After reading both Blake Lively & Justin Baldoni’s lawsuits, here’s my honest take—and why this hits close to home.
When I managed a house of TikTok stars, my job was to enforce the rules: no jumping off the roof into the pool, no stealing, everyone makes the content agreed to. Basic stuff, right?
When I read Baldoni’s lawsuit, it hit close to home.
I’ve been there: labeled a villain in my own story by people I trusted to help build something great.
Here’s what happened:
I built The Kids Next Door, a TikTok house that thrived during the pandemic. My job? Simple. Enforce the rules, make sure everyone created the content they agreed to, and handle the contracts that ensured we all got paid.
But success comes with a target on your back. The influencers didn’t want rules. They didn’t want accountability. They wanted to do the bare minimum, rake in the money, and never honor their agreements.
They wanted to spray paint "Ari is a bitch" all over the walls. Then came the fake victimhood.
At first, they grumbled about me behind closed doors. Then, when the New York Times came to write about our success, it became open war.
The biggest TikTokers in the house started scheming. Their plan? Destroy my reputation. If they made me look like a villain, they wouldn’t have to pay what they owed.
And it worked—for a while. They played up the “Kids” angle, even though most of them were over 21. They sold the idea that I was some evil, power-hungry boss exploiting young creators.
Then Taylor Lorenz got involved. She didn’t care about the truth. She cared about the headline. She cozied up to the influencers, wrote a glowing puff piece to gain their trust, and used it as a springboard to tear me down in the New York Times.
The result? I was painted as the bad guy. But here’s the kicker: while they burned down what we built, they didn’t realize they were torching themselves, too. The TikTokers? Their careers fizzled. Lorenz? She's done.
The influencers sided with NYT and Taylor Lorenz and with the 2 powerful influencers in the house. Once the whispers started, the rest of the influencers didn’t stand a chance. They heard the lies so many times, they started to believe them. And suddenly, anything I did—enforcing rules, asking for what I was owed—became “proof” that I was the villain.
It reminds me of what Baldoni’s going through. Not everyone from This Is Us is lying or bad, but when you hear enough rumors from powerful voices, it’s easy to see how they might think, “Maybe Lively’s right. Maybe Baldoni’s the problem.” People I did so much for unfollowed me too.
When I see Baldoni fighting back, I get it. People don’t realize how easy it is to twist the truth and destroy someone just because they were in charge.
The media? They love to create villains. But what about the protections for people like us? The ones who take risks, build something real, and end up paying the price when others can’t handle it?
Here’s the hard truth: people don’t need proof to believe a story. They just need someone loud enough to tell it.
And sometimes, the person telling it has a bigger motive.
In my case, the influencers didn’t just want me out of the picture—they wanted what I built. They wanted control of the house, the deals, the narrative. They wanted everything I had created without having to work for it.
So they set out to end me.
Is that what’s happening between Lively and Baldoni? Maybe, maybe not. But the timing and intensity of this story make you wonder: does she want something he has?
I hope that’s not the case. And to be fair, there’s no solid proof to suggest that’s what’s happening here—yet.
But it’s a reminder to keep an open mind. Narratives are powerful, and they’re rarely black and white. In situations like these, the loudest voice doesn’t always tell the whole truth.
To clarify: I wasn’t accused of sexual harassment. My situation was different. The accusations against me were about control, contracts, and money. But the pattern is eerily similar: the person in charge—whether it’s Baldoni or me—gets painted as the villain because that’s the story people want to believe.
And as someone who’s sortof been in Baldoni’s shoes, I can tell you this: the truth takes time, but it always comes out. / END
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The Hollywood Reporter tries to both-sides the Blake Lively vs. Justin Baldoni ordeal—while casually smearing an entire religion.
I’m sorry, you can’t accuse someone of SH bc they gave you the ick. 🧵👇🏽
THR suggests the entire controversy might be just a cultural misunderstanding. That Baldoni’s alleged behavior was simply a clash between his Baha’i faith and Hollywood’s post-MeToo workplace norms.
