Streisand effect

Short description: Increased awareness of something after suppression efforts

The original image of Barbra Streisand's cliff-top residence in Malibu, California, which she attempted to suppress in 2003

The Streisand effect describes a situation where an attempt to hide, remove, or censor information results in the unintended consequence of the effort instead increasing public awareness of the information.

## Contents

* 1 Origin
* 1.1 Streisand's perspective
* 2 Mechanism
* 3 Other examples
* 3.1 In politics and government
* 3.2 By businesses
* 3.3 By other organizations
* 3.4 By individuals
* 4 See also
* 5 References
* 6 External links

## Origin

The Streisand effect is named after Barbra Streisand.

The term was coined in 2005 by Mike Masnick of Techdirt after Barbra Streisand attempted to suppress the publication of a photograph by Kenneth Adelman showing her clifftop residence in Malibu, taken to document coastal erosion in California.[1][2][3]

In 2003, the American singer and actress Barbra Streisand sued the photographer, Kenneth Adelman, and Pictopia.com for US$50 million for violation of privacy.[4][5][6] The lawsuit sought to remove Image 3850, labeled as "Streisand Estate, Malibu", an aerial photograph in which Streisand's mansion was visible, from the publicly available California Coastal Records Project of 12,000 California coastline photographs. As the project's goal was to document coastal erosion to influence government policymakers, privacy concerns of homeowners were deemed to be of minor or no importance.[7][8][9][10][11]

The lawsuit was dismissed and Streisand was ordered to pay Adelman's $177,000 legal attorney fees.[4][12][13][14][15] "Image 3850" had been downloaded only six times prior to Streisand's lawsuit, two of those being by Streisand's attorneys;[16] public awareness of the case led to more than 420,000 people visiting the site over the following month.[17]

Two years later, Masnick coined the name when writing about Marco Beach Ocean Resort's takedown notice to urinal.net (a site dedicated to photographs of urinals) over its use of the resort's name.[18][19]

> How long is it going to take before lawyers realize that the simple act of trying to repress something they don't like online is likely to make it so that something that most people would never, ever see (like a photo of a urinal in some random beach resort) is now seen by many more people? Let's call it the Streisand Effect.

— Mike Masnick, "Since When Is It Illegal To Just Mention A Trademark Online?", Techdirt (January 5, 2005)[9]

### Streisand's perspective

In her 2023 autobiography My Name Is Barbra, Streisand, citing security problems with intruders, wrote:[20]

> My issue was never with the photo [...] it was only about the use of my name attached to the photo. I felt I was standing up for a principle, but in retrospect, it was a mistake. I also assumed that my lawyer had done exactly as I wished and simply asked to take my name off the photo.

According to Vanity Fair, Streisand "didn't want her name to be publicized with [the photo], for security reasons."[21] Since the controversy, Streisand has published numerous detailed photos of the property on social media and in her 2010 book, My Passion For Design.[4]

## Mechanism

Attempts to suppress information are often made through cease-and-desist letters, but instead of being suppressed, the information sometimes receives extensive publicity, becoming viral over the Internet or being distributed on file-sharing networks.[7][22] Seeking or obtaining an injunction to prohibit something from being published or to remove something that is already published can "backfire" by increasing the publicity of the published work.[23]

The Streisand effect has been described as an example of psychological reactance, wherein once people are aware that some information is being kept from them, they are significantly more motivated to acquire and spread it.[24]

The Streisand effect has been observed in relation to the right to be forgotten, the right in some jurisdictions to have private information about a person removed from internet searches and other directories under some circumstances. A litigant attempting to remove information from search engines risks the litigation itself being reported in the news.[25][26][27][28][29]

The phenomenon has been described by the Chinese proverb, "(when one) attempts to cover (the truth), (it) becomes more conspicuous" (欲蓋彌彰, pinyin: Yù gài mí zhāng).[30]

## Other examples

### In politics and government

When the French intelligence agency DCRI tried to delete Wikipedia's article about the military radio station of Pierre-sur-Haute, much of which came from a documentary made with the cooperation of the French Air Force and freely available online,[31][32] the article became the French Wikipedia's most-viewed page.

