Jump to content

Streisand effect

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by PJonDevelopment (talk | contribs) at 04:41, 30 November 2010 (→Examples: fixing BRL representation). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

The Streisand effect is a primarily online phenomenon in which an attempt to hide or remove a piece of information has the unintended consequence of causing the information to be publicized widely and to a greater extent than would have occurred if no contrary action had been attempted. It is named after American entertainer Barbra Streisand, following a 2003 incident in which her attempts to suppress photographs of her residence inadvertently generated further publicity.

As early as 1993, John Gilmore observed that "the Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it."[1] Examples of such attempts include actions against photographs, numbers, files or websites (for example via a cease-and-desist letter). Instead of being suppressed, the information receives extensive publicity, often being widely mirrored across the Internet or distributed on file-sharing networks.[2][3]

Origin

File:Barbrahouse1.jpg
The image of Streisand's house which led to the controversy giving the effect its name.

Mike Masnick originally coined the term Streisand effect in reference to a 2003 incident in which Barbra Streisand unsuccessfully attempted to sue photographer Kenneth Adelman and Pictopia.com for US$50 million in an attempt to have the aerial photograph of her mansion removed from the publicly available collection of 12,000 California coastline photographs, citing privacy concerns.[2][4][5] Adelman stated that he was photographing beachfront property to document coastal erosion as part of the California Coastal Records Project.[6] As a result of the case, public knowledge of the picture increased substantially and it became popular on the Internet, with more than 420,000 people visiting the site over the following month.[7]

Examples

  • In April 2007, an attempt at blocking an AACS key from being disseminated on Digg caused an uproar when cease-and-desist letters demanded the code be removed from several high-profile websites. This led to the key's proliferation across other sites and chat rooms in various formats, with one commentator describing it as having become "the most famous number on the internet." Within a month, the key had been reprinted on over 280,000 pages, printed on T-shirts and tattoos, and had appeared on YouTube in a song played over 45,000 times.[8][9][10]
  • On 5 December 2008, the Internet Watch Foundation (IWF) added the Wikipedia article about the 1976 Scorpions album Virgin Killer to a child pornography blacklist, considering the album's cover art "a potentially illegal indecent image of a child under the age of 18."[12][16] The article quickly became one of the most popular pages on the site,[17] and the publicity surrounding the censorship resulted in the image being spread across other sites.[18] The IWF were later reported on the BBC News website to have said "IWF's overriding objective is to minimise the availability of indecent images of children on the internet, however, on this occasion our efforts have had the opposite effect."[19] This effect was also noted by the IWF in their statement about the removal of the URL from the blacklist.[20][21]
  • In September 2009, the Photoshop Disasters blog posted an advertisement from Polo Ralph Lauren that contained a heavily manipulated image of a female model. The post was subsequently reprinted by BoingBoing.[22] Ralph Lauren issued DMCA takedown notices to BoingBoing's ISP and Blogspot, which hosts Photoshop Disasters, claiming their use of the image infringed copyright. Blogspot complied, but BoingBoing's ISP consulted with BoingBoing and agreed the image was fair use. As a result, BoingBoing issued a mocking rebuttal,[23] using the same image again and posting the takedown notice. The rebuttal was widely reported, including on frequently viewed websites such as The Huffington Post[24] and ABC News.[25]
  • In November 2009, Wolfgang Werlé and Manfred Lauber, convicted for the murder of Walter Sedlmayr, demanded their names be removed from an article on the German language Wikipedia due to German laws. The German Wikipedia complied, but the information was widely publicized as a result.[26] In the following few days, the visits to the page on the English Wikipedia increased from approximately 20 a day to over 10,000.[27]
  • In December 2009, Ted Alvin Klaudt, a former South Dakota state legislator convicted of raping his two foster daughters, attempted to claim "copyright" on his name and demanded it not appear in any news articles. His demand was publicized and quickly spread to several major websites, increasing his exposure to the public.[28][dead link][29]
  • In January 2010, an Australian Aboriginal man named Steven Hodder-Watts drew controversy when he successfully sued Google to remove links to the satirical page on his race on Encyclopedia Dramatica. After Google removed them, the search term that Hodder-Watt had used instead linked to 300,000 other results, all news services providing links to the offending article.[30]
  • In February 2010 Cryptome.org posted a copy of Microsoft's "Global Criminal Compliance Handbook", which outlines procedures to take with law enforcement in regards to user information. Microsoft then issued a DMCA take-down notice to Cryptome's hosting provider, Network Solutions. As a result, Cryptome was taken down. Several mirrors went up of the document and it has been distributed widely among the Internet along with similar documents from entities such as Facebook, PayPal, and Comcast. Microsoft has since withdrawn the take-down notice and Cryptome is back up.[31]
  • During the 2010 FIFA World Cup, FIFA attempted to block a marketing campaign by the Bavaria Brewery, claiming it violated the rights of their partner Budweiser. They took legal action against Bavaria and a group of women who attended the stadium wearing orange dresses supplied by the company. This backfired on them, as the lawsuit became a cause célèbre and an unsuspected amount of worldwide coverage was generated in print media, websites and blogs, featuring pictures of the girls and generating an outstanding amount of publicity for the brand. The story became viral and just a few days after the match, there were thousands of posts on Twitter with the #Bavaria tag, as well as many other negative ones with the #Budweiser tag. Facebook groups were also created in support of the brand. The Lost Agency estimates that the brand reached an audience of over 25 million people on the press alone, without considering the impact of social networks.[32]
  • On October 5, 2010, Xuxa, a famous Brazilian presenter for kids and also an actress, sued Google over an action tried in Rio de Janeiro. The action claimed that Google should suppress all results including the actress, and the Brazilian word equivalent to "pedophilia". She won the action and the judge issued that Google would have a fine in the value of R$ 20,000 for each "positive result" (links). The reason behind this process is because she had roles in the past on movies including a 12 years old child, also she has some nude pictures widely over the internet. As a result she got her name published in major portals in the Brazilian media, publishing the keywords "Xuxa pedófila". Google claims not being capable to remove the references.[33]
  • On October 15, 2010, Adam Josephs of the Toronto Police Services filed a 1.2 million dollar lawsuit against Google for alleged defamation in the form of satire cartoons and 25 individual user comment on YouTube, which Google owns. The cartoon 'Officer Bubbles' was widely circulated inside the G20 activist crowd but otherwise had little public exposure. Following the filing of this lawsuit, news outlets world-wide picked up the story, most with the term "Officer Bubbles" in the headline instead of Josephs' real name. This mainstream exposure has in turn made the cartoon even more popular, with re-posts and mirrors going up within hours of the announcement. In Canada the "Streisand effect" can now be referred to as "The Bubble Effect" [34]

