Independent Correspondent Kerry Butters takes a look at the so called ‘Streisand Effect’ and the way in which the public now have some say in dictating what is news worthy. Do the public have a greater say in directing what is covered than we think?
The term ‘Streisand Effect’ was coined back in 2003 when Barbara Streisand, the American actress and singer, decided to kick up a fuss after photos of her Malibu home were documented for a coastal erosion project. She did everything in her power to halt the publication, and whilst her efforts were admirable, they unfortunately had the opposite effect. Since then, the term ‘Streisand Effect’ has come in to use whenever a person or business attempts to stop the release of information, with the result being an even higher degree of publicity.
The fact is, as soon as the public gets wind that someone is trying to keep a secret through the courts or other forms of legal action, they invariably become intrigued. So much so that people become far more obsessed with uncovering said secret than they would if it was published without protest in the first place.
The most notable example of this in recent times is that of a high-profile Premiership footballer. The popular player, who despite attempting everything to keep his adulterous behaviour out of the public eye, did nothing more than add fuel to the fire and turned what could have been another sleazy story in a tabloid about a football player cheating into headline news on every channel for weeks on end.
Let’s be honest, the idea of a famous footballer playing away is hardly headline news. This kind of thing is almost expected from those that live in the world of the footballing elite. The best thing the football star could have done is ignore it, let the story be published and wait for everyone to forget it the following day, as they read the latest gossip surrounding another scandal from the realms of the rich and famous. Instead, the solicitor was involved and did everything in his power to keep the star’s name out of the papers. The result was tens of thousands of tweets with his name in them and daily news coverage. Within days, the whole story became a mockery surrounding a football player, whose name everyone knew, but no-one was allowed to say. One newspaper even featured a front page image with his eyes blacked out and the words “censored” written alongside.
The reality is that with the internet being at our disposal there is no sure fire way to keep a secret. While Streisand may not have expected the rise in publicity, you would have to be a fool to think you can achieve a total blackout of information in 2012. The world is full of internet users who see themselves as champions of free information and who will do anything to ensure that anyone attempting to keep a secret predominantly fails.
Another famous example is that of The Pirate Bay, the allegedly illegal file sharing site. Heard of them? Most people have. Ironically this wasn’t the case until the high court ordered British ISPs to block access to the site in a high profile case. Pirate Bay saw an unprecedented rise in visitors to the site. This could be viewed as the Streisand Effect in principle, where the attempt to reduce visitors to a site has the complete opposite effect and a very good illustration that any publicity is good publicity. In the case of Newzbin 2 – the first site was shut down, but they soon replaced it with another one, which was promptly treated to the same blocks as the Pirate Bay.
Whilst The Pirate Bay and Newzbin assert that they themselves are not breaking any Intellectual Property laws, as they don’t physically store files on their servers, governments disagree and the case continues as the owners of The Pirate Bay find various ways around such blocks.
Whilst you may think these high profile stories and their meteoric rise in publicity will serve as fair warning to those looking to seek injunctions, I wouldn’t hold your breath. It’s far more likely that those with money or power will continue to do everything possible to stop the release of information that they would prefer we didn’t see.
It is human nature to want to know exactly what is going on especially when we think it is being withheld from us. You can expect the “Streisand Effect” to continue to embarrass councils, movie stars, sports stars and anyone else in the public eye for as long as they provide the appropriate fodder.
The ‘Streisand Effect’ can create unwanted publicity not just for the stars, but for governments and the tactics they employ to fight illegal downloads, ‘hacktivists’ and others that live on the fringes of the law. This means that publicity the government supplies through media outlets, only heightens the profile of people who they intend to shut down.