The French intelligence agency DCRI's attempt to delete the French Wikipedia article about the military radio station of Pierre-sur-Haute[33] resulted in the restored article temporarily becoming the most-viewed page on the French Wikipedia.[34]

In October 2020, the New York Post published emails from a laptop owned by Hunter Biden, the son of then Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden, detailing an alleged corruption scheme.[35] After internal discussion that debated whether the story may have originated from Russian misinformation and propaganda, Twitter blocked the story from their platform and locked the accounts of those who shared a link to the article, including the New York Post's own Twitter account, and White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany, among others.[36] Researchers at MIT cited the increase of 5,500 shares every 15 minutes to about 10,000 shares shortly after Twitter censored the story, as evidence of the Streisand Effect nearly doubling the attention the story received.[37] Twitter removed the ban the following day.

Donald Trump's lawsuit of The Wall Street Journal for publishing a letter between Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein has been described by some as causing a Streisand effect.[38][39]

A study found that banned books in the United States grew in circulation by 12%, on average, compared with comparable nonbanned titles after the ban.[40]

In light of warnings from Brendan Carr, the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, that the fairness doctrine might apply to the talk show, CBS suppressed Stephen Colbert's interview with candidate James Talarico. It was then presented on YouTube, garnering far more views than it might have gotten if it had been aired on CBS.[41] This was said to be “the Streisand effect".[41][42]

### By businesses

See also: AACS encryption key controversy

In April 2007, a group of companies that used Advanced Access Content System (AACS) encryption issued cease-and-desist letters demanding that the system's 128-bit (16-byte) numerical key (represented in hexadecimal as `09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0`) be removed from several high-profile websites, including Digg. With the numerical key and some software, it was possible to decrypt the video content on HD DVDs. This led to the key's proliferation across other sites and chat rooms in various formats, with one commentator describing it as having become "the most famous number on the Internet".[43] Within a month, the key had been reprinted on over 280,000 pages, printed on T-shirts and tattoos, published as a book, and appeared on YouTube in a song played over 800,000 times.[44]

In September 2009, multi-national oil company Trafigura obtained in a British court a super-injunction to prevent The Guardian newspaper from reporting on an internal Trafigura investigation into the 2006 Ivory Coast toxic waste dump scandal. A super-injunction prevents reporting on even the existence of the injunction. Using parliamentary privilege, Labour MP Paul Farrelly referred to the super-injunction in a parliamentary question and on October 12, 2009, The Guardian reported that it had been gagged from reporting on the parliamentary question, in violation of the Bill of Rights 1689.[45][46][47] Blogger Richard Wilson correctly identified the blocked question as referring to the Trafigura waste dump scandal, after which The Spectator suggested the same. Not long after, Trafigura began trending on Twitter, helped along by Stephen Fry's retweeting the story to his followers.[48] Twitter users soon tracked down all details of the case, and by October 16, the super-injunction had been lifted and the report published.[49]

On March 11, 2025, the book Careless People: A Cautionary Tale of Power, Greed, and Lost Idealism by Sarah Wynn-Williams was published. It details the author’s experiences working at Facebook (now Meta) and explores the company’s internal culture, decision-making processes, and role in reshaping global events. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg responded by seeking relief at the Emergency International Arbitral Tribunal, which enjoined Wynn-Williams "from making orally, in writing, or otherwise any disparaging, critical or otherwise detrimental comments to any person or entity concerning [Meta], its officers, directors, or employees".[50][51] Macmillan, the UK publisher, later issued a statement saying that it would ignore the ruling.[50] The book reached number one on the New York Times bestseller list by March 20, 2025.[52] Meta described the book as "a mix of out-of-date and previously reported claims about the company and false accusations about [its] executives".[52]

### By other organizations

In January 2008, the Church of Scientology's attempts to get Internet websites to delete a video of Tom Cruise speaking about Scientology resulted in the creation of the protest movement Project Chanology.[53][54][55]

