heals nearly everything.”

Evans goes back to his timeline mentioned earlier in his comments.

“The variable is what she does between now and a return-to-work moment,” he says. “If she takes 12-to-18 months out of the public eye, comes back in a serious dramatic role with a respected director and stays off social commentary about the case, she recovers most of the way.

“If she relaunches publicly in the next 90 days with a press tour that relitigates the litigation, she doesn’t.

“Reputations heal in entertainment more reliably than in almost any other industry but only if the principal lets the audience forget before reminding them.”

Baldoni has also been affected by this crisis of reputation and his future is a legitimate question mark as well at this point.

“There’s a benefit to being perceived as the underdog but those perks won’t last long,” Harrison warns. “While the public views him sympathetically, Hollywood decision-makers often hate onset drama and legal liabilities.”

That will impact his career, at least now.

“His future likely involves a quiet, temporary retreat from public view for a bit and then a return to high-profile acting roles,” Harrison adds. “If he maintains a dignified, professional silence during future legal proceedings, then he will slowly rebuild industry trust as a professional collaborator.”

Baldoni, figuratively speaking, took body blows, as did Lively, during the duration of the case, the media coverage of it and the likely reaction within Hollywood.

“His reputation has absolutely been harmed,” Narvey says. “Even after basically every count of Lively's lawsuit has been withdrawn or dismissed, not everyone will know that. Some will only have checked in for the start of this legal and celebrity drama and they won't catch the ending.”

Narvey has confidence that Baldoni isn’t done in Hollywood, yet he does see expensive fallout for him.

“He'll probably work again but his price will be lower, because a producer could always go with a director that doesn't come with complicated baggage,” Narvey suggests.

Jacobs isn’t bullish on Baldoni’s future either.

“In three words? ‘Not great, Bob,’” he says. “This is a guy with a fraction of the visibility as Ms. Lively. He'll likely have a great deal of trouble finding A-list talent willing to (a) work with him, due to the allegations and (b) go against a juggernaut like Ms. Lively and Ryan Reynolds. People don't realize how much of a team sport Hollywood is.”

Evans too recognizes the adjacent trust, relationship and reputation challenges.

“Baldoni’s situation is harder than Lively’s and the press is under-covering that,” he asserts.

There is an important distinction that the public and some in the media don’t realize.

“Within the industry, the legal record is technically favorable to him. His countersuit got dismissed but so did the bulk of hers and the case settled with no money changing hands. On paper that’s a draw,” Evans says.

“In practice, the industry math is different from the legal math.”

He goes into how so.

“Hollywood casting decisions are made by a small number of producers, studio executives and agents who all read the same trade press and talk to each other,” Evans says. “Once a male director has been publicly accused of harassment by his female lead, even after the harassment claims are dismissed, the calculus on casting him changes. Not forever, but for several years. Risk-averse studios will pass.”

That’s loss aversion and risk management in play.

“Risk-tolerant projects with smaller budgets will still hire him but the path to another wide-release, female-fronted, prestige project is meaningfully narrower than it was two years ago,” Evans says.

Baldoni has work to do, deserved consequences or not.

“He’ll have to spend years building a quiet record of professional, respectful, well-run productions before that hesitation thaws,” Evans says.

Baldoni has opportunities, even if they are not the most valued ones.

“His likely future is a pivot lane that already exists for him: independent film, faith-adjacent and self-help content, podcasts, books and producing projects rather than directing the kind of star-vehicle that put him in this position in the first place,” Evans says.

“He’ll still have work but likely won’t direct another Blake Lively, Florence Pugh or Margot Robbie for a long time.”

Both parties and their teams have work to do yet what, precisely, is it, to improve perception and receptiveness to their professional brands.

“For anyone experiencing a high-profile legal battle and needing to rehabilitate their personal brands, it’s important to shift from winning in the courtroom to healing the disconnect,” Harrison says.

The sustained, aggressive push for control of the narrative, while meaningful and maybe understandable, can be an impediment to improvement.

“Each need to step aways from defensive PR messaging, which has been a particularly pronounced tactic from Blake’s team, and center the conversation back on the advocacy issues her project was meant to highlight in the first place,” Harrison adds.

She offers a warning for Lively’s opponent.

“Baldoni will face a tempting opportunity to take a public victory lap but should remember that true reputation management in a crisis is never achieved through legal action but through demonstrated humility and a return to purposeful work.”

Narvey uses an example to respond.

“Either of them could go the Mel Gibson route and self-finance or produce their own independent projects,” he suggests. “From a financial standpoint, that’s certainly easier for Blake Lively but where there’s a will, there’s a way.

“Throw themselves into the work, create great shows that people actually want to watch for the great writing and acting, not the drama behind the scenes,” Narvey says.

That is a straight, narrow, helpful way forward.

“That way lies a path to career resurrection and possibly even glory,” Narvey says.

“In Hollywood, as in most places, everyone loves a comeback story.”

Jacobs sees a harder struggle ahead for Baldoni than for Lively.

“He has to dig out of a pit before he can start ‘putting points on the board,” he says. “He'll need to do several come-clean interviews with tough female interviewers. He'll need to find a high-profile project he can attach himself to and ride that publicity train.

“I don't want to say this is a lot like the Globetrotters against the Washington Generals but it definitely has that vibe. But again, this is not a binary situation.”

Evans is more pointed.

“Both of them need the same thing, which is the discipline to disappear from this story before they try to reappear in a different one,” he says.

“Reputations don't recover through statements, interviews or counter-narratives. They recover through silence, consistent behavior and by work.”

Less is better for Lively, he advises.

“The move is to skip the press cycle she would normally do for her next role, take a serious dramatic project with a director whose name is more important than hers in the credits and let the work be the headline instead of the marriage, the lifestyle brand or the case,” Evans says.

“For Baldoni, the move is to spend the next two years producing other people's projects, building a track record on small, well-run sets that no one accuses anyone on and letting the next generation of female collaborators publicly vouch for the experience of working with him.”

The court of public opinion has enough observation and information to make a judgment, he adds.

“Neither of them benefits from another statement, another interview or another version of the story told their way. The audience already has an opinion” Evans says.

“The only way to change it is to give them new material to form a different one. Both (Lively and Baldoni) are talented enough to do that.

“Whether they have the patience for it is the actual question.”

Subscribe for free (or paid, for additional benefits)

Connect on the LinkedIn company page for Reputation Intelligence
or connect with Michael Toebe on LinkedIn.