Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce wedding guest denies reports that guests signed NDAs
Dean Blandino says no NDAs were signed at Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce’s wedding despite conflicting reports

Reports surrounding the privacy measures at Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce’s wedding have been questioned after NFL rules analyst Dean Blandino said guests did not sign non-disclosure agreements.
Blandino, who attended the wedding at Madison Square Garden, addressed the claims during an appearance on the Haymaker Network. "There's a lot of rumours. Nobody signed the NDAs. There wasn't any," he said.
The comments follow speculation that attendees were required to sign strict agreements preventing them from discussing the ceremony.
Graham Norton had previously fuelled the reports by saying he had "signed multiple NDAs" to attend, although he later clarified that the comment was intended as a joke.
"I said that as a joke on the podcast… and then it started getting reported as a serious thing in America," Norton told The Independent.
Other reports have presented a different account. Johnathan Thomas said on The Compound and Friends podcast that the wedding invitation required multifactor authentication and an NDA through DocuSign.
TMZ also reported that guests confirming their attendance received a link to sign an agreement restricting them from sharing details.
The differing accounts could reflect separate requirements for different people involved with the event. Reports also suggested that Madison Square Garden employees were subject to confidentiality measures.
Swift and Kelce reportedly married during a 20-minute ceremony attended by more than 1,000 guests, with comedian Adam Sandler officiating.
"(The) wedding was the best night of my life," Kelce said during a recent press interaction. "I appreciate everyone who came out and celebrated and had fun with us. It was a crazy night, it was full of a lot of celebrations."


















COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