On December 5, 2008, the Internet Watch Foundation (IWF) added the English Wikipedia article about the 1976 Scorpions album Virgin Killer to a child pornography blacklist, considering the album's cover art "a potentially illegal indecent image of a child under the age of 18".[53] The article quickly became one of the most popular pages on the site,[56] and the publicity surrounding the IWF action resulted in the image being spread across other sites.[57] The IWF was later reported on the BBC News website to have said "IWF's overriding objective is to minimise the availability of indecent images of children on the Internet, however, on this occasion our efforts have had the opposite effect".[58] This effect was also noted by the IWF in its statement about the removal of the URL from the blacklist.[59][60]

### By individuals

In May 2011, Premier League footballer Ryan Giggs sued Twitter after a user revealed that Giggs was the subject of an anonymous privacy injunction (informally referred to as a "super-injunction")[61] that prevented the publication of details regarding an alleged affair with model and former Big Brother contestant Imogen Thomas. A blogger for the Forbes website observed that the British media, which were banned from breaking the terms of the injunction, had mocked the footballer for not understanding the effect.[62] Dan Sabbagh from The Guardian subsequently posted a graph detailing—without naming the player—the number of references to the player's name against time, showing a large spike following the news that the player was seeking legal action.[63]

In 2013, a BuzzFeed article showcasing photos from the Super Bowl contained several photos of Beyoncé making unflattering poses and faces, resulting in her publicist contacting BuzzFeed via email and requesting the removal of the images.[64] In response to the email, BuzzFeed republished the images, which subsequently became much more well-known across the internet.[65]

In December 2022, Twitter CEO Elon Musk banned the Twitter account @elonjet, a bot that reported his private jet's movements based on public domain flight data,[66] citing concerns about his family's safety.[67] The ban drew further media coverage and public attention to Musk's comments on allowing free speech across the Twitter platform.[68][69] Musk received further criticism after banning several journalists who had referred to the "ElonJet" account or been critical of Musk in the past.[70]

## See also

* Banned in Boston
* Blowback (intelligence)
* DSMA-Notice (popularly known as a "D notice")
* The History of Sexuality
* Hydra effect
* List of eponymous laws
* Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority v. Anderson
* McLibel case
* Perverse incentive ("Cobra effect")
* Reactance (psychology)
* Red triangle (Channel 4)
* Royal Family (film)
* Strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP)
* Succès de scandale

