In 2012, Taylor Swift infamously told one of her exes, through song, We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together. Might her current football beau Travis Kelce be facing similar rejection? That’s the furious gossip sparked by what we now know is almost certainly a fake “leaked” document, created to look as though it was drawn up by Kelce’s PR team, Full Scope. Supposedly purporting to set out an agreed media strategy for announcing their split later this month, the contract initially looked convincing enough to get tongues wagging – although loyal Swift fans refused to believe it.

The document is titled “Comprehensive Media Plan for Travis Kelce’s Public Relations Following Breakup With Taylor Swift” and the stated objective is to “effectively manage and mitigate the fallout” from the breakup, ensuring that Kelce “retains a positive public image, minimises negative media portrayal, and continues to build his personal and professional brand”.

According to the document, an official announcement about the breakup would be made on September 28 2024. The key messages to impart to the media include, emphasising that this was a “mutual” decision, stressing Kelce’s “commitment to his career”, and framing the split as “a natural part of life”.

An example of the preferred wording is given: “Travis and Taylor have decided to part ways after careful consideration. They both value and respect each other’s personal lives and appreciate your respect for privacy during this time. They are both committed to their careers and personal growth. They remain friends and wish each other the best.”

Swift and Kelce, a tight end for the Kansas City Chiefs, began dating in 2023 and have been dubbed “America’s royal couple”. Interest in their pairing led to record NFL viewership and ticket and merchandise sales – one sports marketing company estimated that the Chiefs had gained $331.5 million (£252.2 million) in value – and Kelce has delighted fans with his appearances on Swift’s mammoth tour.

A representative for the Los Angeles-based firm has been swift to respond, saying that the pages are “entirely false and fabricated and were not created, issued or authorised by this agency”. The representative added: “We have engaged our legal team to initiate proceedings against the individuals or entities responsible for the unlawful and injurious forgery of documents.”

So how do celebrity couples manage the fall-out when a relationship hits the buffers?

Lawyer Mark Stephens, a partner at Howard Kennedy, whose clients have included many high-profile celebrities and sportspeople, can understand some of the wording used by those behind the contract hoax.

“Couples who are together long-term, like David and Victoria Beckham, often coordinate their PR strategies,” explains Stephens, “so they can be marketed as a unit.” If a couple breaks up, “it’s much better to agree how to frame it. If it becomes a pissing contest, it gets ugly for both of them and damages their brands,” he says.

“Everybody is usually keen to put a brave face on it. What celebrities are doing is amplifying a fairly normal conversation couples have when they break up, the kind of thing you say to friends and relatives. Celebrities have painful breakups too – and it’s worse dealing with the fallout in the public eye.”

This is why the hoaxers would have used the phrase ‘mutual decision’. “It’s better if everyone comes out of it looking good and keeping their dignity, rather than having villains and victims,” says Stephens. Likewise, setting a time to make the coordinated announcement (which, in the invented document, is listed as September 28). For example, comedians Lucy Beaumont and Jon Richardson announced their divorce in a carefully worded joint statement on their Instagram accounts in April 2023.

Swift, of course, has become renowned for using her relationships as fodder for her songs, which is perhaps why Kelce’s team might be eager to make a pre-emptive bid to protect their client’s reputation should the couple ever split.

It’s certainly plausible that he would want it to be framed as amicable – so that the Swifties don’t come for him – and as a joint decision, rather than a humiliating dumping – since Swift is seen as the more powerful figure in the relationship. This is perhaps why the scammers emphasised Kelce’s “ongoing achievements in the sports industry”.

Stephens says it wouldn’t be unusual “for lawyers and PRs to sit down together to sketch out and agree those sorts of terms and messaging”.

Could such an agreement actually be legally enforceable? “Yes, in theory one person could be in breach of contract,” says Stephens. “The problem is that if you sue, there will be a court case that amplifies the whole thing – which is bad publicity.”

It’s dicier if there’s a status mismatch in the pairing, he points out, like a rock star getting together with a groupie. “I have been in a situation where a very well-known, very wealthy celebrity got together with a partner who was not so wealthy, and week one we worked out the deal we were going to give the partner. Then we sat them down and said, “Sign here, you get that” – it’s usually a generous offer so that you keep the dirty laundry out of the public domain. You want to control the messaging.”

Public relations consultant Mark Borkowski observes that someone could easily put together a plausible-seeming document like this since there’s plenty online about both Swift and Kelce’s PR machines. “Of course he’s got agents and a team, and to run a career as an A-lister she’s got mountains of advisors.”

