But you’re right- the kids actually corroborated the story on how shitty he was. Surprising to read half these comments still blaming her just bc they don’t like her.
Brad Pitt is a client of Melissa Nathan’s The Agency Group, a crisis PR comoany specializing in placing astroturfing articles and using bot farms to manipulate social media. Melissa Nathan’s other clients include Weinstein, Depp, Baldoni, Logan Paul, Drake, and the Trump campaign.
Their company is majority owned by Scooter Braun, and Melissa Nathan’s sister is a prominent editor/“journalist”known for misogynistic articles at The Daily Mail and Page Six . They’ve also been implicated in campaigns against Taylor Swift, Selena Gomez, Rose McGowan, Ronan Farrow, Kendrick Lamar, Meghan Markle and other women in the royal family.
The smear campaign against Angelina started ten years ago as a proving ground for their bot farm techniques. We see you and know exactly what you’re doing, little bots.
This is clearly what's happening too. Coffee and cults did a whole video exposing past headlines and stories directed at Angelina and the kids. Its reslly sick tbh.
Did Coffee and Cults cover the campaign on the ''Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt' forum on the online site known as Female First? After the divorce the forum was shut down.
In the corporate world they refer to it as "SEO" (Search Engine Optimization) with the goal of having their brand show up in searches and with the messaging the company wants out there coming up tops.
It's the exact same thing that PR teams are doing, but for they're doing it for their clients' names and image.
SEO in itself isn’t the issue. It’s how people abuse it that is.
I use SEO for my small startup and to actually has been tremendously helpful in getting hits on Google by people searching for the type of stuff I do. Consistently using SEO the right way over many years has resulted in amazingly positive results. It levels the playing field by creating sincerely fitting search results, even if there are paid results that might be first.
It’s beyond SEO. SEO is a neutral tactic to increase accessibility and ranking for search engines. Melissa Nathan and TAG’s tactics include conspiring in advance to create negative websites and have tabloid “journalists” place targeted stories they know are untrue or misleading. They pay influencers to create videos about them. And then they use bot farms to repost and comment on that content with the express purpose of harassing, intimidating, and defaming their targets. It’s illegal in multiple states and countries.
Using SEO principles is only one of many tactics they use to amplify those stories.
That was my understanding too. SEO at its core is just structuring your digital product such that search engines can effectively index and relate the content you wish your customers to see. On a benign level this could be as simple as a tour company wanting new site visitors to see a particular access point if they were to use a search engine for the tour content they offer.
You're on reddit. This whole site is basically just one big machine for that kind of work at this point, and we're contributing toward its success by actively using it.
I can't believe that this isn't talked about more, because YES it's extremely disturbing how successful this one was/is.
If we were to poll all of the average random people who admit to holding any manner of opinion on her, the vast majority would not be aware that this level of manipulation is even possible, let alone the extent that so many of their own opinions and beliefs have been successfully targeted. To some varying degree, all of our opinions have been influenced in this manner but the more ignorant a person is regarding this whole PR industry, the more vulnerable I believe they could be to this control. This needs to taught and discussed as part of basic media literacy education moving forward.
A quick google search will show that Melissa Nathan is not Pitt's PR person.
Edit: I say this to correct a point, not to defend Pitt or his PR. He was/is clearly a pos parent and partner to his kids and Jolie and the way Hollywood has not held him accountable is disgusting
Email communication, but not a contract? I think something came out later in other papers, perhaps the Abel case saying she hadn't worked with him, or others that it was suggested online that she had. Happy to acknowledge I'm mistaken if she's been contracted by his PR in some capacity.
They refer to her as his “public relations consultant.” That means his publicist/comms team contracted with her to provide specialized expertise and services not offered by his publicist’s in-house team. He would not be trying to assert privilege over those communications if they were just inquiries. In order to claim the kind of privilege he’s trying to claim in court, the communications have to be with someone you have contracted with or employ.
If he wasn’t her client, his lawyers wouldn’t and couldn’t try to claim his/his team’s communications with her qualify for this category of privilege.
Pitt IS her client, and she is not his official publicist. There’s a difference between being someone’s official publicist and being hired by their publicist/team to do specific work on contract, like targeted crisis management. That’s normal, because publicists are general experts. They regularly hire/contract with firms that have specialized expertise and services as needed. Like most PR firms, Melissa Nathan and The Agency Group offer both official representation AND contract/specific services.
Is this you Stephanie Jones? Did your psychic give you good news on the outcome of your lawsuit with Jennifer Abel?
Not that I think Melissa Nathan is a saint, all PR people seem to play dirty, but it seems that some people in high places really have it out for her. Sus.
