Flaawsome Talk with Kjersti Flaa - June 02, 2026


BLAKE'S REAL DRAGON !!？


Episode Stats


Length

21 minutes

Words per minute

155.21

Word count

3,359

Sentence count

142

Harmful content

Misogyny

3

sentences flagged


Summary

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

Blake Lively and the Wayfair Parties are back in court today in a very important meeting in New York City. Is this the beginning of a new legal war between the two parties or is this just the end of the road for Blake and Ryan Reynolds?

Transcript

Transcript generated with Whisper (turbo).
Misogyny classifications generated with MilaNLProc/bert-base-uncased-ear-misogyny .
00:00:00.000 This alone explains a lot about how the media decided to cover this case.
00:00:10.900 Hi and welcome to Flossom Talk, I'm Jashti Floor, journalist, Hollywood truth teller
00:00:15.300 and your voice of reason in a town built on delusion.
00:00:19.320 As you know, today is the big meeting in court between Blake Lively's attorneys
00:00:24.140 and the Wayfair Party's attorneys.
00:00:26.540 And yesterday was the deadline for both parties to send a letter to the judge.
00:00:31.640 Let's look into these letters and if this is the beginning of a new legal war.
00:00:37.080 And the New York Times is doubling down with another story supporting Blake Lively.
00:00:42.240 Surprise, surprise. Let's analyze this.
00:00:45.660 And one of my insiders who works for mainstream media told me this little secret.
00:00:50.820 Remember when Blake and her sister Robin were caught by a paparazzi walking down the street with Salma Hayek?
00:00:59.140 This happened about a year ago and they made it almost look like a girl's night out.
00:01:03.880 Well, guess who was also at that dinner?
00:01:06.780 Ryan Reynolds.
00:01:08.220 And as this person pointed out to me, this alone explains a lot about how the media decided to cover this case.
00:01:16.940 Let's get into it.
00:01:18.080 This is really juicy stuff.
00:01:19.980 And guess what? People Magazine did a story on Blake and Ryan and how they're still madly in love.
00:01:29.040 Yeah, let's get into all this mess.
00:01:31.480 So as you know, today is a very important meeting in New York.
00:01:35.340 The judge told both parties to show up at court and they have about 30 minutes to argue their side.
00:01:41.440 As you know, Blake's team is pointing at this new Me Too law called 47.1.
00:01:47.440 And they told the judge that we should have our attorney's fees covered because of this new law.
00:01:52.620 And on top of that, we should also have punitive damages and treble damages.
00:01:57.160 The judge then told both parties to send him a letter, maximum two pages.
00:02:01.860 There were a lot of specifics there where they both could argue who should have the burden of proof here.
00:02:07.520 And that is basically what they have responded to in these two letters.
00:02:11.780 So as you know, Justin Baldoni and the Wayfair parties countersued Blake for defamation after she had sued them for SH and retaliation.
00:02:21.100 They also sued Ryan Reynolds and Leslie Sloan.
00:02:23.880 And these are the legal fees that Blake Live is asking for. 0.91
00:02:26.960 If she gets any legal fees covered, it's only the money that she spent to defend herself against this lawsuit. 0.96
00:02:34.500 What could get out of control are the punitive damages and the triple damages.
00:02:39.460 And these should not apply according to the wayfair parties.
00:02:43.980 They're saying basically, okay, let's assume that this Me Too law is in effect here,
00:02:49.940 even though it's a California law and we're in New York.
00:02:52.940 Let's just assume that this is into effect.
00:02:55.100 Blake can't also go after us for all these damages.
00:02:59.320 Damages like this should go to a jury.
00:03:02.380 And 10 of her 13 claims were dismissed and she voluntarily dismissed the rest herself.
00:03:07.740 so why should we pay her all these damages and Blake is basically claiming that the the law
00:03:14.500 allows me to ask for all of this so I should so everyone here is basically agreeing that this
00:03:19.600 me too law is and does exist but for the judge is really important to be very thorough here
00:03:27.200 because he knows that the ruling on this will be used in future cases so that's why he's asking
00:03:33.900 the parties here to argue about this for him so he doesn't have to do it himself. So what could