“Could everything that went wrong with the movie actually have been one big cultural misunderstanding?”
🤔
The piece spends an absurd amount of time dissecting Baldoni’s religion—implying his faith is somehow central to the legal battle. Yet Lively’s lawsuit doesn’t mention Baha’i at all.
🚨 Screenshots are being circulated alleging that multiple actresses on It Ends With Us filed HR complaints against Justin Baldoni and that this is Blake Lively's smoking gun.
But let’s actually THINK for a second—because some things aren’t adding up besties. 🧵⬇️
1️⃣ WHAT THE SCREENSHOTS ACTUALLY SAY
The circulating screenshots claim that Sony received additional HR complaints against Baldoni from other actresses on set (possibly Jenny Slate or Isabela Ferrer).
🚨 That’s it. That’s the whole big reveal. 🚨
But let’s ask the obvious questions:
WHERE WERE THESE COMPLAINTS BEFORE?
- Are they even real?
- If they are real, why weren’t they referenced in the CRD or Blake’s lawsuit?
- If multiple people filed complaints before the lawsuit, wouldn’t that have been major evidence in Blake’s case?
Why weren’t these included to bolster her claims?
The math isn’t mathing. 🤨
2️⃣ THIS DIRECTLY CONTRADICTS BRYAN FREEDMAN’S STATEMENT.
Baldoni’s attorney, Bryan Freedman, went on record saying:
🗣️ “Well, remember that there was actually no allegation of sexual harassment until the lawsuit was filed.”
So either:
❌ Freedman lied publicly (unlikely), or
❌ These complaints weren’t filed until AFTER the CRD, meaning they don’t prove anything about Baldoni’s conduct during filming.
If these existed before the lawsuit, why would Freedman be this bold about saying there were no complaints? You think he’d risk that if there was actual documented proof out there?
Let me get this straight…Ashley St. Clair had people running defense for her over a “mean girl” comment—secretly pregnant with Elon’s kid. Now she’s doing a PR tour from a $40K/mo apartment, publicly begging for a response?
The power trip was real. The fall-off is even funnier.
🚨 Candace, Candace, Candace… you were so close. You had it—Taylor Swift’s PR empire, Ronan Farrow playing industry nepo-enforcer, The NYT running protection—but then you lost the plot. 🧵
Justin Baldoni vs. Blake Lively is a textbook NYT takedown—a playbook I know firsthand.
You really think the NYT wouldn’t “risk their reputation” for Blake Lively? Girl. That’s not a risk for them—it’s their entire business model.
The NYT doesn’t make moves based on reputation. They make them based on who benefits.
And trust me, a lot of people benefited from taking down Baldoni.
Let’s explore, shall we?
The NYT got a juicy Hollywood feud to milk for clicks and to keep their “we break every MeToo story” branding alive.
Lively’s publicist took out top entertainment PR heavyweights—Melissa Nathan, Jennifer Abel, and Jed Wallace—some of the biggest names in crisis and Hollywood publicity.
And Taylor Swift? She got to take a jab at Scooter Braun—who just so happens to have funded the crisis PR firm run by Melissa Nathan, one of the key players behind Johnny Depp’s comeback. 🤔
I’m not a gossip reporter. I run a startup, and in 2 weeks I’ve pulled 3 all-nighters covering the Justin Baldoni vs. Blake Lively saga after working my regular day.
Here’s why I’m going to keep covering it—and why you should care. 🧵
Smear campaigns are real. They’re designed to destroy reputations, ruin lives, and shift public opinion.
And while Justin Baldoni is lucky to have a billionaire backing him, most people don’t stand a chance when they’re targeted.
Regular people can’t fight Hollywood power players, PR firms, or media outlets with unlimited budgets. Their only hope?
If YOU, the public, learn how to decipher smear tactics and call them out when you see them.