Flaawsome Talk with Kjersti Flaa - April 16, 2026


Blake Justifies Filing Taylor's cooke recipe as EVIDENCE !!!


Episode Stats


Length

27 minutes

Words per minute

170.85738

Word count

4,709

Sentence count

165

Harmful content

Misogyny

17

sentences flagged

Toxicity

15

sentences flagged

Hate speech

2

sentences flagged


Summary

Summaries generated with gmurro/bart-large-finetuned-filtered-spotify-podcast-summ .

Why does Blake Lively's team want to exclude her supporters from the stand in her upcoming trial? And why did one of the executives over at Sony delete text messages from Blake's phone? Also, why is Blake still renovating her Instagram?

Transcript

Transcript generated with Whisper (turbo).
Misogyny classifications generated with MilaNLProc/bert-base-uncased-ear-misogyny .
Toxicity classifications generated with s-nlp/roberta_toxicity_classifier .
Hate speech classifications generated with facebook/roberta-hate-speech-dynabench-r4-target .
00:00:00.000 Why does Blake Lively's team want to exclude her supporters?
00:00:09.440 Hi and welcome to Flossom Talk, I'm Sjæshti Flår, journalist, Hollywood truth teller and
00:00:13.600 your voice of reason in a town built on delusion. Okay, so now Blake Lively's attorneys have come
00:00:19.860 out and explained why Taylor Swift's cookie recipe is important for her case. You won't
00:00:26.440 believe this. Also, let's look at the real reason why Blake Lively does not want me to take the
00:00:32.660 stand. Reading through this argument that they made to the judge over many, many pages about
00:00:38.240 why I should not take the stand really makes one thing very clear. Also, why does Blake Lively's
00:00:44.760 team want to exclude her supporters over at Sony as well as her critics? And did one of the
00:00:52.880 executives over at Sony delete text messages? What are they hiding? Also is Blake Lively renovating
00:00:59.900 her Instagram? I wonder why. It seems like now she wants us to forget about that statement she made
00:01:07.240 publicly last week saying that she is a victim of digital violence and of course that community
00:01:13.800 note that is still there on her post that she doesn't want anyone to see and definitely not
00:01:19.600 the jury to see. I reported on a post she did yesterday, which made no sense, just a random
00:01:25.740 carousel of pictures of what she's been up to lately. And of course, a little sneaky ad there
00:01:30.560 for vodka and for her hair brand. But what's really happening on her Instagram now is that
00:01:35.220 she pinned two of her previous posts so that the statement keeps being pushed further back or
00:01:42.880 further down on her Instagram. This statement was the post that you first saw when you entered
00:01:48.120 at Instagram. And if you ask me if she really means what's in that statement, she should have
00:01:52.840 pinned that statement because that's the most important thing going on in Blake Lively's life
00:01:57.460 right now. It's not what her and Ryan Reynolds dressed up as for Halloween in 2025. And anyways,
00:02:04.800 as I said before, we can expect to see a lot of new posts on Blake Lively's Instagram in the future
00:02:09.820 weeks because of course she wants us to forget about that community note. Anyways, let's look
00:02:14.260 into this new filing where Blake Lively's attorneys are trying to explain why this cookie recipe from
00:02:21.220 Taylor Swift is so important that they had to add it into evidence. So as you know Blake dumped a
00:02:28.560 whole pile of new evidence last week and the Wayfair parties asked the judge to give them more
00:02:33.880 time to review all of this new evidence and they pointed out some absurd new stuff that she was
00:02:39.400 filing, amongst it was Taylor Swift's cookie recipe. And now Blake's team is defending that,
00:02:45.100 saying that this cookie recipe is not something they brought up. The Wayfair parties actually
00:02:50.100 brought this up themselves. Her attorney is saying defendant's assertion that Ms. Lively has
00:02:55.080 loaded up the exhibit list with irrelevant documents is yet another press stunt. Defendants
00:03:01.600 understand that any reference to Taylor Swift in their court filings leads to immediate headlines,
00:03:07.420 Hence, their claim that it is exceptionally unlikely that a jury would gain any insight