00:03:39.620 happen now is that the judge could allow some attorney's fees for Blake and he could just cut
00:03:46.280 off all the damages. He could also allow the fees and just postpone the question about these damages
00:03:52.680 or he could just allow everything to move forward. If he cuts off all of these damages entirely that
00:03:58.220 would just shorten this case a lot so best case scenario here if he does that this case could end
00:04:05.380 in a few months if he doesn't do that if he's if he's allowing all these damages to move forward
00:04:11.680 we could still look at this fight going on way until 2027 and if one of the parties here are
00:04:18.940 not happy with his decision they can appeal that decision and then this will go on even longer i
00:04:25.900 have a feeling that the Wayfair parties just want all of this to end they just want to move on and
00:04:31.100 that's maybe why they would just agree to pay these attorneys fees but I think Blake and Ryan
00:04:36.780 are never going to give up for them it's so important to show that this was some kind of
00:04:42.560 win for them as you know they already claimed victory after they lost everything but if they
00:04:48.560 win anything here if they get any attorneys fees they will spin this in the media as a big win for
00:04:55.160 Blake Lively and she already made sure that we all know that this is not about the money and of
00:05:01.260 course it isn't because if she gets some attorney's fees as I said it's such a minor amount especially
00:05:06.720 considering that she spent approximately 30 million dollars on this lawsuit this whole thing is just
00:05:12.900 for optics. Anyways I'll keep you posted on what's happening in this meeting today let's hope we get
00:05:18.920 a little more information after this. We also have to remember there is another parallel lawsuit going
00:05:24.040 on here. Jones versus Abel, Abel versus Jones, these two publicists who are fighting. And I was
00:05:31.160 looking at their docket today. There's not much going on there right now, but they are way into
00:05:36.980 discovery. They haven't filed any of this discovery in the docket yet, but even a couple of months
00:05:42.760 time, that's when I think the deadline is for the expert witnesses that they're both going to use.
00:05:49.300 then there are probably going to be some filings of summary judgment.
00:05:53.280 And that is when they dump all the evidence on the docket.
00:05:58.160 So fingers crossed that we're going to see a lot more evidence of what really went on
00:06:04.720 when Stephanie Jones took her employees, Jennifer Abel's phone,
00:06:09.560 gave it to Blake Lively, who gave it to the New York Times.
00:06:13.360 Anyways, talking about the New York Times, they just published another story.
00:06:18.500 They keep doubling down on this narrative that Blake Lively fed them in 2024.
00:06:25.680 As you know, they're the one who broke this story.
00:06:28.800 Anyways, a few days ago, they published this, saying Blake Lively's last chance,
00:06:34.560 a U.S. judge take on an untested state law.
00:06:40.080 After the settlement with Justin Baldoni's company, one potentially thorny legal issue remains,
00:06:46.000 whether she's due damages under a new California law.
00:06:50.240 When you look at this situation, it's not actually a settlement in that sense.
00:06:54.460 It's more like she voluntarily just dropped her case.
00:06:57.840 But anyways, as always, New York Times frames this story from Blake Lively's perspective.
00:07:02.100 It's all focusing on what she might win and not everything that she already lost
00:07:07.640 or why the judge might just reject this claim from her.
00:07:11.860 They're not even playing with the idea that he was just defending himself.
00:07:15.280 They're just saying basically that this was a retaliatory lawsuit.
00:07:19.720 Basically, they're going through why this Me Too law has passed
00:07:23.480 and all the advocacy around this new law and how important it is.
00:07:28.300 And they're not discussing the idea that if someone is falsely accused of something
00:07:32.900 that they should have the right to defend themselves.
00:07:35.800 The New York Times obviously doesn't think so.
00:07:37.940 They're also claiming that Blake's lawsuit was dismissed on technicalities,
00:07:42.620 which is completely false.
00:07:45.780 We all saw Judge Lyman's ruling here.