Elements like the section on how Kelce would be given media training and talking points ahead of interviews are pretty standard in the industry: every modern celebrity goes through such training.

However, Borkowski says it’s unlikely that a PR company would lay out their entire strategy in this way. “You don’t put all that down in paper – you wouldn’t go into that sort of detail. Each party would just have their various teams leap into action, and the rest would be discussed internally.

He is also dubious that a separation agreement would be settled in these terms in real life, with all the gentle language around “respect for each other’s personal lives”. Borkowski says: “Usually in a breakup both parties want to get their side of the story out there first, so they leak it and all hell breaks loose. It’s very rare that they would agree on a split like this, in such a harmonious way.”

He adds that there’s an exception if, unlike Swift and Kelce, you’re dealing with more of a constructed relationship – “where two celebrities are together for the good of their brands.

“There are a lot of showmances out there, particularly in the influencer community. People like to buy into those stories.”

Such faked romances are certainly not a new phenomenon in the entertainment business, points out Borkowski. “You can look back to the Golden Age of Hollywood and their spin masters: Howard Strickling was the doyen. They would construct showmances to cover up an actor’s homosexuality or infidelity, or the studio would put two stars together to sell a movie. Then obliging diarists like Louella Parsons would break the story. Now, Strickling and Parsons have become Reddit and social media.”

Instead of gushing words about silver-screen Hollywood legends and their fairytale lives, the modern equivalent is earnest wellness-speak (which the fake document has made hay with, stating that following this fictional post-breakup, Kelce is now “focussing on personal development, self-improvement, and resilience”).

Travis has had to furiously deny his relationship with Swift is a showmance, and his agency has denounced the document as “entirely false and fabricated”. But, Jack Ketsoyan, one of Kelce’s representatives at Full Scope, has publicly admitted to setting up fake romances between clients in the past. Speaking on Australian podcast The Quicky in 2019, Ketsoyan claimed he had put together at least two famous couples purely for the publicity.

In one case, he said, it was a mutual agreement between agents. “We had a male who had a movie coming out and it was getting a lot of bad reviews and slack, and they wanted to take the negativity away and make it more about him.”

The solution? “We found him a girl: a one-year deal. He finished off the press and a little bit after that they went their separate ways.” It worked out well for her too: she “went from being the third-billed” to a leading lady, boasted Ketsoyan.

In such cases, both parties would sign a “love contract”, he added. Celebrity divorce lawyer Christopher C. Melcher, also speaking on the podcast, said that in that kind of contract there would most likely be stipulations as to where and when they’re photographed together – as well as non-disclosure lines governing what can and can’t be said. Melcher declared he had even seen contracts with clauses pertaining to sexual relations, although he noted that “if it was truly an arranged relationship, sex wouldn’t come into it.”

Swift herself was accused of fabricating a romance with actor Tom Hiddleston in 2016, which Hiddleston denied was a publicity stunt. The high-profile pair dated for just three months – but that was long enough to distract attention from her breakup with DJ Calvin Harris.

Ketsoyan has even co-written a novel, Guilty Pleasure, all about a celebrity who starts a fake relationship to drum up positive publicity (with the help of his PR ex) after he gets out of rehab.

Other showmances are just focussed on plugging a product, Ketsoyan admitted. “It’s to be able to sell the hype of it – whether a concert, album, or getting people to go see the movie.”

Jackass star Steve-O claimed that Nicole Richie only dated him as “a big publicity stunt”, calling the paparazzi when they were together, and Nick Lachey has made similar claims about the photographers who suddenly appeared when he went on a date with a then-relatively unknown Kim Kardashian.

However, the trouble in today’s world of fake news and AI is that it’s becoming harder to distinguish between truth and fabrication, laments Borkowski. “That’s the really profound idea at the centre of all this. People will look at this Kelce-Swift document and say ‘There’s smoke here’, and it’s very difficult for their PRs to defend them.

“Especially when you have a huge, powerful fan base like the Swifties, they can have an emotional response to a story: what feels true rather than what is true. It’s easy for someone to take advantage of that and make mischief.”

Swift famously has an iron grip on her brand, music and reputation, even going so far as to re-record her albums with the title addition “Taylor’s Version” after a bitter dispute over her back catalogue. But, thanks to the Wild West of the internet, she and Kelce may find such rumours hard to shake off.