00:03:13.200 from, and then they're pointing out this evidence, which is an article about Taylor
00:03:18.780 Swift's cookie recipe.
00:03:20.820 Okay, so who brought it in in the first place?
00:03:22.660 You wanted it as evidence, and now you're pointing at Wayfair parties saying that this
00:03:28.200 is a PR stunt from them because they're pointing out that you brought it up in the first place.
00:03:33.000 I mean, try to find any logic in this.
00:03:35.040 And then they continue blaming it on them, saying defendants conveniently omits that Tagg emailed a link to the cookie recipe article to the Daily Mail, which Tagg did to encourage one of its friendlies to trash Ms. Lively in a way that would appear organic, as Ms. Lively has previously explained.
00:03:54.620 So they're saying that TAG, Justin's crisis PR team, emailed this cookie recipe to the Daily Mail to portray Blake Lyle in bad lights.
00:04:05.240 Here they explain further on August 15, 2024, to stop the Daily Mail from writing about HR complaints.
00:04:13.480 We know there weren't any HR complaints because Blake herself has said that there weren't any HR department that she could complain to.
00:04:22.180 And she tried to complain to Sony and they said you have to complain to Wayfair parties.
00:04:26.860 But then remember in her own letter to the producers Guild of America, she said that she was responsible for HR.
00:04:33.260 But anyway, side note there.
00:04:34.840 Anyways, they continue.
00:04:35.720 To stop the Daily Mail from writing about HR complaints, Tag provided a Daily Mail reporter with helpful links comparing Lively to Taylor Swift
00:04:45.640 and urged the reporter to cover how lively, quote, 0.99
00:04:49.280 is emulating her best friend Taylor with a charm bracelet and shit, end quote, 0.99
00:04:55.040 which Nathan said was the only thing she could think of 0.99
00:04:58.260 that looked organic and wouldn't seem like replaced.
00:05:03.240 I don't understand how on earth that is going to put Blake in a bad light
00:05:08.600 just saying that she's copying Taylor.
00:05:10.620 Blake kept bragging about her BFF Taylor Swift
00:05:13.920 throughout the entire promotion of this movie
00:05:15.720 and said she could never really have done this without her
00:05:18.140 and Taylor was with her the entire time.
00:05:20.300 She played such an important part in this
00:05:22.420 and now they're saying that comparing the two of them
00:05:25.420 would smear Blake.
00:05:27.320 And they continue.
00:05:28.240 The Daily Mail published a few days later
00:05:30.440 incorporating the provided link
00:05:32.380 and quoting an insider that Lively 0.91
00:05:34.780 laughed at the concept of making herself available
00:05:39.180 to DV survivors 0.99
00:05:40.860 is trying to get Taylor to help pull her out of this mess by using their friendship for interviews 0.95
00:05:46.980 and other promotional work directly related to the film amid the current backlash that she's
00:05:52.960 getting and that the entire situation showed how out of touch she is. Exactly that is what happened
00:06:00.780 and we know how much she used Taylor Swift in the promotion of this movie so all of this is true.
00:06:05.040 I don't know if Tag gave this information to the Daily Mail they probably did since they have it
00:06:10.100 here in writing that they shared this information. But why on earth would this be important information
00:06:16.800 to put in front of a jury? It's so, I mean, it's so far-fetched. And then there's a footnote here
00:06:22.980 saying that this tactic, using the mention of Taylor Swift to generate clickbait media stories,
00:06:28.680 was part of defendant's August 2024 scenario planning document and is exactly what followed
00:06:36.080 defendant's letter here. And now they're linking this to another TMC story where they wrote about
00:06:42.260 Baldoni claim Blake put Taylor Swift cookies recipe in discovery. So this is like a real-time
00:06:48.940 discussion. Now every time they file something the media picks it up and then they file something
00:06:54.180 new saying hey we filed this and now the media has picked it up. Well for sure this time it wasn't
00:07:00.700 the Wayfair parties who planted this story they just pointed out why this is ridiculous and TMZ 0.93
00:07:08.040 picked it up because it is ridiculous. Here comes another explanation. Those the cookie recipe 0.86