00:07:48.860 He pointed to all of our SH claims
00:07:51.640 and put in writing why none of them actually held up to SH.
00:07:56.560 But the New York Times obviously did not read that.
00:07:59.380 They also, of course, don't explain
00:08:01.300 why Baldoni's lawsuit against Blake, Ryan and Leslie was dismissed.
00:08:05.960 They're basically just insinuating that Blake's allegations were true
00:08:09.900 and Baldoni's countersued and his allegations against her had no merit.
00:08:16.680 Basically, they're saying here that this new law is designed to protect victims,
00:08:22.500 insinuating so strongly that Blake really is a victim.
00:08:26.560 Yeah, there are absolutely no critical questions here
00:08:29.280 in regards to why Blake likely should get these attorneys' fees covered
00:08:35.100 when 90% of a lawsuit was dismissed by the judge
00:08:38.640 and then she voluntarily dismissed the rest of it herself,
00:08:42.000 why should she then be entitled to these fees?
00:08:46.420 They're, of course, not mentioning that at all.
00:08:49.380 Yeah, I mean, what would you expect from the New York Times at this point?
00:08:52.520 As you know, they were also sued by Baldoni and the wafer party,
00:08:55.900 something they don't disclose in this article, by the way.
00:08:58.680 And they also don't disclose in this article
00:09:00.520 that they were the first to actually break this story,
00:09:04.460 that they were the ones who brought this lawsuit to the public.
00:09:08.640 And as you know, the New York Times also asked to get their attorney's fees covered by the
00:09:13.040 wayfair parties, and the judge hasn't ruled on that yet either.
00:09:17.460 Anyways, this whole New York Times mess brings me to this new story.
00:09:21.120 So I have an insider who works in mainstream media, and the person told me a lot of really
00:09:27.860 interesting stuff that I didn't know about.
00:09:30.300 Amongst other things, how much money is involved in advertisement in these magazines and why
00:09:38.000 that is really important in how they're covering stories like this as they pointed out to put it
00:09:45.440 into context a broad estimate full page ad for vogue in the u.s is about 150 to 200 000
00:09:52.540 people magazine is about 200 to 250 000 and time is 100 to 150 000 a double page spread typically
00:10:04.360 adds roughly 70 to 90 percent on top of a single page rate adding onto this a full page national
00:10:11.920 print ad in the new york times is 150 to 250 000 a sunday double page spread is about 600 000 to
00:10:23.940 a million dollars and then they said you can assume correctly what this implies and then they
00:10:29.800 point to this picture of Blake Lively, her sister Robin and Salma Hayek. So this happened about a
00:10:38.300 year ago and they made sure the paparazzi knew what was going on here. And it's interesting when
00:10:44.040 this happened, it kind of looked like a girls night out with these three girls just hanging
00:10:49.520 out together. But guess what? Ryan Reynolds was also there. He was also present at this dinner
00:10:57.040 And People Magazine actually mentions that in this story, saying Blake Lively dines with Salma Hayek after Taylor Swift's fiery statement about Justin Baldoni's subpoena.
00:11:08.420 Yeah, if you ever wonder where People Magazine stands in this, here's your answer.
00:11:12.800 Anyways, Blake Lively and Ryan Reynolds were photographed spending time with friend and former co-star Salma Hayek Pinoa on May 13.
00:11:21.520 So this is about a year ago, as I said.
00:11:23.760 And I'll get to the point here why this is so important.
00:11:27.040 They continue in this article to say that Blake and Ryan caught up with pal Salma Hayek as their ongoing legal battle with Justin Baldoni continues.
00:11:36.460 The couple were spotted in New York City on Tuesday, May 13, walking and smiling with lively sister Robin plus Hayek, whose Sports Illustrated swimsuit cover debuted earlier the same day.
00:11:47.760 The group got dinner at RH Rooftop Restaurant.
00:11:52.140 Why is this important? Well, as my insider pointed out, yes, with Salma Hayek being married to
00:11:59.980 François-Henri Pinot, president of Keurig, the luxury group behind Gucci, YSL, Balenciaga and
00:12:08.700 Bottega Vanetta and president of the Pinot family's investment company Group Artemis, which holds
00:12:15.080 interests including Chateau Latour, Christie's Pinot Collection and a majority stake in creative
