digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About

Forbes does a story on Digg/Streisand effect

forbes.com — Forbes on the recent HD-DVD controversy

Who dugg this? Made popular May 12, 2007

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

42 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • Flipsen, on 10/11/2007, -3/+72We don't do things like that around here.
  • JelloShotz, on 10/11/2007, -1/+33I love how on my 1920x1200 wide screen monitor a website compresses its entire article into a 3cm paragraph then adds 6inces worth of advertising to each side with the rest of the screen being left white.

    Well I guess its better then one normal sized article being spread over 12 thousand pages forcing you to click next and reload for every paragraph.

    ░░░░▒▒▒▒▓▓▓▓████ Heres the Article ████▓▓▓▓▒▒▒▒░░░░
    A Web user and his information are like a grizzly and her cub. Come between them, and you're likely to get mauled.

    That's what a group of heavyweight tech and entertainment companies learned last week when they tried to keep the lid on the code that could help break the electronic locks on HD-DVDs. On May 1, someone posted the code, which allows software developers to copy content from high-definition discs, to the social news portal Digg.com.

    A consortium of companies such as Disney (nyse: DIS - news - people ), Microsoft (nasdaq: MSFT - news - people ) and IBM (nyse: IBM - news - people ), who have invested in the disc format, responded with a cease-and-desist letter, trying to strong-arm the site's owners into removing the code.

    Digg's administrators cooperated; its users didn't. Crying censorship, they staged a digital riot, covering Digg's pages with links to the banned digits, printing them on T-shirts and immortalizing them in a song that's been played on YouTube more than 200,000 times.
    In Pictures: The Streisand Effect

    Thanks to Digg's rebels, the HD-DVD encryption code has become another victim of the "Streisand effect," an increasingly common backlash that occurs when someone tries to muzzle information on the Web. When the Streisand effect takes hold, contraband doesn't disappear quietly. Instead, it infects the online community in a pandemic of free-speech-fueled defiance, gaining far more attention than it would have had the information's original owners simply kept quiet.

    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.

    The Internet has been mainstream for more than a decade. But what Streisand and others fail to realize, says Michael Masnick, the tech consultant and writer who named the Streisand effect in his blog, Techdirt, is that the rules of privacy and information control have changed. "Before, you took the hardest legal stance you could," says Masnick. "You sent out cease-and-desist letters with a lot of nasty language. But the Internet has turned that around and allowed people to fight back and get a lot more people outraged."

    Michael Fertik owns ReuptationDefender, a start-up company that helps individuals and companies manage their online reputation--essentially a Web-centric crisis PR firm. He says he would have taken a subtler approach to Streisand's situation. "You have to reason with people and approach them politely," he says. "People don't like that a large entity can beat up on a little entity, and the power of the Internet has been arrayed to support victims."

    Despite these new rules of publicity control, the Streisand effect has its limits. When the celebrity gossip blog Gawker published leaked photos of Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie's newborn baby in June of last year, Time Inc. threatened them with a lawsuit for infringing its exclusive right to publish the star-child's pictures in the U.S. After a heated exchange between the two media outlets and threats of a lawsuit, Gawker gave in and removed the photos--at least until Time's People magazine had a chance to publish its own spread.

    But as the Digg revolt shows, damage control can be difficult even when Web sites respond to legal threats. Last September, Brazilian model and TV personality Daniela Cicarelli demanded that Google's (nasdaq: GOOG - news - people ) YouTube remove a video clip of her indiscreet sexual behavior on a Spanish beach, which had been filmed by a paparazzo. YouTube obediently pulled the clip, but users continued to upload the file with different names, evading YouTube's filters.

    Eventually, a Brazilian judge ordered that the site be banned in Brazil until YouTube could effectively remove the video. But the ban only brought more attention to the clip outside of Brazil, as well as inspiring a boycott of her shows by angry Brazilian YouTube fans. Today, YouTube has been unblocked in Brazil, and though Cicarelli's sex clip seems to have disappeared from YouTube, a host of other video sites still feature the footage.

    The government of Thailand has run up against similar limits to its power to control the international Web. Last April, an anonymous YouTube user posted a 44-second video portraying Thailand's king, Bhumibol Adulyadej, as a monkey. The Thai government charged the site with "lèse majesté," insulting the monarch, and rather than ask for the offending video to be removed, banned the site altogether.

    YouTube users around the world responded by posting a series of Bhumibol-bashing clips, portraying the king as a clown, as various types of animals and as a pedophile. Each clip has been viewed tens of thousands of times, and this week Thailand responded by suing the video site.

    But Thailand's lawsuit is more likely to fuel the videos' distribution than to stop them. Attorney Kevin Bankston argues that unlike the laws of Thailand, U.S law ensures that sites like YouTube are free to act as a platform for defamatory materials posted by users. Bankston, a free-speech advocate for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, cites a provision in the Communications Decency Act stating that communication services aren't responsible for the speech that they enable.

    That law may have some bearing on the Digg case as well, as the consortium that owns the HD-DVD encryption code considers how to prevent more users from seeing the digits posted on the site. As for Bankston, he was happy to see Digg's users rebel last week in what he calls "a great flowering of civil disobedience," and he says it should serve as a warning to future censors about the power of the Streisand effect.

    "The Web," Bankston says, "is like the mythical Hydra. Cut off one of its many heads, and two will grow back in its place."
  • cmiller1, on 10/11/2007, -3/+33"Don't hate just cuz I be first"
    I'll have to add that to the list of the many reasons dumbasses claim to get dugg down in spite of the fact that their obnoxious stupidity is the actual cause
  • Wonderkind, on 10/11/2007, -4/+25"i hope they dont keep calling it the streisand effect."

    Why not?
    Streisand was gifted with a wonderful voice and an average brain.
    She has used her voice to make a ***** load of money and used her money to bully people.
    People who make fortunes on their celebrity status can't demand privacy when they feel like it.
    She's not a good person.

    If her name is forever tied to getting backlashed, she deserves it.
  • captinherb, on 10/11/2007, -2/+20You think the leaders in China are sitting around thinking
    "You know, I think this whole internet thing could end up screwing us"
  • NinjaPig, on 10/11/2007, -6/+23i'm a head of mythical hydra. Raaar!
  • praxisseizure, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11The big cheeses don't understand there's a new sheriff in town.

    Don't lie, cheat, swindle or cover ***** up.

    Take the humiliation like men and admit you're caught or you'll end up with a hundred thousand loud mouthed hydra heads bruising your asses.
  • tom6a, on 10/11/2007, -2/+11The phrase "The Streisand Effect" was coined by Techdirt's Mike Masnick. See this post for more info:

    Forbes Takes On The Streisand Effect; If I Ask Them To Take It Down Will It Become More Famous?
    http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070511/133311.shtml
  • Battlecry, on 10/11/2007, -4/+12Doing a google search reveals that it's been a widely used term already, which is unfortunate.
  • BarneyF, on 10/11/2007, -2/+10Forbes seems to agree with Dvorak's recent remarks that lawyers are making things worse, but it much more articulate.
  • GawtMilk, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7Short answer: "The Streisand Effect" is when someone asks people to take something down because they don't want people to see it, but it only results in MORE people seeing it. The "HD-DVD keys" would be a long-gone non-issue if the MPAA didn't make Kevin censor Digg.
  • PixelVision, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6If you associate "Streisand effect" with something else then you've not been on the net for very long.
  • vvaduva, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7This was a fantastic article!! Thanks to the sumbitter!
  • JoshuaGross, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Barbara Streisand is a Digg user?
  • Rethcir, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4What about the mecha-streissand effect? Ok sorry.
  • Urusai, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3"...and though Cicarelli's sex clip seems to have disappeared from YouTube, a host of other video sites still feature the footage."

    Sounds like the reporter did some diligent facts-checking.
  • eoinmonty, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2The term the Streissand effect was not created by forbes. It is a term that Mike Masnick of techdirt jokingly coined when writing about the effect referring to a previous story he had written. http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20030624/1231228.shtml
    http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070511/133311.shtml
  • sparrowvs, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Did you read the article? The first several paragraphs were about how the "Streisand Effect" had backfired against big media and tech companies. The slide show has other examples of humiliated companies like EMI and Cisco. Try reading more than the headline.
  • xigxag, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Good job diggers. Keep this in mind when you run across overzealous censors.
  • inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I'm kinda surprised that more of a "first post" culture has not developed on Digg. It surely was something of a contact sport on /.
  • sparrowvs, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Not excellent that a revolting anti-semite like you reads Digg.
  • darny, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1"People don't like that a large entity can beat up on a little entity, and the power of the Internet has been arrayed to support victims."
  • mattmcm, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1People don't do first posts here because the sheer, awesome force of the digg-downs hurled at them will scar them forever.
  • Latka, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect

    There.
  • bariswheel, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1what's the streisand effect?
  • gnixon70, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1wouldn't it be amazing if something like this happened in China? I mean their government are the kings of net censorship.