00:07:13.900 article that defendants mock is actually something they made relevant when Tag sent it to the Daily
00:07:19.420 Mail to influence that friendly publication to publish a hit piece about Miss Lively that would
00:07:25.260 appear to be organic a hit piece really do they know what a hit piece is a hit piece is what they
00:07:31.780 did in the new york times not referring to blake and taylor's friendship and that they share the
00:07:38.100 interest in cooking or baking and here is the article it says how blake lively copied best
00:07:44.860 friend taylor swift to promote it ends with us before turning to singer to help crisis manage
00:07:49.920 backlash and justin baldoni drama and it says here blake lively has been relying on her best
00:07:55.220 friend Taylor Swift to help get her through the recent media storm and is hoping to use their
00:07:59.760 friendship to distract from the drama while promoting her new flick It Ends With Us, a source
00:08:04.840 has revealed. Blake has been embroiled in controversy in recent weeks as rumors of an
00:08:10.100 ongoing feud between her and a co-star Justin Baldoni continue to make headlines. And the reason
00:08:14.760 for that is because Blake wanted those headlines because she asked all the cast members to unfollow
00:08:20.840 Justin Baldoni at the same time and also that he was not allowed to appear next to her on the red
00:08:26.180 carpet. Why did she do that? Because she wanted the media to pick up on the feud but when they did
00:08:31.680 and they didn't cover it the way she wanted them to cover it then it's like part of a smear campaign
00:08:38.080 and here an insider apparently told the Daily Mail at this time this was published on August 17th of
00:08:45.400 2024. Blake has been relying on Taylor to get her through this storm in the same way that she
00:08:50.680 relied on her every step of the way during the filming of It Ends With Us, the source told Daily
00:08:55.640 Mail. Taylor knows how to handle backlash better than anyone. So why is this a hit piece on Blake
00:09:02.060 that she's relying on Taylor Swift's support? Well, here they're saying something interesting.
00:09:07.140 It says, and it seems like Blake is taking a similar approach to the Justin drama,
00:09:11.080 subtly throwing shade towards the actor by unfollowing him and partaking in interviews
00:09:16.600 with every cast member but him but failing to actually disclose that allegedly what allegedly
00:09:22.600 went down exactly the source also said here that the actress is purposely bringing up her friendship
00:09:29.140 with taylor in interviews and other promotional work in the hope that it will help pull her out
00:09:33.740 of this mess exactly that's what she did i mean she's saying that taylor had nothing to do with
00:09:38.460 and then she's bringing her into every conversation on the red carpet and in press
00:09:42.900 junket interviews and then when the press picks up on it then it's a hit piece on blake anyways
00:09:47.900 the article continues here to say to mention all the times that blake brought up taylor in
00:09:52.180 promotion of the movie so yes back to this ridiculous filing here in another footnote
00:09:57.620 they're saying here in addition blake posted multiple videos of herself and castmates baking
00:10:02.040 while promoting the flick which is a hobby that taylor often uses when she promotes her own
00:10:06.640 projects. I mean, this is like high school drama at this point. And in this same filing, they're
00:10:13.640 saying this, this is the best part. Ms. Lively has carefully considered and identified evidence
00:10:19.460 she may present at trial, narrowing her exhibit list to 814 documents, less than 1% of the 89,000
00:10:31.300 documents produced in this litigation can you believe it 89 000 documents have been filed
00:10:39.200 produced in this litigation so blake narrowed it down to one percent and she really wants this
00:10:46.180 evidence in there that she took up baking because taylor swift did okay so let's talk about this
00:10:51.780 sony emails and text messages that blake lively wants out i saw this on reddit this morning
00:10:58.280 There's some amazing internet sleuths there pointing out that Josh Greenstein,
00:11:02.460 remember that Sony executive who was supporting Blake Lively throughout all of this?