00:12:22.220 artist agency. You can imagine the level of influence and industry connections involved
00:12:28.780 and you can imagine the advertising spend these brands have and the legacy media publications
00:12:35.740 they have stronghold over. There is also the power behind CAA. CAA is one of the biggest talent
00:12:43.480 agencies in Hollywood or in the US, which grants celebrity access to these magazines.
00:12:49.960 Getting the right celebrity for a cover has a major impact on sales, and you wouldn't
00:12:55.000 believe how hard it actually is to get someone good.
00:12:58.780 There is often a quid pro quo arrangement, for example, feature this up-and-coming actress
00:13:04.060 on your cover and we will give you access to someone bigger.
00:13:07.860 Big name celebs covers affect sales significantly, which in turn affects ad rates.
00:13:15.040 And this is, of course, not accounting for their influence with the film industry, as you know.
00:13:19.940 It was an important purposely power move with a big message for sure.
00:13:24.560 And of course, Blake is known to use pap walks with other powerful celebrities to send messages,
00:13:30.720 including during her bake-off for Sony leaving Bradley Cooper's apartment with Taylor Swift.
00:13:37.040 etc and this person pointed out the openly veiled threat seems to be a running theme with Blake and
00:13:43.120 Ryan it was interesting that Hunter Biden said in his recent interview with Candace Owens
00:13:47.440 that releasing someone's address is known is a known open threat in their political world
00:13:55.100 Blake and Ryan doxing Justin and Jamie's addresses on the docket I believe was a
00:14:00.440 I believe it was a desperate, purposeful, last-ditch effort to make them fold.
00:14:05.580 Yeah, remember that?
00:14:07.100 Blake's attorneys, completely by mistake,
00:14:11.380 added both depositions from Jamie Heath and Justin Baldoni on the docket
00:14:16.920 without sealing any of their private information
00:14:20.660 so everyone could just look it up and find out where they're living.
00:14:24.740 But as my insider is pointing at her,
00:14:26.700 How this whole power move with Salma Hayek influenced how the media covered this case.
00:14:34.300 Why was Ryan Reynolds also at this girl's dinner?
00:14:38.080 Why was he present there?
00:14:39.780 What did they talk about?
00:14:41.700 As you know, Ryan also co-starred with Salma Hayek in two movies.
00:14:45.720 One, The Hitman's Bodyguard and the sequel, The Hitman's Wife's Bodyguard.
00:14:50.300 And Blake co-starred with Salma in Savages.
00:14:53.580 and you know Blake and Ryan love their dragons so why did they call the paparazzi that day I mean
00:14:59.880 yeah very fascinating stuff that really explains a lot so as she mentioned here having a spread in
00:15:07.740 the New York Times on a Sunday a double page is between 600,000 to a million dollars and of course
00:15:15.240 the New York Times need that money also something interesting that they mentioned in this People
00:15:19.260 magazine article. I remember I spoke about this before, but now looking at it again with everything
00:15:24.600 that we know, they're pointing out here what Salma Hayek said on stage at this Variety Power
00:15:30.280 of Women Luncheon in 2017 about her co-star Blake Lively. She said, I still have never met anybody
00:15:39.000 that at such an early stage in their life had such a sense of self, so much courage. I mean,
00:15:45.320 I saw her take on one of the biggest bullies in the industry that everyone, everybody feared.
00:15:50.700 She was like, bring it on, baby. What's your problem? She knows exactly what she wants.
00:15:56.420 She took on Oliver Stone, one of the most feared directors in the industry. But of course,
00:16:03.680 she couldn't deal with feminist Justin Baldoni. Try to make sense of that. Anyways, on top of this, 0.91
00:16:10.360 of course, with the connections of Salma Hayek and her husband and how much money they bring
00:16:15.160 into mainstream media. On top of that, you also have Ryan Reynolds production company Maximum
00:16:21.380 Efforts that are also producing a lot of these ads that ends up in these magazines. I just reported
00:16:28.940 on a paid collaboration that they just did with The Hollywood Reporter. That was a collaboration
00:16:36.360 to promote his TV show, the Wrexam, the documentary series Wrexam.
