We need to talk about astroturfing
“It Ends With Us,” more like it ends with trust
After the story moved him to tears, Justin Baldoni wanted to adapt Colleen Hoover’s “It Ends With Us,” a romance novel about domestic violence. “I just thought if this could affect me in this way then I could only imagine what it could do for women and people who are in this situation all over the world," Baldoni told CBS News. "All of us have a situation or a pattern that we need to end the cycle of."
Ironically, according to a lawsuit by his co-star Blake Lively, this movie started another pattern of abuse. One where Baldoni was the perpetrator.
In the lawsuit, Lively alleged that Baldoni and his co-producer Jamey Heath sexually harassed her on set. Moreover, the lawsuit stated that Baldoni, for fear that Lively could publicize his actions, embarked on a smear campaign to ruin Lively’s reputation. According to the suit, Baldoni’s PR team’s plan was “to engage in ‘social media mitigation and proactive fan posting to counter the negative’ as well as ‘social manipulation’” to bury Lively.
The aggressive campaign described in the lawsuit does not seem outlandish to anyone who witnessed the social media blitz after the movie was released in August. Fans at first noticed that all of the film’s cast members had unfollowed Baldoni on Instagram, leading to speculation on what caused a potential rift. Many pro-Baldoni answers sparked across TikTok. Such reasons were that Lively and her A-lister husband Ryan Reynolds bulldozed Baldoni’s creative control, Lively’s insensitively fluffy film promotion, or, based on resurfaced interviews, Lively was just mean.
Somehow, the overwhelming online hate against Lively masked the initial clue of contention: the fact that all the cast members had unfollowed Baldoni, indicating that he was the problem. In her lawsuit, Lively argued that her negative social media narrative was not organic; it was an example of astroturfing done by Baldoni’s crisis PR team.
The Media Manipulation Casebook defines astroturfing as “the strategy by which established, politically motivated groups (such as corporations, interest groups, political campaigns, etc.) impersonate grassroots activist movements for political gain.” Named after synthetic grass, astroturfing mimics grassroots support through reviews, paid actors, social media posts, articles, and other tactics to create the illusion of a popular consensus. It relies on the bandwagon effect, which is a psychological phenomenon that occurs when people do something or adopt certain opinions because a large group of people are doing so.
In the case of the “It Ends With Us” saga, Lively’s lawsuit alleged that Baldoni’s crisis PR team used a contractor that “weaponized a digital army around the country from New York to Los Angeles to create, seed, and promote content that appeared to be authentic on social media platforms and internet chat forms.” Their astroturfing was the artificial spark that led other social media users to hop on the anti-Lively bandwagon, turning Lively from a beloved celebrity to one of the Internet’s hated mean girls.
Melissa Nathan, head of Baldoni’s crisis PR team, was also employed by Johnny Depp during his defamation trial against Amber Heard in 2022. Heard was lambasted on social media, and the immense pro-Depp frenzy arguably influenced the jury’s verdict (since the jury cannot avoid the Internet’s omniscient public opinion). These are two cases where celebrities were publicly destroyed when at odds with individuals using the same PR manager. That’s fishy.
Baldoni’s attorney retaliated by claiming Lively’s accusations were false, and her lawsuit was a “desperate attempt” to repair her reputation. With an imminent countersuit, more will be released in the coming weeks to affect this ever-shifting narrative. But, this lawsuit sheds light on an increasingly important issue that should impact how we all consume media.
Crisis PR emerged as an important area of public relations in the early 1900s. One of the earliest public relations specialists, Ivy Lee, started his career by managing transportation accidents. In response to the Pennsylvania Railroad disaster, where a derailed train killed over 50 people, Lee authored the first corporate press release in 1906.
With more and more corporate catastrophes, from the Three Mile Island disaster to the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill, the crisis communications field grew. In a late-stage-capitalistic manner, crisis PR has flourished into a booming industry with dozens of firms specializing in crisis management for people and corporations alike.
The Agency Group PR (TAG) is Nathan’s PR firm. According to the firm’s website, TAG “redefines the rules of reputation management.” On their list of services, TAG offers messaging and narrative development, media relationships, search engine optimization, and digital and social strategy. At TAG, “it’s more than just creating a powerful narrative – it’s knowing how to navigate that narrative towards continued success and a lasting legacy.”
As highlighted in TAG’s website, the bulk of public relations is about spinning a narrative. It involves laundering the truth into a story that supports the client’s side. In a social media landscape shaped by cancel culture, crisis PR managers like Nathan aim to commodify morality.
To hide Baldoni’s alleged inappropriate behavior on set, through messaging, Justin was framed as a moral hero. To viewers, Baldoni was the sole cast member to market the movie ‘correctly’ by leading with the fact that it is about domestic violence. Lively was the villain for treating the movie like a rom-com, even though unbeknownst to viewers that was the official marketing plan for the movie. Lively used her and her husband’s A-list power to dominate production, making Baldoni the poor underdog. Lively is just a terrible person–did you see when she rebutted an innocent interviewer's question and essentially called her fat?
Look, those interview videos were bad. No one is denying that they don’t exist. But, the smear campaign shows a lack of regular karmic retribution. Lively’s bad moments were amplified way beyond what is necessary or valid for typical rude behavior.
This type of planted content works so well because these PR specialists are like psychological and sociological experts. They know the ‘woke mob’ will rally behind a feminist cause of respectful rhetoric regarding domestic violence media. Simultaneously, they know how misogynistic the Internet is, and how quickly users will want to take down a woman for being a ‘mean girl.’
A particularly sinister messaging proposal from Nathan was to “explore planting stories about the weaponization of feminism.” It is a smart move because society is eager to conclude that women use movements like Me Too ‘unnecessarily.’ But, this proposal is coming from the defense of Baldoni, a man who has a feminist podcast called “Man Enough” about the toxicity of gender roles. To give you a taste, a recent episode is titled, “Strength in Unity: Men Supporting Women in Leadership.” Guess those sentiments only count for women in leadership who won’t expose harassment…
It is important to emphasize that as of now, all of Lively’s accusations are alleged. They have not been proven true in court, and more information will likely come out against both parties. Baldoni is rebutting that Lively’s publicist planted stories and was responsible for smears against him. As the classic adage goes, there are three sides to every story.
But, this whole situation proves how gullible we are to these types of PR narratives, especially now that this saga is turning into a war of who smeared first. Manipulation of public opinion is not new, but this conflict underscores how influential astroturfing can be and how it is slipping under the cracks of scrutiny.
If we can be swayed so viscerally by Hollywood astroturfing, imagine how influential it is in our political world. Because of the 2010 Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the federal government cannot limit independent expenditures from corporations and special interest groups. This permitted dark money can be spent on astroturfing efforts, using immense funds to push political agendas.
Most people understand that fake news exists, and can recognize to some level shady articles or comments by bots. But, when this planted content is a TikTok video with a face or a Reddit post from someone with history, it seems more authentic. Sharyl Attkisson in a 2015 Ted Talk aptly described how digital astroturfing creates “a Truman show-esque alternate reality all around you.”
This legal battle is just another reminder of the recurring lesson to question popular opinion and convention. If there is an inordinate amount of hate or support for one particular person or thing, then maybe think critically about how that consensus was formed. Unless it’s overwhelming support for my Substack, of course (wink wink).