## References

1. ↑ Burnett, Dean (May 22, 2015). "Why government censorship [in no way at all carries greater risks than benefits"]. The Guardian (London). https://www.theguardian.com/science/brain-flapping/2015/may/22/government-censorship-psychology-theresa-may.
2. ↑ Canton, David (November 5, 2005). "Today's Business Law: Attempt to suppress can backfire". The London Free Press. http://www.lfpress.ca/cgi-bin/publish.cgi?p=111404&x=articles&s=shopping. Retrieved July 21, 2007. "The 'Streisand effect' is what happens when someone tries to suppress something and the opposite occurs. The act of suppressing it raises the profile, making it much more well known than it ever would have been.".
3. ↑ Mugrabi, Sunshine (January 22, 2007). "YouTube – Censored? Offending Paula Abdul clips are abruptly taken down.". Red Herring. http://www.redherring.com/Article.aspx?a=20872&hed=YouTube—Censored?. "Another unintended consequence of this move could be that it extends the kerfuffle over Ms. Abdul's behavior rather than addressing it. Mr. Nguyen called this the 'Barbra Streisand effect', referring to that actress's insistence that paparazzi photos of her mansion not be used"
4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 Byrne, Suzy (November 6, 2023). "Yahoo Celebrity — What is 'the Streisand effect'? Barbra Streisand addresses infamous invasion of privacy lawsuit in new memoir.". Yahoo Entertainment. https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/streisand-effect-barbra-streisand-invasion-of-privacy-lawsuit-new-memoir-130024264.html. ""When I first heard the term, I naively thought, Is that about the effect of my music?" she wrote in her book. "Little did I know.""
5. ↑ Barbara Streisand v. Kenneth Adelman Et. Al., Cal.Super. (Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles May 20, 2003).
6. ↑ Parkinson, Justin (July 31, 2014). "The perils of the Streisand Effect". BBC. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-28562156.
7. ↑ 7.0 7.1 Canton, David (November 5, 2005). "Today's Business Law: Attempt to suppress can backfire". The London Free Press. http://www.lfpress.ca/cgi-bin/publish.cgi?p=111404&x=articles&s=shopping. Retrieved July 21, 2007. "The 'Streisand effect' is what happens when someone tries to suppress something and the opposite occurs. The act of suppressing it raises the profile, making it much more well known than it ever would have been.".
8. ↑ Li, Charlene (2010-06-22). "Groundswell. Winning in a World Transformed by Social Technologies" (in en). Strategic Direction 26 (8). doi:10.1108/sd.2010.05626hae.002. ISSN 0258-0543. https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/sd.2010.05626hae.002/full/html.
9. ↑ 9.0 9.1 Masnick, Mike (January 5, 2005). "Since When Is It Illegal to Just Mention a Trademark Online?". Techdirt. http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20050105/0132239.shtml.
10. ↑ "Barbra Sues Over Aerial Photos". The Smoking Gun. May 30, 2003. http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/celebrity/barbra-sues-over-aerial-photos.
11. ↑ "California Coastal Records Project". https://www.californiacoastline.org/streisand/lawsuit.html.
12. ↑ Streisand v. Adelman, et al., in California Superior Court; Case SC077257
13. ↑ Adelman, Kenneth (May 13, 2007). "Barbra Streisand Sues to Suppress Free Speech Protection for Widely Acclaimed Website". California Coastal Records Project. http://www.californiacoastline.org/streisand/lawsuit.html.
14. ↑ "Streisand's Lawsuit to Silence Coastal Website Dismissed" (Press release). Mindfully.org. December 3, 2003. Archived from the original on July 6, 2009. Retrieved April 8, 2008.
15. ↑ Weiss, Kenneth (May 28, 2004). "Judge Orders Streisand to Pay $177,000 for Photographer's Legal Fees". https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2004-may-28-me-barbra28-story.html.
16. ↑ "Barbara Streisand vs. Kenneth Adelman, Ruling on submitted matters, tentative decision and proposed statement of decision". p. 6. http://www.californiacoastline.org/streisand/slapp-ruling-tentative.pdf. "Image 3850 was downloaded six times, twice to the Internet address of counsel for plaintiff" In addition, two prints of the picture were ordered—one by Streisand's counsel and one by Streisand's neighbor.
