Nick Denton Using The Streisand Effect For All It's Worth
from the silly-facebook dept
Two stories popped up on the radar this morning that involve Gawker publisher/editor Nick Denton using threats of bans to get a lot more attention (which is likely exactly what he wanted). The first one seems minor, but is still important. Just a few weeks ago, Tom Lee was talking about how people need to assume that any info they put online on a social network site should be considered public info. Given that, it's interesting to see Nick Denton is facing a ban from Facebook for publishing some info from someone's Facebook profile on Gawker. While publishing the info may have been mean or tacky, and may have even violated Facebook's terms of service, it's laughable to think that banning Denton would actually stop that kind of activity. If anything, it would make it more common. First of all, it's not even clear if it was Denton himself who found the info, or if it was submitted by someone else. However, if Facebook does go through with a ban, many Gawker fans will take it upon themselves to send him info and screenshots from Facebook. All the ban will do, a la the Streisand Effect, is draw more attention to the fact that Gawker publishes info from Facebook profiles.
The second case, involves the Church of Scientology. Denton posted a video of Tom Cruise talking about Scientology. Scientologists are infamous for their attempts to misuse copyright law to take down any content they don't like. However, Denton is fighting back, and getting the video (and, of course, Gawker) a lot more attention in doing so. It certainly looks like Denton has figured out how to use such threats to his own advantage.
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
by Anonymous Coward on Jan 17th, 2008 @ 11:11am
This is exactly the issue or problem we face. Denton used Facebook, agreed to its terms by doing so and then violated these terms. He seems like a jerk to me. Then you write "While publishing the info may have been mean or tacky, and may have even violated Facebook's terms of service, it's laughable to think that banning Denton would actually stop that kind of activity. If anything, it would make it more common."
So since it can't be stopped, I guess its ok that people can be mean or tacky or jerk like. Is that where we are all going? Thats what we want to strive for? Screw it, technology allows it, it can't be stopped so we just need to accept it. Thats the end game huh? Kind of sad really.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
HarHar by Thom on Jan 17th, 2008 @ 11:16am
Anytime anyone takes on the the scientology scam artists and their kooky cult members I'll give 'em a big round of applause.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
glad you ran this one, mike by Adam Singer on Jan 17th, 2008 @ 11:22am
i had a chuckle at the whole situation today too...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Anonymous Coward on Jan 17th, 2008 @ 11:23am
You sure are proud of using the term "Streisand Effect"
Sure it was interesting the first couple of times but it is as tired and boring as "Tomkat" and "Bennifer"
Give it a rest.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Anonymous Coward on Jan 17th, 2008 @ 11:36am
Mike is an internet trendsetter and has coined a term - that's what creative people do. Why don't you go to Chris Anderson's blog and tell him to stop using the phrase 'the long tail'.
It's a theme he mentions here - it's his blog, the fact that you are reading and then commenting about it says enough...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Using the Streisand Effect to avoid Jumping the Sh by Moob on Jan 17th, 2008 @ 12:02pm
I was just reading this a few days ago on NYT. Looks like he found a good way to keep the site going. And growing.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: by Hulser on Jan 17th, 2008 @ 12:09pm
So since it can't be stopped, I guess its ok that people can be mean or tacky or jerk like.
Your "guess" is wrong. Where does it say or even imply in Mike's post that it's "OK" to be tacky or a jerk? The point of Mike's post is that even when someone has the right to do something -- in this case, ban a Facebook member -- it often has the exact opposite effect as intended. That's the Streisand Effect.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: by TheDock22 on Jan 17th, 2008 @ 12:34pm
Yea post #1, lay off. Beside, if you want your information on Facebook private (or at least pictures) make them only viewable to your friends and then be picky about your friends.
I laugh when some people have over 500 friends, you know they just allow whoever to add them.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Add Your Comment