The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Happy 20th Birthday to the Streisand Effect
The underlying lawsuit was filed May 20, 2003, and the Effect followed within a few weeks; Mike Masnick (Techdirt) has the details:
Twenty years ago today, actress/singer Barbra Streisand sued photographer Kenneth Adelman for daring to photograph her coastal mansion as part of his (fascinating) project to photograph the entire west coast of the US from a helicopter to track erosion over time.
In 2002 this was an incredibly ambitious project by Adelman. It was before we all had widespread access to satellite imagery, and before the web worked the way it does today. Adelman set up a pretty incredible website which is still up today in all its 2002-era glory (though he has, as was part of the original plan, updated it with more modern photographs over time).
Either way, one of the thousands of photographs of the coastline include Barbara Streisand's compound:
[Streisand's lawyers brought] five different claims, all variations on privacy or publicity rights violations (all of which were obviously ridiculous), and yet she demanded $10 million in damages for each claim, for a grand total of $50 million. For an aerial photograph of her home.
The rest, as they say, is history. Streisand sued, and in Adelman's anti-SLAPP motion to try to get the case dismissed, he revealed that the photo of Streisand's house had been viewed a grand total of six times, two of which were from Streisand's own lawyers, and most of the rest appeared to be by Streisand herself and some neighbors ….
However, after the lawsuit was filed and the story hit the news, the photo received nearly half a million views. Oops….
Masnick has more in his article, which is much worth reading. Note that the Effect can apply to meritorious claims as well as frivolous ones, and thus can deter the filing of meritorious claims (especially related to invasion of privacy or defamation); it thus isn't always a good thing. But is definitely a real thing, which lawyers and litigants ignore at their peril.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
I have counseled numerous clients over the years not to bring defamation claims precisely because of the Streisand Effect; fortunately, they have all listened (and thanked me effusively for that, as they, not being terminally online people, were not aware of it).
I'm defending a case right now where the plaintiffs have pulled multiple Streisand Effect moves, making matters far worse for their clients than they would have been.
Only because it mentions Streisand, but one of my favourite Onion pieces: Collectible-Plate Industry Calls For Tragic Death Of Streisand
In Streisand’s defense, I will say that the right to be left alone is one of our most important freedoms, so it is definitely something worth fighting for. Of what use is money if it can’t keep people away from you? And I don’t mean that sarcastically.
The more famous you are, the more you will have to spend to enjoy the benefits of privacy. I can enjoy privacy for practically nothing. Streisand, however, had to pay hundreds of thousands in lawyer’s fees for the same privilege.
Or, as sung by Judas in “All for the Best” from the musical, Godspell:
“Some men are born to live at ease, doing what they please
Richer than the bees are in honey
Never growing old, never feeling cold
Pulling pots of gold from thin air
The best in every town, best at shaking down
Best at making mountains of money
They can’t take it with them, but what do they care?”
“They get the center of the meat, cushions on the seat
Houses on the street where it’s sunny
Summers at the sea, winters warm and free
All of this and we get the rest
But who is the land for? The sun and the sand for?
You guessed! It’s all for the best!”
– Lyrics by the great Stephen Schwartz
She didn't "have to" pay anything, since this didn't implicate her privacy in the first place.
Love!!!
Mike Masnick, in addition to being famous for coining the phrase "Streisand Effect", is also the go-to guy for understanding sec 230 and social media "censorship".
Next thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers