Lanna Hill: Blake Lively’s reputation implosion could have been avoided

If you’re gen Z or a Blake Lively fan, chances are you won’t have missed the recent backlash over the It Ends With Us press tour, a series of unfortunate events (to put it mildly) featuring Lively’s tone-deaf media interviews, juxtaposed with the seriousness of the issue the film is portraying: domestic violence.

The ensuing social media analysis that followed also uncovered Lively’s fairly substantial track record of less than exemplary behaviour, such as her repeated use of transphobic slurs as recently as 2012, or her praise of Woody Allen as “empowering” back in 2016 during the press tour of the director’s film Café Society.

Lively has been called out many times over the past decade, and times have certainly changed significantly since then, and rightfully so. People also make mistakes — but the onus is surely on the individual to take ownership of these mistakes and make amends by at least indicating some intention to educate themselves on how to avoid similar mistakes in the future.

One of the many components of this that isn’t easy to understand is that it had the potential to be so easily avoided.

Celebrities, not unlike politicians or CEOs, are tasked with engaging audiences around a story, a message or an idea. While we certainly expect a higher standard of behaviour from these people, due mainly to the huge sums of money they’re receiving, they are as likely as we are to make the wrong call and say or do the wrong thing.

The question begs: why isn’t sensitivity or media training more common for this tier of leaders, especially given the pace of cultural and linguistic change?

And if not for the reasons of inclusivity, positive societal and cultural change or just the “greater good”, why not to reduce the risk of reputational or commercial damage?

Lively’s film, while initially performing strongly at the box office, has now tanked in the Chinese market — an astonishing result given the popularity of the book sales. Director Justin Baldoni has also squashed questions about Lively reprising her role in the sequel.

It’s a fairly safe bet that we’ll continue to see examples of this, not only in pop culture but also in our workplaces and our governments.

As big legislative changes come into play in Australian workplaces, such as the positive duty to prevent discrimination, harassment, and psychosocial risks, the importance of language and ongoing awareness and education for our leaders will only continue to rise.

From Japanese Formula 1 driver Yuki Tsunoda to the former CEO of Australia’s largest gambling company, Tabcorp, to Pope Francis himself, there is no shortage of examples of prominent figures using language that quite simply doesn’t have a place in 2024.

Surely, at this point, the risk of being cancelled — be it by the trial of public opinion, by a loss of commercial earnings, or by being forced to apologise — the risk of not being informed surely outweighs any reason to support inaction or, worse, ignorance.

Lanna Hill is a strategist, speaker and founder of Leverage Media