00:11:06.960 He was the one who let her make her own version of the movie.
00:11:11.540 He was supporting that.
00:11:13.240 And we have seen some of his text messages.
00:11:15.680 But interestingly enough, we've only seen his side of text messages.
00:11:20.540 We've never seen how people responded to his texts.
00:11:24.380 On Reddit, there were speculating if he had deleted the answers or the replies that he
00:11:30.760 got from his text messages.
00:11:32.540 I don't know if that's true or not.
00:11:34.800 That could be, that's definitely just something that someone alleged.
00:11:38.400 But I just read up a little bit about how you retrieve this information from the phones.
00:11:43.380 And sometimes it is hard to get the entire conversation.
00:11:48.540 And especially with iPhones, some stuff is up in the cloud and some stuff is not.
00:11:52.800 And all these different things.
00:11:54.380 So I don't know if Josh Greenstein did any of this on purpose.
00:11:57.680 But what I found interesting here is that Blake Lively really wants this evidence tossed out.
00:12:02.100 She wants evidence tossed out from a person, a Sony executive, who supported her throughout this crisis. 0.98
00:12:09.960 Why does she want that? 0.99
00:12:11.980 Of course, because it proves how much power she had.
00:12:17.000 I don't remember exactly what these text messages or conversations from Greenstein were,
00:12:22.600 But we've seen in his deposition, there's a lot of black holes for Josh Greenstein.
00:12:28.060 It's a lot of stuff that he doesn't really recall.
00:12:30.880 As someone pointed out on Reddit, he also said he didn't recall things in his deposition that were likely impossible.
00:12:39.520 Even when he was asked if he asked her to lead Sony's cut, he said, I don't recall.
00:12:45.800 An actress with no movie editing experience being given leadership over the cuts of a huge IP and he can't recall?
00:12:53.840 BS. Yes, I totally agree. That is BS.
00:12:59.460 As you know, Blake wants basically all sonic communication tossed out of evidence because she believes it can harm her.
00:13:08.060 So this is a text between Josh Greenstein and Tara Grant.
00:13:10.980 And here we only see Tara Grant's responses.
00:13:13.480 Tara is saying all this would do is continue to reinforce what everyone is saying that Blake is
00:13:21.720 a bully this is an email Leslie got she's asking and then we don't as I said we don't see his
00:13:28.800 response here either and she says yes and then Tara continues she's not getting support even
00:13:36.780 with Daily Mail and New York Post and then she says she orchestrated all this drama in a totally
00:13:44.900 unsavvy and amateur way and basically threatened you and Sony telling Josh this and now is mad
00:13:53.160 and now she's mad it backfired on her better than alternative because she and her team are playing 0.98
00:13:59.040 with fire with all this borderline abusive language that's where shit can spiral and it 0.98
00:14:05.180 hasn't taken hold at all. So we don't know what Josh Greenstein responded here but as you know 0.96
00:14:12.520 Blake wants of course this tossed out obviously and all the other text messages where she's called 0.97
00:14:18.520 epic level stupid by another Sony executive and another one also calling her a terrorist. So of 0.97
00:14:24.980 course she doesn't want those text messages shown in front of a jury and at the same time she doesn't
00:14:28.940 want the jury to see the text messages that are supporting her either because as I said that proves 0.95
00:14:33.880 that she had so much power on this set and that she actually took over the movie and that is not
00:14:40.140 a good look for a victim so now her lawyer so now her lawyers are claiming that because we only see
00:14:47.380 one side of these texts they should be tossed out that's the reasoning they have saying that oh we
00:14:53.340 don't see the responses here we don't see the reply from the text messages so that means that
00:14:58.740 we can't really use them because then the jury can start speculating what's missing here in between
00:15:03.160 these texts and between these responses and that is really dangerous to go down that path. So again
00:15:08.940 let's see what the judge will allow to happen here if he's going to allow any of these Sony text