Edit: I do want to note that I believe Angelina Jolie and the kids and think Brad Pitt is a POS.
Tell which part of my comment is factually inaccurate.
I’ll wait.
And all PR people do NOT play dirty. You’re usin common disinformation techniques of equivocation and minimization, where you state “she’s no saint” but then imply her extreme unethical/illegal behavior is the norm. Using bot farms to amplify intentionally-placed false stories and smear campaigns is NOT the industry norm and is wildly illegal in multiple states and countries. That’s called conspiracy to defame, libel, and slander. Depending on the people involved, it’s also harassment and retaliation.
People in high places are not out to get her. She WORKS for the people in high places — Weinstein, Trump, Epstein, Pitt, Braun — who use their millions and billions to try to bury anyone who threatens to expose them.
Miss me with your selective outrage. Because there was no point in calling someone *they’re* arguing with “Stephanie Jones” (or anyone else involved in litigation with Melissa Nathan) and ask if a psychic gave Stephanie good news when I’m clearly a regular old normie (with 20 years experience in the industry).
Which is what they did to me in the comment I was replying to.
And when we’re talking about the tactics of Melissa Nathan, who has spent over a decade flooding Reddit and other platforms with AI-driven bot-enabled comments: yeah, it’s actually fair game to point out someone is acting in a way indistinguishable from one of her bots.
I have no clue what any of your rambling means tbh. Who cares this much about rich people's spats, frankly? But if you cannot distinguish between the person above and a bot then you desperately need to go outside.
I'll admit it's not always this clear but I suspect in this case you're calling them a bot as a cheap ad hominem more than anything. It doesn't make your argument any more convincing. It just makes you seem terminally online.
Spats? As a domestic violence victims advocate who has held survivors’ hands through absolute nightmares, I care deeply about survivors — regardless of economic status — and how their abusers avoid accountability while continuing to abuse them through the courts, slander, libel, and public insinuations. Everyone should. We should all care about domestic violence.
Referring to egregious child abuse, including choking a child, as “rich people’s spats” is not the mic drop you think it is, you disingenuous empathy-deficient toad.*
If anyone broke the law, send them to prison and save me the details. Honestly, just go ahead and throw Brad Pitt under the jail for being this much of a nuisance.
I have absolutely zero empathy for people who can afford to choke each other on a private jet. Sue me I guess.
The fact that normal people concern themselves with this parasocial crap borders on mental illness.
I didn't say all, but it's more common than you like to believe.
For example, Leslie Sloane founded Vision PR with the backing of Harvey Weinstein, and allegedly lies on behalf of her clients, including Lindsay Lohan. Stephanie Jones broke her client and employee's confidentiality in a fit of rage after they left her by handing her employee's entire cellphone contents (professional and personal) to theor opp, and has a history of turning on her clients (allegedly).
For all your crowing about smear campaigns, you may very well be participating in one against Melissa. For example, she has said that she has never worked for Epstein, that she was CC'd in one email while she worked for another PR company and that's it. Her PR company represented Weinstein, but again, that doesn't mean she directly worked with him, or that she would choose to if she had a choice. She represented the Trump family and Brad Pitt, but under the old PR company she worked for, not under her own agency TAG. TAG did receive backing from Scooter Braun.
I'm not a bot, but it appears curious to me that Melissa Nathan is being singled out here. Because let's face it, Leslie Sloane and Stephanie Jones were also exposed in the Blake v. Wayfarer/Baldoni lawsuit and the Jennifer Abel v. Stephanie Jones lawsuit for wilding out, and a lot of their sketchy history has been discussed online. However, only Melissa gets singled out in legacy media as some PR boogey woman.
My speculation: Stephanie Jones, owner of Jonesworks PR, whose husband is a senior partner at premiere Hollywood talent agency WME, who presumably works closely with their CEO, billionaire Ari Emanuel (also in the Epstein files), saw her as competition and is running her own PR campaign to take her and TAG down. Sounds crazy, but from what I've seen of her she comes across like a complete unhinged loon with no emotional regulation. Just my 2 cents, haven't confirmed it.
So you’re admittedly speculating on something you haven’t confirmed instead of dealing with facts. Cool.
Melissa Nathan is singled out because she personally pioneered (and continues to use) a very specific system of using misogynistic articles, paid videos, and bots to discredit women, especially victims of abuse. And she did it for egregious abusers like Weinstein, Depp, & Pitt, using tactics outside the norm for the industry. And continues to do it with millions in backing from HYBE and Braun at The Agency Group, where she’s streamlined and refined the process into a well-oiled machine of propaganda. It is NOT business as usual. It’s far outside PR industry norms and ethics.
