On August 21st, Stephanie Jones, founder of Jonesworks, called publicist Jen Abel into her office. The two women had been deeply involved in a challenging crisis PR campaign for client Justin Baldoni, the director of “It Ends With Us,” who had been the center of intense media attention due to a rift with the film’s star, Blake Lively. However, Jones had a different agenda that day. She was accompanied by a security guard and an attorney as she informed Abel that she was being let go. Abel was given a document to sign and instructed to surrender her phone. Jones had learned that Abel was planning to leave and start her own firm, a move that had been preceded by the loss of high-profile clients like Dwayne Johnson and Jeff Bezos over the past year.
A few days earlier, Business Insider had published a critical report on Jones, highlighting her reluctance to part ways with departing employees. Months later, the contents of Abel’s phone surfaced in a New York Times article and a complaint filed by Lively against Baldoni with the California Civil Rights Department, alleging sexual harassment and a smear campaign against her.
One intriguing aspect of the case was how Lively’s legal team obtained Abel’s text messages, revealing discussions within Baldoni’s PR team about undermining Lively. Obtaining such messages is usually a lengthy legal process, but Lively’s attorneys claimed to have acquired them through a subpoena to Jonesworks LLC. Jones, still representing Baldoni, remained silent on the matter.
Bryan Freedman, representing Abel, Baldoni, crisis publicist Melissa Nathan, Wayfarer Studios, and others involved, stated that his clients were not subpoenaed and intended to sue Jones. Freedman challenged the allegations, asserting that the complete set of texts proved there was no smear campaign. He invited Variety to review the texts and emails to uncover the truth.
California law permits pre-litigation discovery in certain instances to gather essential evidence before legal proceedings commence.
“I’m not saying you have to file,” stated Nicole Page, a partner at Reavis Page Jump LLP. “Having that information at hand could be crucial when making a decision.”
The complex case has brought attention to crisis publicists, typically operating discreetly but now deeply involved in the unfolding drama, with four different agencies caught up in the whirlwind. Although Lively’s complaint does not mention Jones, Tag PR, another firm, is heavily featured, specifically its founder Nathan, referenced 88 times. Leading up to the release of “It Ends With Us” on August 9, speculation ran rampant on social media regarding a rumored rift between Lively and Baldoni, particularly after fans noted the actor had unfollowed her director on Instagram. Despite Baldoni’s continued collaboration with Jonesworks, the agency enlisted Nathan and Tag, a company associated with Scooter Braun, who manages high-profile clients like Drake, Travis Scott, and Rebel Wilson.
Jones is identified as the sole individual known to have been in possession of Abel’s phone following the dismissal of her subordinate. Some observers find it noteworthy that Lively’s complaint overlooks Jones, despite her involvement in efforts to enhance her client’s reputation during the dispute. Adding to the complexity, Jones is married to Jason Hodes, a partner at talent agency WME, which represents Lively, her husband Ryan Reynolds, and formerly Baldoni, until dropping him as a client post-complaint.
In an email quoted in full by Variety, Jones urged several Wayfarer executives on August 14 to “Prepare Alternate Stories,” emphasizing the need to mobilize a strong support network and third-party advocates to combat the false narratives both on and off the record.
Lively’s team submitted the complaint to the California Civil Rights Department, which has the authority to conduct its own investigation or issue a “right to sue” letter enabling plaintiffs to pursue legal action in civil court. Typically, complaints made to the agency remain confidential unless the complainant opts for public disclosure.
The CRD declined to provide any comments on the ongoing case, stating, “To preserve its integrity, we refrain from commenting on, confirming, or denying any potential or active investigations.”
Lively’s complaint outlines allegations of sexual harassment and retaliation, contending that the orchestrated PR campaign against her was a retaliatory response to her initial harassment claims.