00:15:13.780 messages being used. I just learned that just showing texts and emails at a trial is considered
00:15:20.600 hearsay. For those texts and emails to actually be considered the person who wrote them has to be
00:15:26.860 there and say yes I wrote those statements, yes I wrote those texts, yes I wrote those emails.
00:15:32.180 Yeah, I don't know. We'll see if any Sony executives are going to come out and support Blake in any way,
00:15:38.460 although it seems like she doesn't want them to.
00:15:40.520 Let's look a bit more into what they're saying about my little bump interview.
00:15:45.300 One thing is that they're trying to exclude me from testifying,
00:15:48.660 but also that they're trying to exclude my video from actually being shown at trial.
00:15:54.460 So in this letter to the judge where they explained why I shouldn't be there,
00:15:59.140 First of all, they're calling me a self-described entertainment reporter and multimedia producer.
00:16:05.040 Self-described? I have like 500 interviews on my channel.
00:16:09.500 I worked as a journalist for over 20 years, so calling me a self-described entertainment reporter?
00:16:16.040 That's like me saying Blake Lively is a self-described actress.
00:16:20.040 Anyways, is she even an actress? She doesn't work that much? 1.00
00:16:22.640 something that the Wayfair parties also pointed out in one of their motions trying to get rid of 0.99
00:16:28.420 some of Blake's experts where an expert is saying that she worked so much and she would have made
00:16:32.100 so much money and they're like she made like four movies since 2017 that's not working a lot
00:16:38.720 so yes the self-described actress anyways they're explaining what happened in this interview here
00:16:45.060 saying that Blake was taken aback by the comment on her body Miss Lively responded congrats on 0.91
00:16:51.880 your little bump. So they're trying to justify that she was offended and taken aback. Like how
00:16:57.720 can you comment on my body like that? So they're trying to make this about me commenting on Blake's
00:17:03.860 body and not congratulating her on being pregnant. Something to be known to be the biggest miracle of
00:17:09.580 life. And she was offended by that and taken aback by it because she took it as me commenting
00:17:16.520 on her body. I mean, if I would have said congratulations on your boobs or on your butts, 0.99
00:17:22.460 the way they continue doing, hey, my boobs, my butt, pointing at all their lady lumps and all 0.99
00:17:28.280 their bumps, I didn't do that. I mean, you can really take any compliments you want and twist 0.98
00:17:34.120 it around to make it be offensive somehow if you really wanted to. And that is what Blake Wively
00:17:40.740 did. And I have to say, that wasn't the worst part of the interview for me. The worst part was being
00:17:46.100 ignored during the rest of the interview and being called basically a sexist by Blake Lively
00:17:51.840 because I asked about costumes and the fact that the two of them hijacked the rest of the interview
00:17:56.480 ignoring me sitting there. That was the worst part and they never mentioned that. They're just
00:18:00.840 saying that she was taken aback by me congratulating her on her baby bump. Also they forget to mention
00:18:07.060 that they're the ones who actually brought me into this litigation and now they just want me
00:18:11.640 out of it. They're the ones who actually created this conspiracy theory that they fed to the New
00:18:17.900 York Times saying that, hey, she must be involved in the smear campaign because look, she published
00:18:24.460 a video about Johnny Depp when he was at trial, hashtagging it justice for Johnny Depp when he
00:18:31.900 was working with Melissa Nathan, who also Justin Baldoni worked with. So they're the ones who
00:18:37.700 accused me of being a part of the smear campaign and now they're admitting without admitting it
00:18:42.580 obviously that they were wrong that I had nothing to do with the smear campaign but of course they
00:18:47.940 don't want but of course they don't want any of that stuff to come up at trial also the fact that
00:18:53.280 they subpoenaed me for my google account and all my personal information also the fact that they're
00:18:58.200 calling me biased is quite ridiculous especially since they have all these expert witnesses all
