Australia’s Richest Woman Discovers The Streisand Effect In Trying To Remove Portrait She Disliked

from the a-good-old-fashioned-streisanding dept

I wonder if Gina Rinehart, an Australian mining magnate, is a fan of Barbra Streisand?

It’s been a bit since we had a straight-up classic Streisand Effect story like the good old days, where someone powerful saw something they didn’t like and insisted that it must be disappeared because they didn’t like it.

Meet Gina Rinehart, Australia’s richest woman.

Apparently, she didn’t like a portrait of her done by the artist Vincent Namatjira that was hanging at the National Gallery of Australia. Namatjira is an interesting artist, who is known for works that “both skewer and honour their subjects” according to a Guardian profile of him from last year.

And, yeah, you could say that’s the case with his portrait of Rinehart.

Image

I wouldn’t exactly call it flattering, but who knows. My tastes in art may differ from yours.

But, of course, the ability to skewer the powerful and mock them is an important part of a free society. The rich and powerful already can get away with so much nonsense, one of the only tools left to keep them slightly in check is public mockery and criticism.

And the thing is, most people would have looked at it and moved on without much of a thought (maybe with a chuckle), and that would have been that.

But, no, Rinehart is rich and if someone who is rich sees something they dislike, “something must be done.” In this case, that something was to demand the removal of the painting.

The mining billionaire Gina Rinehart has demanded the National Gallery of Australia remove her portrait from an exhibition by the award-winning artist Vincent Namatjira.

The image, arguably an unflattering picture of Australia’s richest woman, is one of many portraits unveiled at the Canberra gallery as part of the Archibald prize-winning artist’s first major survey exhibition.

The National Gallery has rebuffed efforts to have the picture taken down and said in a statement that it welcomed public dialogue on its collection and displays.

Take a wild guess what happened next?

Yup. You got it. This portrait that few people would have known about became national news.

If Gina Rinehart was trying to make sure no one saw a portrait of her, recent moves have had the opposite effect.

Last week, media – including Guardian Australia – reported that Australia’s richest woman had demanded the National Gallery of Australia remove a portrait of her. The painting by the artist Vincent Namatjira is one of numerous portraits on display at the Canberra gallery in Namatjira’s first major survey exhibition.

The Guardian even rightly tagged it as the latest example of the Streisand Effect in action:

Rinehart appears to have fallen victim to the “Streisand effect”, a term coined after Barbra Streisand launched a lawsuit in 2003 to try to remove an aerial photo of her California beach house from an online collection. Streisand’s attempt to suppress the image led to almost half a million people visiting the ­Pictopia site to view the photo within a month.

A similar thing seems to have happened with Rinehart. The NGA told Guardian Australia in a statement that there had been a “noticeable increase” in visitors to the national gallery as well as its digital channels over the past week.

Google trends has also given us a sweeping indicator of the worldwide gain in traction of the search term “Gina Rinehart”.

Before 15 May – the day the first stories about Rinehart’s portrait demand was published – interest in Rinehart on Google was at roughly 0, meaning there was not enough search data on the term.

But after the news broke, search interest picked up, with “Gina Rinehart” hitting peak popularity two days later.

A week later, interest lingered.

Who would have predicted that… other than just about everyone familiar with how these things go.

Look, being rich comes with all sorts of privileges. But one thing it should not come with is the ability to go through life without having to deal with an occasional bit of mockery pointed in your direction. But, when that happens, there are a variety of ways to deal with it, and Rinehart appears to have chosen the absolute worst.

Filed Under: , , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Australia’s Richest Woman Discovers The Streisand Effect In Trying To Remove Portrait She Disliked”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
45 Comments
Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

What people love to do, and what their governments decide they are allowed to do, are often at odds. If she’s able to use Australian law to censor art, that’s a black mark on Australian law. It’s not some victory wherein a rich person was exposed as garbage. She’s rich. Of course she’s garbage.

The only question at this point is how deeply Australian legal systems are in the pockets of rich garbage.