17. ↑ Rogers, Paul (June 24, 2003). "Photo of Streisand home becomes an Internet hit". San Jose Mercury News, mirrored at californiacoastline.org. http://www.californiacoastline.org/news/sjmerc5.html.
18. ↑ Siegel, Robert (February 29, 2008). "The Streisand Effect' Snags Effort to Hide Documents". All Things Considered. NPR. https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=87809195.
19. ↑ Masnick, Mike (January 8, 2015). "For 10 Years Everyone's Been Using 'The Streisand Effect' Without Paying; Now I'm Going To Start Issuing Takedowns". Techdirt. https://www.techdirt.com/2015/01/08/10-years-everyones-been-using-streisand-effect-without-paying-now-im-going-to-start-issuing-takedowns/.
20. ↑ Streisand, Barbra (2023). My Name Is Barbra. US & UK: Viking. pp. 906–907. ISBN 9781529136890.
21. ↑ Jones, Radhika (October 7, 2023). "Malibu Barbra: Inside Barbra Streisand's World". Vanity Fair. https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2023/10/barbra-streisand-cover-story. Retrieved October 14, 2024.
22. ↑ Mugrabi, Sunshine (January 22, 2007). "YouTube – Censored? Offending Paula Abdul clips are abruptly taken down.". Red Herring. http://www.redherring.com/Article.aspx?a=20872&hed=YouTube—Censored?. "Another unintended consequence of this move could be that it extends the kerfuffle over Ms. Abdul's behavior rather than quelling it. Mr. Nguyen called this the 'Barbra Streisand effect', referring to that actress's insistence that paparazzi photos of her mansion not be used"
23. ↑ Jansen & Martin 2015, "The Streisand Effect and Censorship Backfire", International Journal of Communication 9: 656–671, https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/2498/1321.
24. ↑ Burnett, Dean (May 22, 2015). "Why government censorship [in no way at all carries greater risks than benefits"]. The Guardian (London). https://www.theguardian.com/science/brain-flapping/2015/may/22/government-censorship-psychology-theresa-may.
25. ↑ Kocharyan, Hovsep; Hamuľák, Ondrej; Vardanyan, Lusine (1 December 2022). ""The Right to be Remembered?": The Contemporary Challenges of the "Streisand Effect" in the European Judicial Reality". International and Comparative Law Review 22 (2): 105–120. doi:10.2478/iclr-2022-0017.
26. ↑ "Google's right to be forgotten creates Streisand effect". Recombu. July 3, 2014. http://recombu.com/digital/news/google-creates-streisand-effect-bbc-mail-guardian.
27. ↑ "Techno File: Exercising 'right to be forgotten' could spark 'Streisand effect'". BDlive. July 23, 2014. http://www.bdlive.co.za/life/gadgets/2014/07/23/techno-file-exercising-right-to-be-forgotten-could-spark-streisand-effect.
28. ↑ Mach, Martin (1 August 2022). "Streisand Effect in the Context of the Right to be Forgotten". European Studies 9 (1): 110–121. doi:10.2478/eustu-2022-0005.
29. ↑ Vardanyan, Lusine; Kocharyan, Hovsep; Hamulák, Ondrej; Mesarčík, Matúš; Kerikmäe, Tanel; Kookmaa, Tea (30 June 2023). "The Unwanted Paradoxes Of the Right to Be Forgotten". Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology 17 (1): 87–109. doi:10.5817/MUJLT2023-1-3.
30. ↑ "史翠珊與潘朵拉效應 欲蓋彌彰愈蓋愈彰" (in zh). eDigest. August 8, 2020. https://www.edigest.hk/投資/史翠珊-與-潘朵拉效應-欲蓋彌彰愈蓋愈彰-173336/. Retrieved July 25, 2022.
31. ↑ Willsher, Kim (7 April 2013). "French secret service accused of censorship over Wikipedia page". The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/apr/07/french-secret-service-wikipedia-page.
32. ↑ Poncet, Guerric (9 April 2013). "Wikipédia et DCRI : la chaîne locale "s'attend" à être censurée" (in French). Le Point (Paris). http://www.lepoint.fr/chroniqueurs-du-point/guerric-poncet/wikipedia-et-dcri-la-chaine-locale-s-attend-a-etre-censuree-09-04-2013-1652341_506.php.
33. ↑ Communiqué from the Wikimedia Foundation, April 6, 2013
34. ↑ Geuss, Megan. "Wikipedia editor allegedly forced by French intelligence to delete "classified" entry". Ars Technica. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/04/wikipedia-editor-allegedly-forced-by-french-intelligence-to-delete-classified-entry/.
35. ↑ Morris, Emma-Jo; Fonrouge, Gabrielle (October 14, 2020). "Smoking-gun email reveals how Hunter Biden introduced Ukrainian businessman to VP dad". Archived on October 14, 2020. Error: If you specify `|archivedate=`, you must also specify `|archiveurl=`. https://nypost.com/2020/10/14/email-reveals-how-hunter-biden-introduced-ukrainian-biz-man-to-dad/.
