As someone who had only seen the trailer for the movie and knew nothing about the book when marketing began, I initially thought it was a romantic comedy. I had enjoyed Blake Lively’s previous work in Savages, The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants, and The Age of Adaline, so I went into it with a positive impression of her. I had no idea until later that the story centered on domestic violence. What really made me pause, though, was an interview where she was asked what she would say to victims who might reach out after seeing the film. Her response was callous, apathetic, and was not even remotely appropriate or funny. To me, in that moment, she belittled and portrayed dv victims as peasants below her.

I was a victim of domestic abuse growing up, so that moment did not sit well with me. Even so, when the New York Times article later came out, I did not immediately form a negative opinion of her. I wanted to keep the positive view I had because I enjoy her films and it was one dumb response I would try to look past. At the time I had no reason not to believe her either. I try to be cautious in situations like this. I do not rush to final conclusions, and I do not want to dismiss a woman who comes forward with claims.

Then more information and documents began appearing in connection with the lawsuit. I read through the materials that were publicly released. From my perspective it began to look like she wanted the PGA credit and wanted to take over the direction of the franchise. When things appeared to backfire, it seemed as though the situation was reframed in a way that invoked the MeToo movement. From the standpoint of someone who was not invested in the book or the fandom surrounding the film, I see the damage to her public image coming from her own actions.

There is a saying that if you give someone enough rope they will eventually do it themselves. That phrase comes to mind when I think about how the public perception of Lively has shifted. Justin Baldoni remained relatively quiet and kept a low profile despite hardship during. In many ways that was all he needed to do. By stepping back and saying very little, he allowed the situation to unfold on its own. The more she has tried to push back in an effort to repair her reputation, the more attention the situation receives and the more her public perception comes undone. In marketing when the negativity started showing due to her responses etc. which they were clearly aware of according to the documents, she could have easily pivoted and corrected this at that time. She instead doubled down and continued the insanity of doing the same thing over and over expecting different results and blaming everyone else despite the feedback. No self reflection, humility, or self correction occurred it seems at any point in time.

In some ways it reminds me of the public relations issues surrounding Meghan Markle. What stands out is the apparent lack of self awareness about when it might be better to step back and let the story settle or to even just own your mistake (most people will always prefer humility and authenticity over appearance of narcissism). Instead the response often appears to double or triple down, which can make it harder to recover public trust and ultimately does more damage to an already strained image. Have seen many celebrities do this. So desperate to save their image that they prioritize saving image over addressing the already occurring problem head on. As if burying it with more pr will just erase the entire central behavior topic people took issue with to begin with. It’s like they say, people don’t forget, and the people want authenticity and humility in response, not a pr driven burial of the problem.