TheCentralScrutinizer (profile) says:

Re:

No, she doesn’t have a case. We have a long and proud history in Australia of mocking people like her. Tall poppy syndrome and all that. She is an entitled so and so, who thinks she can bully whoever she likes simply because she’s filthy rich. Her father, Lang Hancock the mining gazillionaire, once said that Aboriginal people should be sterilised so that they eventually don’t exist anymore. This would solve the “Aboriginal problem”, according to him. That’s the background she’s coming from. She deserves every bit of mockery she gets.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

A real piece of work, Gina is.

The Guardian’s coverage of this rich destroyer of humanity says it all, and I welcome everyone to start digging.

Climate change denial, fraud AND support for Trump.

That unflattering portrait is not even enough to counterbalance the evil she continually does.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Ehud Gavron (profile) says:

Re: Re: "Actually"

When lecturing to your betters avoid starting a sentence with “Actually”. The implication your know-nothing comment overrides the preceding one is “actually” laughable.

is married to a woman
Nobody cares, nongermaine to topic, irrelevant. Quiet, frog.
has had children with her
I’ve had pizza with people too. Irrelevant, nongermaine, quiet, frog.
isn’t in the closet
No but your myopia is.

Migh want to try again.
Maybe you should just quiet down, screaming frog.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

As others have already pointed out, the fact you clearly believe someone using the word ‘gay’ to insult someone to be better than someone calling them out on it says everything about you. It says you’re a rampant homophobe that should be placed under house arrest for the entire month of June. Unfortunately, even hate criminals like you have rights.

Anonymous Coward says:

Look, being rich comes with all sorts of privileges. But one thing it should not come with is the ability to go through life without having to deal with an occasional bit of mockery pointed in your direction. But, when that happens, there are a variety of ways to deal with it, and Rinehart appears to have chosen the absolute worst.

There’s something about the rich and powerful that makes them think that they are beyond criticism or ridicule, particularly the ones who genuinely think that they’ve pulled themselves up by their bootstraps – disregarding their felicitous circumstances, or their fortunes being uplifted by countless foundations of slavish subordinates.

They’re the sort of people who look at the challenges facing our world, our youngest generations today, and think, “Why, I don’t see any issue at all. Something must be wrong with the youth of today, they’re unhappy, incapable of demonstrating resilience, and unwilling to suffer. That’s why they hate their job and they’re all losers.” They’ve actually, collectively deluded themselves into believing that any problem can be solved with an attitude adjustment, and anything terrible you’re going through has to be your fault. Which gets even funnier when these 0.1 percenters make the news precisely because they can’t bear to receive any kind of ignominy. Or because they’re angry that their workers have a life outside work, or caregiving responsibilities, or don’t want to be contacted for work-related issues on the weekends.

Now Mike’s write-up makes no mention as to how or why Gina even had that artwork made in the first place, but it’s probably not a stretch to imagine that getting painted by a famous artist was just another flex to write on her LinkedIn profile or something. Of course, that meant that she got exactly what she asked for, and got buyer’s regret afterwards. It’ll be fun to watch as she reaches Milorad Truklja’s level of infamy of one of the dumbest case studies from down under ever seen.

Cole says:

That doesn’t look so bad to me…

Picasso’s portrait of Dora Maar certainly couldn’t be called flattering, but then the mere gesture of painting her was flattery. I think there’s beauty here, particularly in the eyes. Ms. Whatsit should settle into a more neutral attitude about this, as art subjects often must, for her own sake now that THE WORLD has seen the portrait.

That Anonymous Coward (profile) says:

The upside down people are confusing…

They made a law that demanded mathematics change its core rules to do what they wanted.

They worry more about a child rapist getting a “fair trial” by banning ALL coverage of the story more than the rights of the victims.

The politicians get mad when you cover they went on vacation while the nation burned out of control or the damage done to coral reefs as they carve out new ports for coal to be burned to bleach the rest of the coral on the planet.

This is the human failing I’ve noted just a couple times /s

This time it will work for me, because I am smarter than those who did it before…
Morgan Freeman voice – They were not smarter.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get all our posts in your inbox with the Techdirt Daily Newsletter!

We don’t spam. Read our privacy policy for more info.

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...