36. ↑ Rushe, Dominic (October 26, 2017). "Twitter bans ads from RT and Sputnik over election interference". The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/oct/26/twitter-bans-ads-from-russia-today-and-sputnik-over-election-interference. "Company announced decision following US intelligence community's conclusion that Russian media outlets sought to interfere with the US election"
37. ↑ Ohlheiser, Abby (October 16, 2020). "Twitter's ban almost doubled attention for Biden misinformation". MIT Technology Review. https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/10/16/1010644/twitter-ban-hunter-biden-emails-backfires/. Retrieved October 20, 2020.
38. ↑ "Trump's WSJ Lawsuit Has Social Media Users Cheering For 1 Unexpected Reason" (in en-AU). 2025-07-19. https://au.news.yahoo.com/trumps-wsj-lawsuit-social-media-000048311.html.
39. ↑ "Epstein-related books and TV shows explode after Trump claim" (in en). 2025-07-21. https://www.9news.com.au/world/jeffrey-epstein-donald-trump-epstein-surge-interest-related-books-tv-shows/1fe4c4de-7d38-4b6a-ab43-595600256612.
40. ↑ Ananthakrishnan, Uttara M.; Basavaraj, Naveen; Karmegam, Sabari Rajan; Sen, Ananya; Smith, Michael D. (14 Mar 2025). "Book Bans in American Libraries: Impact of Politics on Inclusive Content Consumption". Marketing Science 44 (4): 933–953. doi:10.1287/mksc.2024.0716. ISSN 0732-2399. https://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/full/10.1287/mksc.2024.0716.
41. ↑ 41.0 41.1 Bubel, Jennifer (February 18, 2026). "The Streisand effect and how CBS censorship of Rep. James Talarico was a win-win for him and Stephen Colbert's 'The Late Show'". as.com. https://en.as.com/latest_news/the-streisand-effect-and-how-cbs-censorship-of-rep-james-talarico-was-a-win-win-for-him-and-stephen-colberts-the-late-show-f202602-n/. "A senatorial candidate who threatens to turn Texas blue was censored on Colbert’s late-night show, but that had the opposite of the intended effect."
42. ↑ Benen, Steve (February 18, 2026). "‘Their plan backfired’: Colbert’s James Talarico interview generates large online audience". MSN.com. https://www.ms.now/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/their-plan-backfired-col. Retrieved March 17, 2026. "Far more people watched the interview on YouTube than probably would have seen it if it had aired on CBS without controversy."
43. ↑ Stone, Brad (May 3, 2007). "In Web Uproar, Antipiracy Code Spreads Wildly". The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/03/technology/03code.html. ""The ironic thing is, because they tried to quiet it down it's the most famous number on the Internet.""
44. ↑ Greenberg, Andy (May 11, 2007). "The Streisand Effect". Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/home/technology/2007/05/10/streisand-digg-web-tech-cx_ag_0511streisand.html.
45. ↑ Leigh, David (October 12, 2009). "Guardian gagged from reporting parliament". The Guardian (London). https://www.theguardian.com/media/2009/oct/12/guardian-gagged-from-reporting-parliament.
46. ↑ Leigh, David (October 13, 2009). "Guardian seeks urgent court hearing over parliament reporting gag". The Guardian (London). https://www.theguardian.com/media/2009/oct/13/guardian-court-parliament-reporting-gag.
47. ↑ Aditya Chakrabortty (October 19, 2009). "Brain food: Internet censorship and the Barbra Streisand effect". The Guardian (London). https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/oct/20/brain-food-internet-censorship-barbra-streisand.
48. ↑ Jacobson, Seth. "Twitter claims new scalp as Trafigura backs down". The First Post. http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/54667,business,twitter-claims-another-scalp-as-trafigura-backs-down.
49. ↑ Beckford, Martin; Watt, Holly (October 16, 2009). "Secret Trafigura report said 'likely cause' of illness was release of toxic gas from dumped waste". The Telegraph (London). https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/6350262/Secret-Trafigura-report-said-likely-cause-of-illness-was-release-of-toxic-gas-from-dumped-waste.html.
50. ↑ 50.0 50.1 Naughton, John (15 March 2025). "Whistleblower's exposé of the cult of Zuckerberg reveals peril of power-crazy tech bros". The Guardian (London, United Kingdom). ISSN 0029-7712. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/mar/15/whistleblowers-cult-zuckerberg-power-tech-bros.