00:19:03.500 these experts who wrote all these really long reports supporting Blakely's narrative. An expert
00:19:10.320 is someone who's asked to create a report that supports the narrative of the person hiring them.
00:19:17.780 They're basically given the results before they actually start writing this report, saying like,
00:19:23.640 hey, we want this to look like a smear campaign. Can you please make a report so it looks like a
00:19:28.800 campaign that was not organic and they say yes. So how is that not biased and how should that
00:19:36.200 person be able to be on the stand and testify when I am not, when I was in the middle and
00:19:42.300 experiencing this viral video? Another thing they forgot to mention here is that you know a lot of
00:19:48.760 videos go viral all the time. There's viral videos on YouTube every single day, there's viral videos
00:19:54.440 on TikToks, there are hundreds, there are thousands of viral videos, but very few of
00:19:58.740 them get picked up by the press. And that's what happened to my video. So why did it get
00:20:03.800 picked up by the press if it wasn't that people reacted to it organically? The press wouldn't
00:20:09.480 be interested in writing a story based on a viral video if the content wasn't interesting
00:20:16.080 for the general public. You just can't take whatever video and just push it to make it
00:20:21.020 go viral. If Blake Lively's team had tried to push a video of Justin Baldoni to make it go viral,
00:20:27.760 to make him look bad, like, for example, the one I pointed at yesterday when he said that he went
00:20:33.360 up and hugged Britney Spears because he felt he knew her. And then he was like, did I harass her?
00:20:38.840 If you want to try and make that video viral, you can try. But the media is not going to pick up on
00:20:44.940 it because there's nothing there because it's such a far-fetched argument that Justin also
00:20:51.220 s-aged Britney and everyone sees that and that's why it didn't go viral. So the reason why my video
00:20:57.620 did is because people were appalled by her and Parker Posey's behavior in that video. They're
00:21:05.280 saying here that it should be excluded to rule 403, I don't know what that rule is, because its
00:21:11.200 minimal property value is substantially outweighed by the dangers of unfair prejudice, confusion of
00:21:19.080 the issues and misleading the jury. So they're saying that if the jury sees this video of Blake
00:21:25.020 Lively, they will get misleaded into believing that she is a mean girl because that is what
00:21:30.120 they're observing watching the video. And they're also arguing here that Ms. Lively do not allege
00:21:35.200 and does not have to show that Ms. Floss publication of the little bump video in 2024
00:21:40.880 was coordinated with defendants or resulted from any relationship with defendants or their agents.
00:21:47.980 For purposes of trial, Ms. Lively need only prove, through percipient fact witnesses and expert testimony,
00:21:54.240 that defendants amplified and bolstered the video to make it go viral.
00:21:59.160 More specifically, that in hours after Tag forwarded the little bump video to Jed Wallace on August 14, 2024,
00:22:07.080 four days after Flo reposted it on YouTube, the comments on the video increased rapidly and at a
00:22:14.420 disappropriate rate, as did the volume and popularity of comments that included
00:22:22.080 bully-related terms. Here's the fact. No one knows if anyone tried to amplify my video or boost it
00:22:32.640 on YouTube and I remember at this point my video I don't think had more than like 30,000 views
00:22:39.200 which means that it wasn't viral when the when the press picked it up. I published a video on
00:22:45.720 August 10th which is four days before Jed Wallace received my video. August 15th the next day so he
00:22:54.180 must be really good at boasting and amplifying videos because the next day the Daily Mail did
00:22:59.160 a report on this. So it might as well have been that article in the Daily Mail. Remember, Daily
00:23:05.360 Mail is the biggest news site in the world. So the fact that they reported on it, could that have
00:23:11.920 maybe made it go more viral? These are things that Blake Leiby has to explain in front of this jury,
00:23:16.860 that it wasn't the Daily Mail reporting on it that made people talk about it. It was the fact
