The birth of the term âStreisand Effectâ was facilitated by the Internet . Well, and especially the psychology of Web users and, probably, of any person. Interesting? Now you know everything.
History of the term
The birth year of the concept â Streisand Effectâ is 2003. It was then that the American singer Barbara Streisand went to court with an unusual lawsuit.
The star demanded compensation from the photographer Kenneth Adelman for the fact that her house was captured on one of his pictures posted on the Internet .
Adelman was not at all annoying paparazzi, he was not interested in the real estate or personal life of Barbara. The photographer simply studied soil erosion on the coast (and by order of the government) and took more than 12,000 photos, which he posted on the web.
The image with the house of Barbra Streisand was not at all popular, almost no one downloaded it, except for a couple of people (among whom was the starâs lawyer), but after distributing information about the lawsuit filed by the star, more than 1,000,000 users viewed the photo!
It would seem that the unfortunate photographer should have filed a counterclaim, because he was blamed for what! But he received considerable benefits from this: an absurd lawsuit allowed his site to receive hundreds of thousands of new visitors, and one of the agencies bought Adelmanâs ill-fated photo altogether, offering a good amount for it.
As a result, removing the image from the Web, of course, did not work. Moreover, it was published in almost all world media.
In 2004, journalist Mine Masnik, in describing another (but similar) situation, applied the term Streisand Effect, which everyone quickly liked. Since then, the phenomena expressed in the fact that all attempts to remove information from the Internet only lead to its wider dissemination, and are called the Streisand effect.
By the way, in the same year, the court dismissed Barbaraâs lawsuit and urged her to reimburse Kenneth Alman all his legal expenses.
Virgin killer
The following story can serve as an example of the Streisand effect.
In 2008, an organization from England that monitors the legality of publishing material on the Internet blacklisted Wikipedia's Virgin Killer article on an album by the popular band Scorpions. The decision was explained by the fact that the album cover depicts a practically naked girl, and this can be interpreted as the distribution of child pornography. As a result, the article gained millions of views, and the image instantly spread to various sites.
Right to oblivion
In 2016, the âLaw on Information ...â was amended to allow Russians to remove links with outdated or false information about themselves from the search list.
Information from the Web will not be deleted anywhere, but the search engine will not give out the site. Only a user who knows the exact address will be able to access it. The only caveat: this function does not apply to the internal search of social networks.
This law was called by the netizens âthe right to oblivionâ.
The pitfalls of the law
The âright to oblivionâ, of course, can allow Russians to save their face, not to drop their honor and dignity, or to avoid false accusations. However, the incompleteness of the law leads to the appearance of such consequences, which are very difficult to deal with.
1. Search engines are often not able to verify the accuracy of the information, because they do not have any authority for that. So it is not worthwhile to pin hopes that Yandex itself will establish the accuracy of the information or a violation of the law.
2. Of all the user requests received regarding the removal of a link about them from the search list, only 30% were satisfied. A huge number of Yandex applications simply do not have time to process. The solution should be the transfer of authority to monitor compliance with the "law on oblivion" to state bodies. But this can only be hoped for.
3. The use of the âright to oblivionâ can turn into a scandal and the end of peaceful life. If the user receives a refusal, then the media immediately begin to âpursueâ him, trying to find out what he is hiding. If nothing succeeds, then the âpoorâ journalists have to come up with âintrigues, scandals and investigationsâ on their own.
A bolt from the blue
The Streisand effect and Internet censorship in modern Russia are very closely related. Moreover, what is eggs and what is chicken is not clear. On the one hand, censorship breeds interest; on the other, unhealthy interest breeds censorship. This confirms a number of high-profile cases.
Not your âcat businessâ
One of the largest Internet scandals has become the "Cat business". The famous cat trainer Yuri Kuklachev sued the blogger Mikhail Verbitsky for calling Yuri a flayer and accused of using a stun gun when training animals.
It was not possible to settle the conflict outside the walls of the courthouse, therefore, in February 2010, Verbitsky was recovered from Kuklachev in the amount of 40,000 rubles. Inaccurate, according to Kuklachev , the information was deleted. What Verbitsky, by the way, considered infringement of freedom of speech.
Prohibited Literature
Vivid examples of the Streisand effect are stories with the novel Blue Fat and Monkey Upgrade.
V. Sorokinâs book âBlue Fatâ caused a wave of indignation over the accusation of distributing pornographic materials. The publishing house and Sorokin himself were sued. As a result, book sales have increased several times.
The story with A. Nikonovâs book âUpgrade of the Monkeyâ is similar. They discovered hidden drug propaganda in her. The book was seized from the shelves of the store, but on the Internet it became a real bestseller.
How to beat the Streisand effect
In order not to start a wave of mass dissemination of unpleasant information about you, you should know a little psychology.
- Please note: at school, they tease with "fat" or "bespectacled" not just the one who is full or wears glasses, but the one who is complex about this. Therefore, it is important to âturn on ignore â on time and pass by false information without escalating the situation .
- Streisand Effect is alive only because people react very violently to restrictions on the Internet . Even if the prohibition is correct and logical, it simply cannot be forgotten. Remember how Herostat set fire to the temple of Artemis? He really wanted to be remembered. And even despite the fact that the woe-hero was executed, and his name was strictly forbidden to be mentioned - he has not been forgotten for 16 centuries .
- Treat everything with humor, even compromising materials or your photos on the Internet . Itâs definitely not worth running to court with a lawsuit, all the more so because itâs only possible to attract everyoneâs attention.
Advertising move
Often the sensational effect is used for advertising or public relations.
Non-standard social advertising of the site âYear of Youth â, aimed at creating an active civic position of young people, had an interesting annotation. It stated that the material was banned from viewing and was not shown on television. Naturally, everyone was interested in the fact that there, in the video, there were a lot of views. No one knew that this was an advertising move, and it was not planned to show the video on TV anyway. Reception with "prohibited information" - perhaps the most used advertising move for today.
Touching story
Martha Payne, an American 9-year-old schoolgirl, really wanted to support one of the charitable foundations helping African children. The girl decided to maintain her own NeverSeconds blog, where she posted photos of her school lunches. The name of the blog is due to the lack of the opportunity to get a second portion of lunch in the school cafeteria. The girl described the dishes in great detail, their appearance, taste and calorie content. Gradually, the blog began to gain popularity among children from other countries who shared photos of their dinners with Martha. As a result, the opinion was formed that Marthaâs dinners are very small. Local journalists became interested in this and even wrote several articles.
The school administration reacted very negatively to the situation and forbade the girl to take pictures of lunches. Martha, saddened by this event, wrote a touching post on her blog that now she will not be able to help African children.
The public and world media were outraged by the act of the school council. As a result, the girl was again allowed to take pictures of food, and the blog became very popular, and the schoolgirl was able to help African children through advertising.
No matter how strange it may sound, people are in no hurry to learn from the mistakes of others. Everyone is sure that he will definitely be able to defeat attackers who spread false information about him. When it becomes clear that it is impossible to fight the multimillion-strong army of âgossipersâ, nothing can be returned - the mechanism is running, and it has no reverse motion. Alas.