MLB Network DMCAs Video Of Bob Costas Torching MLB Pitcher, Which We'll Now Discuss At Length

from the swing-and-a-miss dept

I have to admit, I didn't see this one coming. We recently discussed how Bob Costas reacted to a video of him being more than a bit hard on Cubs MLB pitcher Pedro Strop by going full-tirade on the internet and social media. Within that post was the embedded video of the broadcast segment that featured Costas wondering aloud whether Strop pointed up to the heavens while walking off the field (something very common in sports) was him imploring a dead relative for forgiveness for his awful performance. That video, I should mention, was up and working at the time the post was being written. By the time it was published, however, it had been taken down with a notice that someone had filed a copyright claim on it.

What's strange about this is that it was an MLB Network broadcast, meaning the likely party requesting its removal would be Major League Baseball itself. I say it's strange because MLB is really good when it comes to advanced media and the internet. No other sport does as well in getting videos and content out there for people to enjoy. A party so good at the internet, however, should know better than to try to hide an embarrassing moment for a broadcaster through obscurity via intellectual property.

Because, thank you Streisand Effect, now we're talking about it again. Oh, and the video is still available from a ton of places, including on YouTube from a variety of uploaders.


The result? Well the conversation continues when this whole thing could already have been put to bed. Costas reportedly apologized to Strop. Strop reportedly accepted the apology, saying he didn't want to be the kind of person to judge anyone. And it would have been over.

But now it's not, because for some reason MLB (most likely) thought it could hide what had happened when it couldn't. I suppose MLB could start an ineffectual game of whac-a-mole with all the other sources of the video out there if it really wants to, but it shouldn't. It never should have taken the first video down in the first place. Going any further would really get the tongues wagging, which was the exact thing the league was hoping to prevent.


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2015 @ 10:52am

    You spelled aloud incorrectly.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    spellchecker, 2 Jul 2015 @ 10:53am

    allowed

    "wondering allowed whether"

    aloud?

    or was wondering allowed?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Sean Murphy (profile), 2 Jul 2015 @ 10:56am

    Or, MLB is desperate for any attention it can get, and is exploiting the Streisand effect, and you're falling for it.

    Or, maybe I'm modeling MLB with too much recursion.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2015 @ 11:05am

      Re:

      No kidding. Why would MLB try to suppress this? It makes no sense. What Costas said was pretty mild.

      I wonder if Techdirt and MLB are conducting an experiment right now, because nothing coming out of Techdirt makes any sense.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Dark Helmet (profile), 2 Jul 2015 @ 11:39am

        Re: Re:

        They promised me season tickets to all the teams everywhere.

        And free corndogs, so I can yuke all over myself.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 6 Jul 2015 @ 5:50am

        Re: Re:

        "I wonder if Techdirt and MLB are conducting an experiment right now, because nothing coming out of Techdirt makes any sense."

        Much like her comment.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    AC (profile), 2 Jul 2015 @ 11:41am

    Still the dumbest controversy of the year

    Costas is known to have his detractors. Probably 99% of the people who heard it either laughed it off or didn't care. But the small minority who make a fuss can sound like the majority when they're the only ones talking.

    I guess we know which group Geigner is in.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2015 @ 11:55am

      Re: Still the dumbest controversy of the year

      And this ladies and gentlemen is why politicians are so successful at remaining in power, people ignore the real story and leap on the tribalism at the edges. The fuss isn't over what was said, but the stupidity of trying to bury bad news. Whenever politicians are caught doing the same thing, the fight over what was said prevents people asking what else are they hiding.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Dark Helmet (profile), 2 Jul 2015 @ 1:07pm

        Re: Re: Still the dumbest controversy of the year

        Was going to reply with this, but you saved me the bother. How some folks can completely misunderstand the very subject of two separate posts is beyond me....

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Dark Helmet (profile), 2 Jul 2015 @ 1:07pm

        Re: Re: Still the dumbest controversy of the year

        Was going to reply with this, but you saved me the bother. How some folks can completely misunderstand the very subject of two separate posts is beyond me....

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    wereisjessicahyde (profile), 2 Jul 2015 @ 11:50am

    Well, that's just not cricket.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Roger Strong (profile), 2 Jul 2015 @ 12:23pm

    Streisand at the Bat

    The outlook wasn't brilliant for the Mudville Nine that day;
    The score stood four to two, with but one inning more to play.
    And then when Cooney died at first, and Barrows did the same,
    A DMCA notice was issued to prevent comment on the game.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    connermac725 (profile), 2 Jul 2015 @ 4:03pm

    TORCHING

    not even close

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    tracyanne (profile), 3 Jul 2015 @ 12:15am

    This shit storm is over what?

    Surely not these comments

    "Strobe is on his way out pointing towards the heavens we can only ask or wonder that he is asking some departed relative for forgiveness for this atrocious performance"

    And the commentator apologised for THOSE words. Is this what this whole shit storm is about. I'm sitting here staring at the screen in disbelief.

    What particular part of that is insulting? What particular part of it is so insulting the commentator had to appologise? What particular part of it was even mildly inappropriate?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    CharlesGrossman (profile), 3 Jul 2015 @ 6:49am

    Good marketers know precisely how to use the Streisand effect

    One of the few areas where Techdirt has its head in the sand is thinking that the Streisand effect always works against the takedown requester. Haven't you noticed that marketers and PR folks now know exactly how to use the Streisand effect as a publicity tool? This story is a perfect example. The sentence "Going any further would really get the tongues wagging, which was the exact thing the league was hoping to prevent" should much more accurately say "Going any further would really get the tongues wagging, which was the exact thing the league was hoping to accomplish." As you wrote, MLB is very internet-savvy; this just proves it again.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Roger Strong (profile), 3 Jul 2015 @ 8:29am

      Re: Good marketers know precisely how to use the Streisand effect

      The Streisand effect is about the backfiring of unjustified censorship - DMCA takedowns, cease-and-desist letters, lawsuits, UK superinjunctions, hotels charging your VISA for a negative review, etc.

      Suppose, as you say, a company deliberately uses really awful behavior to generate publicity. That's not the Streisand effect, as there's no censorship involved. It's old-fashioned shock advertising. And "We're really awful people" is a message that's going to backfire in the long run anyway.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Heard this from the horse's mouth, 4 Jul 2015 @ 6:49pm

    Bob, Bob..

    Funny story and especially from a guy who never played baseball, not even little league or high school.. should he be ok to be acceptable authority on performances.. Throwing stats around is a lot easier than throwing a backhanded sidearm muffin ball for a strike.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 6 Jul 2015 @ 5:53am

      Re: Bob, Bob..

      Much like FoxNews military analysts who never saw a day of combat, yet insist we send thousands of our men and women to die in the Middle East.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Show Now: Takedown
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.