    I imagine digg is one of their banned sites, but it would be an interesting uprising if some injustice that they tried to censor had the opposite effect and the whole population became aware..
  • pigsbladder, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2where is diggnation 97?
  • djbelieve, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Reference: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ciG-Xs7mBwU

    Copycat effect?
  • arbulus, on 10/11/2007, -3/+3iHydra?
  • arbulus, on 10/11/2007, -3/+3Hydra effect in action!
  • typographics, on 10/11/2007, -2/+0thank god all that crap is over with
  • inactive, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1Excellent that such a revolting individual -- who was able to make an entire career out of the rampant ethnic nepotism in the Judeo-liberal entertainment establishment -- would be immortalized in "The Streisand Effect."
  • Swift2, on 10/11/2007, -5/+2In an otherwise decent article, all the analysis -- and the headlines -- go to calling it "the Streisand effect." Why? Yes, she did make a now-classic blunder when she tried to get the Coastal Commission to take down its picture that included a picture of her property. Silly and impossible. Why her? Why, because in right-wing Forbes-land, Streisand is a crazy loon, who is to blame for the war in Iraq, global warming, the Maoification of the Democratic Party, and every other evil that has happened in the world since 1953. You'll notice that Forbes has no discussion of what it all means in terms of controlling the flow of information for the big boys, like the big studios and the big sons of more-distinguished wealthy fathers like Forbes himself. (But thank God, Forbes won't be paying the full evil Death Tax when he passes his fortune on to his more idiotic cross-eyed issue.)

    Barbra Streisand sings well, for those who like it, and has very nice seaside property that she was probably worried about getting publicized -- among other reasons, because it's information for loonies and burglars as well as people who want to protect the coastline. She also bankrolls liberal causes, which of course makes her fair game in Forbes.

    All of which has next-to-nothing to do with the DRM scheme that the studios are pushing, which is already cracked. That has to do with the greed and the will to control the flow of information that comes from a number of people called "copyright holders" who can't sing, act or perform in any way except to their accountants, and whose artistic accomplishments will be to drive around L.A. with a ponytail, a gut, and a 25-year-old girlfriend with big bazooms. Call that the "fatass effect."
  • Scheissen, on 10/11/2007, -5/+1I hate the term "Streisand effect." The Streisand one isn't related to digg because it wasn't self-censorship so Digg should have it's own and another one to where it relates to DRM. It sounds so lame and I hate when the "psychologists" can't even come up with a good term.
  • pjdk28, on 10/11/2007, -7/+3great article
  • Skye16, on 10/11/2007, -9/+5It's great being one of the heads of the mythical hydra...unless you're the head that gets cut off.

    On the upside, two (or, realistically speaking, about 50) more will grow back to take your place, but on the downside, -you've been beheaded-.

    Though, I suppose if you're going to get boned, it's best to go out like a martyr, eh? :]

    Seriously though, I thought the Hydra analogy was quite apt. I hope the name "Streisand Effect" goes right out the damn window as soon as possible, but that's about all I can complain about. Hooray for civil disobedience!
  • inactive, on 10/11/2007, -10/+2How dare I criticize digg users. They really showed me by voting down my hurtful comment.
  • BarneyF, on 10/11/2007, -10/+1Nothing against Barbra, but its not a great name because most people associate her name with something else, and its not descriptive. If its going to be a random name, I'd suggest the "operative thetan" phenomenon, because it zapped the Scientologists. But "information hydra" seems like the best option. It is exactly right.
  • inactive, on 10/11/2007, -12/+2This isn't "industry news" it's Digg news.

    Digg category please.
  • antifreeze11, on 10/11/2007, -18/+7i hope they dont keep calling it the streisand effect.
  • slalomskier, on 10/11/2007, -20/+4It's called the Digg Effect. I don't think "The Streisand Effect" could do what we do to servers.
  • GawtMilk, on 10/11/2007, -75/+5In before immature low-lifes.

    EDIT: Nevermind. bnoxiousasshole beat me to it.

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.