See also

References

  1. ^ Philip Elmer-Dewitt (6 December 1993). "First Nation in Cyberspace". Time magazine. Retrieved 2009-12-26.
  2. ^ a b Canton, David. "Today's Business Law: Attempt to suppress can backfire", London Free Press, November 5, 2005. Retrieved July 21, 2007. The "Streisand effect" is what happens when someone tries to suppress something and the opposite occurs. The act of suppressing it raises the profile, making it much more well known than it ever would have been".
  3. ^ Mugrabi, Sunshine. "YouTube—Censored? Offending Paula Abdul clips are abruptly taken down.[dead link], Red Herring (magazine), January 22, 2007. Retrieved July 21, 2007. "Another unintended consequence of this move could be that it extends the kerfuffle over Ms. Abdul’s behavior rather than quelling it. Mr. Nguyen called this the "Barbra Streisand effect", referring to that actress’s insistence that paparazzi photos of her mansion not be used".
  4. ^ Josh Bernoff (2008). Groundswell: Winning in a World Transformed by Social Technologies. Boston, Mass: Harvard Business School Press. p. 7. ISBN 1-4221-2500-9. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthor= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  5. ^ Since When Is It Illegal to Just Mention a Trademark Online?, techdirt.com
  6. ^ "Barbra Sues Over Aerial Photos | [[The Smoking Gun]]". The Smoking Gun. 2003-05-30. Retrieved 2010-11-22. {{cite web}}: URL–wikilink conflict (help)
  7. ^ Rogers, Paul (2003-06-24). "Photo of Streisand home becomes an Internet hit". San Jose Mercury News, mirrored at californiacoastline.org. Retrieved 2007-06-15.
  8. ^ Andy Greenberg (May 11, 2007). "The Streisand Effect". Forbes. Retrieved 2008-02-29. The phenomenon takes its name from Barbra Streisand, who made her own ill-fated attempt at reining in the Web in 2003. That's when environmental activist Kenneth Adelman posted aerial photos of Streisand's Malibu beach house on his Web site as part of an environmental survey, and she responded by suing him for $50 million. Until the lawsuit, few people had spotted Streisand's house, Adelman says--but the lawsuit brought more than a million visitors to Adelman's Web site, he estimates. Streisand's case was dismissed, and Adelman's photo was picked up by the Associated Press and reprinted in newspapers around the world.
  9. ^ Brad Stone (May 3, 2007). "How a Number Became the Latest Web Celebrity". New York Times. Retrieved 2008-02-29. Sophisticated Internet users have banded together over the last two days to publish and widely distribute a secret code used by the technology and movie industries to prevent piracy of high-definition movies.
  10. ^ kdawson (May 1, 2007). "Digg.com Attempts To Suppress HD-DVD Revolt". Retrieved 2007-05-01.
  11. ^ Mathew Ingram (January 19, 2008). "Scientology vs. the Internet, part XVII". The Globe & Mail. Retrieved 2008-01-19.
  12. ^ a b Arthur, Charles (2009-03-20). "The Streisand effect: Secrecy in the digital age". The Guardian. London. Retrieved 2010-03-31.
  13. ^ "The Streisand Effect: When Internet Censorship Backfires | Complex Blog". Complex.com. 2009-07-24. Retrieved 2010-04-27.
  14. ^ "What is 'The Streisand Effect'?". The Daily Telegraph. London. 2009-01-31. Retrieved 2010-03-31.
  15. ^ "Church of Scientology warns Wikileaks over documents". Wikinews. 4 July 2008.
  16. ^ Schofield, Jack (8 December 2008). "Wikipedia page censored in the UK for 'child pornography'". The Guardian. London: Guardian Media Group. Retrieved 9 December 2008.
  17. ^ Cade Metz (December 7, 2008). "Brit ISPs censor Wikipedia over 'child porn' album cover". The Register. Retrieved 2008-12-09.
  18. ^ Moses, Asher (December 8, 2008). "Wikipedia added to child pornography blacklist". Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved 2008-12-09.
  19. ^ "IWF backs down on Wiki censorship". BBC News Online. December 9, 2008. Retrieved 2008-12-09.
  20. ^ "Living with the Streisand Effect". International Herald Tribune. 2008-12-26. Retrieved 2008-12-29.
  21. ^ "IWF statement regarding Wikipedia webpage". Internet Watch Foundation. December 9, 2008. Retrieved 2008-12-09.
  22. ^ "Ralph Lauren opens new outlet store in the Uncanny Valley". Boing boing. 29 September 2009.
  23. ^ "The criticism that Ralph Lauren doesn't want you to see!". Boing boing. 6 October 2009.
  24. ^ "Boing Boing And Ralph Lauren Clash Over Image Of Emaciated Model". Huffington Post. 6 October 2009.
  25. ^ "11 Photo-Editing Flubs: Ralph Lauren Ad Sparks Controversy". ABC News.
  26. ^ Two German Killers Demanding Anonymity Sue Wikipedia’s Parent, New York Times, 12 November 2009
  27. ^ "Wikipedia article traffic statistics". Stats.grok.se. Retrieved 2010-04-27.
  28. ^ Ex-Lawmaker Convicted of Rape: Name Is Copyrighted, The New York Times, December 16, 2009 [dead link]
  29. ^ "Rapist, former lawmaker Ted Klaudt claims name copyright". Rapid City Journal. Rapid City, South Dakota: Lee Enterprises. 2009-12-15. Retrieved 2010-03-21.
  30. ^ "AdelaideNow... Google blocks links to Encyclopedia Dramatica Aborigine page". www.news.com.au. Retrieved 2010-01-25.[dead link]
  31. ^ "Cryptome Gets Back Online After Microsoft Takes Back Complaint | TopNews United States". Topnews.us. 2010-02-27. Retrieved 2010-04-27.
  32. ^ "Dutch mini skirt marketers 1, South African police 0". theglobeandmail.com. Retrieved 2010-06-17.
  33. ^ "Google diz que não é capaz de apagar páginas sobre Xuxa da web". http://g1.globo.com/. Retrieved 2010-10-14. {{cite web}}: External link in |publisher= (help)
  34. ^ "Officer Bubbles Sues To Find Out Identity Of Anonymous YouTubers". http://www.techdirt.com/. Retrieved 2010-10-15. {{cite web}}: External link in |publisher= (help)
Look up streisand effect in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Streisand_effect&oldid=399657692"