00:23:22.180 that Jed Wallace pushed it. Anyways, also on August 15th, I received an email from Daily Mail
00:23:29.120 saying, Hi Shashti, I'm a reporter from Daily Mail, currently writing a story about the Blake
00:23:35.080 Lively interview you re-shared online recently. Some people on Twitter have theorized that you
00:23:41.160 shared it to distract from the hate Justin Baldoni is getting after they noticed you previously
00:23:47.060 praised Johnny Depp during his trial and just hired Johnny's PR. I wanted to give you a chance
00:23:52.780 to respond and or shut down these claims. Please let me know if you have any comments. This is how
00:23:58.040 you do it. By the way, New York Times, you actually reach out to the person, ask for a comment. And
00:24:02.780 this happened on August 15th. So already at that point, people started, I don't know where that
00:24:09.400 came from, maybe like Lively's camp, started these speculations online that I was a part of a smear
00:24:16.900 campaign because these theories as she said here this reporter from the Daily Mail were already
00:24:24.060 out there yeah so none of this really adds up if you ask me this theory that Blake Lively has
00:24:30.280 that my video was amplified and pushed by his team it doesn't add up and it doesn't really
00:24:37.240 doesn't prove any smear campaign and also as I said before the fact that I received so many emails
00:24:43.080 and so many DMs from people, they weren't bots, they were real people and telling me that the
00:24:49.160 interview resonated with them in one way or another. So this whole argument here is so
00:24:55.200 ridiculous and the funny thing is they're trying to use their own expert here saying that he knows 0.59
00:25:00.540 more about why my video went viral than I do and in his report it says here on Instagram several 0.95
00:25:08.320 posts from this time period include the notion that Ms. Lively was a mean girl and dissected
00:25:14.980 content like the Little Bump interview. For example, in a reel posted on August 17, 2024, 1.00
00:25:21.980 one former reporter with over 13,000 followers said Ms. Lively had a mean girl vibe for the way 1.00
00:25:28.580 she acted during the Little Bump interview in a post that received 540,000 views. Another post 1.00
00:25:36.920 from august 15 2024 by an account typically highlighting the work of the prince and princess
00:25:43.480 of wales received 224 000 views on a video post with the caption blimey blake lively it's high
00:25:51.980 time people see you for the mean girl and unkind anti-women you've always been other posts on
00:25:58.580 instagram critique the marketing of it ends with us calling miss lively tone deaf so he's basically
00:26:04.020 explaining here what happens when a celebrity acts badly and the public reacts to it organically
00:26:10.140 he's saying here how many views and how many likes all these posts got so he's basically saying that
00:26:15.480 Jed Wallace amplified all these videos everywhere to make people believe that these videos were
00:26:22.320 popular and because they had so many views people organically started thinking oh she must be a mean 0.53
00:26:29.360 girl because all these people on the internet is saying so and it's just being part of the public 0.92
00:26:34.140 I don't have any critical thinking abilities so I just have to go with the flow here and also
00:26:40.280 believe that Blake Lively is a bully and a mean girl yes basically Blake Lively's team is terrified
00:26:46.800 of the jury seeing that video and I understand why it's because of course if they see her behavior
00:26:53.800 they start thinking oh is she like that what would she really like to work with for Justin 0.59
00:26:58.980 Baldoni if she behaves like that in a setting where she knows she's on camera. And also the
00:27:04.420 fact that this is video footage of herself. This is not hearsay. This is not twisted fake news or
00:27:11.860 whatever. This is not an article with some sources. This is actually Blake Lively behaving as herself
00:27:19.720 and that is why they're terrified. Anyways, that's it from you guys. I hope you enjoyed this episode.
00:27:25.240 So thank you so much for watching.
00:27:26.840 And if you haven't subscribed yet, please do hit the notification bell
00:27:29.880 so you never miss an episode of Flawsome Talk.
00:27:31.940 And I'll see you soon.
00:27:33.260 Bye.