Bryan Freedman, the legal representative for Baldoni and his production company Wayfarer Studios, has publicly addressed the recent lawsuit filed on behalf of the plaintiffs. In a statement to E! News, he asserted that the New York Times has ?capitulated to the demands of two powerful ?untouchable? elites in Hollywood, showing a blatant disregard for established journalistic principles and ethical standards that the publication once upheld. This situation involves the use of manipulated and altered texts, along with the deliberate exclusion of materials that contradict their preferred public relations narrative.? This critique underscores the ongoing tension between media integrity and the influence of high-profile individuals.
In relation to the legal action against the NYT, Lively’s attorney emphasized to E! News that “This lawsuit does not alter the validity of the claims put forth in Ms. Lively?s complaint filed with the California Civil Rights Department, nor does it impact her federal complaint submitted earlier today.” This statement highlights that the lawsuit’s focus does not detract from the fundamental issues addressed in Lively’s original complaints, which remain a priority in her pursuit of justice.
The attorney further stated, “This lawsuit hinges on the clearly inaccurate assertion that Ms. Lively?s administrative complaint against Wayfarer and others was merely a facade, suggesting a decision ‘not to pursue legal action against Baldoni or Wayfarer,’ and that ‘litigation was never her true objective.’ The filing of the federal complaint earlier today serves as a counterargument to this misleading narrative regarding the Wayfarer lawsuit. While we are committed to not engaging in public discourse about this matter, we invite the public to review Ms. Lively?s complaint in full. We are eager to respond to every allegation made by Wayfarer in a court of law.? This underscores the seriousness with which Lively and her legal team are approaching the case.
E! News has sought a response from The New York Times regarding the lawsuit but has not received any feedback at this time. The lack of communication from the publication raises questions about their stance on the matter and the implications it may have for future reporting.