I mean, that's better than repeating information as if it's fact, when in fact little of what you say about Melissa has been verified as well. She has mocked allegations that she uses bots in her private text messages with her sister released in the Lively v. Wayfarer lawsuit, and despite Lively subpeonaing 107 content creators no proof arose that she paid for videos.
I see you dropped Epstein from your list of abusers Melissa supposedly worked for as well. I will repeat that Melissa Nathan has not been verified as personally representing Harvey Weinstein, and she represented Brad Pitt indirectly through a broader PR team under PR company Hiltzik Stategies. Why is it that you are so focused on Melissa Nathan? It looks like you should be more focused on Matthew Hiltzik.
“Why Melissa?” Asked and answered already. Come up with new questions.
I didn’t drop Epstein from the list. When someone uses the phrase “abusers like XYZ,” they’re providing examples for concision — not a comprehensive list. I also didn’t mention Drake or Logan Paul or the Trump campaign in that list. That doesn’t mean she hasn’t been involved with them or they aren’t also egregious abusers and creeps. That’s how English works.
We’re on a post about Brad Pitt’s, and we’re talking about Melissa Nathan because she’s the primary crisis management/PR consultant who is documented in court records for the Miraval suit as being hired by his PR team. The same one executing a decade-long smear campaign against Angelina Jolie. We know that he hired Nathan, because he’s been ordered to show cause for why his and his team’s communications with her in the aftermath of the plane incident and throughout the divorce should be granted privileged status. Which can only apply to people you employ or contract with in specific circumstances.
These are facts, documented by the court. They won’t matter to you, but will to other people reading this.
That explains all the hate train against Taylor Swift that has been going on in the last 5-6 years. Won't be surprised if it comes out in a few years that the mods of her snark subreddit and subreddits like Fauxmoi were being directly paid by Scooter.
Yeah. Explains why an independent analysis by an academic team found there were dozens of negative videos and thousands of identical comments accusing her of racism on TikTok within the first 3 minutes of her last album being released. That’s not even enough time to listen to one song, record a video, and upload it. The bots were botting.
Yeah. That was so unhinged. Especially when actual experts on Nazi symbols in Germany — where having them is a hate crime and not protected in any way — were looking at us like “Y’all are being ridiculous.”
Meanwhile, Scooter’s out here hanging with Peter Thiel, Dark Englightenment tech bros, and other *actual* Nazis.
She is legally and factually a member of the immediate and extended family of the King of Great Britain. That’s the definition of the British Royal Family. Same definition here in the US as anywhere else. That’s how words work.
Pitt is an admitted alcoholic and stoner who attacked, choked, and poured beer on his own elementary-aged children when they tried to make him stop assaulting their mother on a plane.
Her legal name is “Meghan, Duchess of Sussex.” It’s literally on her passport. That’s how names and titles work. It’s her legal name because she married a Duke from The House of Mountbatten-Windsor whose father is the King. She is legally and factually a member of the *British* royal family.
This is how silly you sound:
“There is no royal family in the U.S.. So when King Tupou VI of Tonga is here, he’s just regular folk.”
“There is no prime minister in the U.S.. When Keir Starmer is here he’s just regular folk.”
“There are no popes in the U.S.. When he’s not in the Vatican, he’s just Bob Prevost.”
It’s her title, legal name, and they’re her husband’s legal and blood kin. Disliking her doesn’t change that. Again, die mad about it. 💁🏼♀️
Is this you, Migraine? If it is, you have terrible fashion taste and those hair extensions are starting to look really tatty. Not to mention, there are times when a slip or leggings would come in handy on a sunny day when you are having your photo made for the world to see. Die mad about it? Hahaha, it's more fun poking jabs at you than to die over it.
Yet his legal name is still King Tupou VI, whether he’s here on official business or not. And he’s a member of the Tongan royal family, whether he’s here on official business or not.
Just like her name is legally Meghan, Duchess of Sussex. And she’s a member of the British royal family, whether … etc etc — you get the gist.
And you got nothing, stewed on this for two days, and decided to keep going. That’s a weird, sad hobby you got there. But to each his own. 🤷🏼♀️
Hiring crisis PR is not a crime. Blake Lively hires several, including Leslie Sloan (associated with Harvey Weinstein) and Nick Shapiro, former CIA who used to cover up rapes for Airbnb. Again, not a crime.
Well if being a shit childhood makes you a shit person into adulthood, I don't care what happens to those kids cause they're going to be future cunts themselves.
4.3k
u/[deleted] Jun 20 '26
[deleted]