High Stakes Lawfare Goes to Hollywood
Every couple of years, a blockbuster celebrity lawsuit makes headlines and sparks widespread discussion about the intersection of the legal system and communications strategy. Three years ago, it was the Johnny Depp and Amber Heard defamation case. Now, the focus has shifted to Blake Lively’s and Justin Baldoni’s competing lawsuits. These high-profile cases have thrust litigation communications, what we call high stakes lawfare, into the spotlight, making it a topic of mainstream media conversation. However, in our world, the use of lawsuits as both a legal and a communication tool has long been a common, albeit often overlooked, tactic.
Beyond celebrity scandals, litigation such as class actions, intellectual property and competitor disputes, defamation, and other forms of legal action are frequently used by companies and individuals to manage reputational challenges or disputes. These cases often fly under the radar for the general public but serve the same purpose—to control narratives, influence public perception, compel responses from opponents, and create conditions for favorable outcomes. What makes cases like Lively v. Baldoni stand out is how they pull this typically business-focused strategy into the popular cultural discourse.
⚖️The Importance of Litigation Launch. Legal filings are a critical tool in the high stakes lawfare and crisis management toolkit because they are vehicles to introduce information into the court and public discourse that otherwise wouldn’t be in the public domain. Further, filing something with the court signals seriousness and inherently carries a level of institutional gravitas that can bolster the credibility of the claims made while also signaling to interested media that it is worth reporting on. This makes a coordinated approach between legal and communication teams essential to success.
Unfortunately, a common mistake in litigation communications is failing to align these efforts on the front end. Creating a comprehensive litigation launch strategy is the best way to introduce an issue and manage the court of public opinion. For our clients, that requires:
A legal filing with sound legal arguments and the inclusion of key narratives and communications assets.
A full suite of communications materials to ensure message discipline.
Media-trained counsel and/or spokespersons at the ready for media engagement.
Reporter and stakeholder backgrounding.
Activation of sympathetic surrogates and influencers.
This coordinated approach almost always ensures media coverage if it’s an interesting and timely case. Conversely, when a client comes to us three weeks after they’ve initially filed or responded to a lawsuit and realizes that they won’t see any action in the courtroom for months, it’s incredibly challenging to reintroduce in the court of opinion successfully and with vigor.
⏰Avoid Being Late to the Game. If I had a dollar for every time a prospective client’s general counsel said, “We’re in a lawsuit and need to PR this,” on the backend of a filing or action, I’d be retired. The tone of early coverage often sets the stage for how the lawsuit will be perceived, and that’s why it’s critical to have an aligned communications and legal strategy at the jump. Positive initial coverage can add credibility to the claims, while skeptical or critical coverage can create significant reputational challenges.
📣Lively v. Baldoni. The ongoing legal battle between Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni provides a textbook example of the stakes involved in litigation communications—and the potential pitfalls of an uncoordinated approach. Here is a brief overview of the situation:
Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni co-starred in the movie adaptation of It Ends with Us, a story centered on domestic violence. The film was released in August 2024, with Lively facing significant online backlash for what many deemed tone-deaf marketing.
In December 2024, Lively filed a sexual harassment claim against Baldoni in California and a separate retaliation lawsuit in New York. This was accompanied by a New York Times exposé alleging that Baldoni orchestrated a smear campaign against her to tarnish her reputation.
Baldoni responded by filing a libel lawsuit against the New York Times on December 31, followed by another lawsuit against Lively, her husband Ryan Reynolds, and other defendants, accusing them of extortion, defamation, and other claims.
Initially, Blake Lively clearly had the upper hand due to her disciplined and strategic approach. Before filing her lawsuits, her team likely worked closely with the New York Times to craft a detailed narrative for public consumption based on the allegations in her lawsuit, highlighting:
Baldoni allegedly engaged in sexual harassment during the film’s production.
Baldoni preemptively hired a crisis management team to tarnish Lively’s reputation, fearing she would go public with her claims.
This team orchestrated a social media campaign to shift public perception against Lively.
Lively’s lawsuits aim to prevent other women from facing similar retaliation.
Regardless of whether you believe her allegations, Lively’s messaging was cohesive and controlled. She maintained a low profile during the months of public criticism, waiting until her lawsuits were filed to make her case and letting them do the talking for her. As a result, media coverage of her claims followed a consistent narrative, bolstering her credibility.
🥊Punch, 🥊Counterpunch. However, the pendulum has started to swing back in Baldoni’s favor based on one simple fact. In lawsuits, you cannot lie or exaggerate because the truth will eventually come out. Lively cited a specific slow dance scene as an example of Baldoni’s inappropriate behavior. Smartly, in response, Baldoni and his team released the raw, unedited footage of that scene, which seems to contradict Lively’s account. Unfortunately for Lively, this made her allegations appear disingenuous, calling all her claims into question. While she had done everything right up to that point and her messaging remained consistent, this revelation significantly damaged the credibility she had worked so hard to establish.
The Lively-Baldoni lawsuits highlight the importance of integrating legal and communications strategies in high-profile disputes. Litigation communications is not just about filing lawsuits. It is about shaping the narrative and controlling the message from the outset. When done well, it can bolster credibility and create the environment for a favorable outcome. However, when inconsistencies emerge, as in Lively’s case, it can erode trust and amplify reputational damage.
As salacious, high-profile cases like this one continue to bring litigation communications into mainstream culture, they serve as a reminder of its growing role in shaping public perception. For individuals and organizations alike, the key takeaway is clear: success in litigation communications requires a comprehensive strategy, meticulous planning, alignment between legal and PR teams, continual management, and a commitment to consistency and clarity at every step along the way.
 | A guest post by
|