00:16:42.280 And it was Mark's paid promotion.
00:16:44.600 So yeah, what would the Hollywood Reporter do any critical articles about Blake and Ryan?
00:16:49.380 Yeah, it all makes sense.
00:16:50.680 Talking about People Magazine, by the way, look at this story.
00:16:54.740 I mean, it doesn't get worse than this.
00:16:58.240 See photos of every time Blake Lively and Ryan Reynolds packed on the PDA,
00:17:02.900 the Deadpool actor and Gossip Girl star married in 2012 and share four kids. Wow, what an
00:17:09.980 interesting news story. And then they say Blake Lively and Ryan Reynolds have been madly in love
00:17:15.520 for 15 years and they have the photos to prove it. You just need a photo to prove it. I've actually
00:17:21.260 read this somewhere else in another article they did similar to this when they also said
00:17:26.020 they have the photos to prove it. But anyways, it says the actors who met on the set of 2011
00:17:31.660 Green Lantern began dating later that year and wed in September 2012. Since then, they have
00:17:37.840 welcomed four children, blah, blah, blah. They have stood by each other in good times, including
00:17:44.020 the Met Gala and their movie premieres, and in rough patches, such as the nearly 18-month legal
00:17:51.400 battle between Lively and Hurried Ends With Us co-star Justin Baldoni. And through it all,
00:17:57.500 they've shared the fact that they're extremely into each other with the internet
00:18:02.660 i mean i just can't i'm not gonna read more of that but they added a bunch of photos obviously
00:18:10.940 they kept their promise there we have the photos to prove it of the two of them posing in public
00:18:16.940 pretending to be in love but anyways it was interesting because if you click on under the
00:18:22.600 byline of the person who actually wrote a story in people magazine they have a people editorial
00:18:28.020 policy and this is quite funny it says here if you read it on people you know it's true in a world
00:18:36.380 of rumors run wild there are all kinds of stories that take the internet by storm and provoke strong
00:18:42.540 reactions even from major public figures before anybody even know knows if the information is
00:18:49.560 true. As one of the world's most read digital publications, we take seriously our responsibility
00:18:55.700 to fight against viral misinformation by having steadfast journalistic standard
00:19:01.740 that guides us in telling true, accurate, and authoritative stories always. And here is the
00:19:11.100 most revealing part. They're actually admitting this. The most A-list stars come to us to share
00:19:16.540 their news and personal stories. And we are in constant dialogue with all the big players in
00:19:22.460 Hollywood and throughout the entertainment industry who speak to us because they know we
00:19:27.800 value the truth. Yeah, amazing stuff. So if it's in People magazine, you know it's true. You know
00:19:36.700 Blake Lively and Ryan Reynolds are madly in love and they can prove it. Okay, so let's end this
00:19:43.560 episode on an even funnier note thank you gina for sending me this there's been some talk online
00:19:48.360 about this and now i see it it is actually really funny so remember that picture the yummy picture
00:19:53.900 that blake lively posted last week of her and ryan eating something obviously that no one even could
00:20:00.600 figure out what was unless you received the press release from blake's publicist who told you that
00:20:07.000 these were cookies by the way interesting how everyone's like what are they eating and of course
00:20:12.400 People magazine knew that these were cookies because Leslie Sloan the publicist obviously
00:20:17.280 told them so but anyways my point is that Gina sent me this and it's so obvious that Ryan Reynolds
00:20:26.100 has a lot of similarities to Justin Baldoni in that photo yeah look at this photo here and then
00:20:32.180 Blake is like oh my god yummy yummy yummy yummy yummy the reason also why she's using yummy so
00:20:38.540 much obviously which is very interesting as well i'll get into tomorrow because now we've learned
00:20:44.120 all her sneaky strategies anyways that's it for me you guys thank you so much for watching and
00:20:51.200 thank you for subscribing and if you haven't yet please do and hit the notification bell so you
00:20:56.820 never miss an episode of flawsome talk and i'll see you soon bye
00:21:08.540 Thank you.