51. ↑ Isaac, Mike (13 March 2025). "Meta seeks to block further sales of ex-employee's scathing memoir" (in en-US). The New York Times (New York, USA). ISSN 0362-4331. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/12/technology/meta-book-sales-blocked.html.
52. ↑ 52.0 52.1 Creamer, Ella (March 20, 2025). "Meta exposé tops bestseller chart despite company's attempt to ban its promotion". The Guardian (London, United Kingdom). ISSN 0261-3077. https://www.theguardian.com/books/2025/mar/20/meta-expose-tops-bestseller-chart-despite-companys-attempt-to-ban-its-promotion.
53. ↑ 53.0 53.1 Arthur, Charles (March 20, 2009). "The Streisand effect: Secrecy in the digital age". The Guardian (London). https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2009/mar/20/streisand-effect-internet-law.
54. ↑ Cacciottolo, Mario (2012-06-15). "The Streisand Effect: When censorship backfires" (in en-GB). BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-18458567.
55. ↑ "What is 'The Streisand Effect'?". The Daily Telegraph (London). January 31, 2009. http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/technology/miloyiannopoulos/8248311/What_is_The_Streisand_Effect/.
56. ↑ Metz, Cade (December 7, 2008). "Brit ISPs censor Wikipedia over 'child porn' album cover". The Register. https://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/12/07/brit_isps_censor_wikipedia/.
57. ↑ Moses, Asher (December 8, 2008). "Wikipedia added to child pornography blacklist". The Sydney Morning Herald. https://www.smh.com.au/news/technology/web/wikipedia-added-to-child-pornography-blacklist/2008/12/08/1228584723764.html.
58. ↑ "IWF backs down on Wiki censorship". BBC News. December 9, 2008. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7774102.stm.
59. ↑ Morozov, Evgeny (December 26, 2008). "Living with the Streisand Effect". The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/26/opinion/26iht-edmorozov.1.18937733.html.
60. ↑ "IWF statement regarding Wikipedia webpage" (Press release). Internet Watch Foundation. December 9, 2008. Archived from the original on January 1, 2011. Retrieved September 24, 2013.
61. ↑ Townend, Judith (May 20, 2011). "Lord Neuberger's report cuts through the superinjunction hysteria". The Guardian (London). https://www.theguardian.com/law/2011/may/20/lord-neuberger-report-superinjunction-hysteria.
62. ↑ Hill, Kashmir (September 30, 2009). "He-Who-Cannot-Be-Named (In The UK) Sues Twitter Over A User Naming Him". Forbes. https://blogs.forbes.com/kashmirhill/2011/05/20/he-who-cannot-be-named-in-the-uk-sues-twitter-over-a-user-naming-him/. "Apparently, though, CTB's lawyers have not heard of the "Streisand effect"."
63. ↑ Sabbagh, Dan (May 20, 2011). "Twitter and the mystery footballer". The Guardian (London). https://www.theguardian.com/technology/organgrinder/2011/may/20/twitter-superinjunctions.
64. ↑ "The 'Unflattering' Photos Beyoncé's Publicist Doesn't Want You To See" (in en). 2013-02-05. https://www.buzzfeed.com/buzzfeedceleb/the-unflattering-photos-beyonces-publicist-doesnt-want-you-t.
65. ↑ Parkinson, Justin (July 30, 2014). "The perils of the Streisand effect". https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-28562156.
66. ↑ O'Brien, Matt (December 14, 2022). "Twitter changes rules over account tracking Elon Musk's jet". Associated Press. https://apnews.com/article/elon-musk-technology-business-social-media-13119e8cc9bbc15a886369263b29087a.
67. ↑ "Elon Musk's Jet and 'Crazy Stalker' Allegations, Explained". Snopes. December 17, 2022. https://www.snopes.com/news/2022/12/16/elon-musk-jet-stalker/.
68. ↑ Smith, Ryan (December 16, 2022). "What Is Streisand Effect? Elon Musk Alludes to Phenomenon Amid Twitter Bans". Newsweek. https://www.newsweek.com/streisand-effect-elon-musk-twitter-bans-1767701.
69. ↑ Reimann, Nicholas; Hart, Robert (December 15, 2022). "Twitter Suspends Accounts For Rival Mastodon And Several High-Profile Journalists". Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicholasreimann/2022/12/15/twitter-suspends-accounts-for-rival-mastodon-and-several-high-profile-journalists/?sh=2aa855db52ba.
70. ↑ Isaac, Mike; Conger, Kate (December 15, 2022). "Twitter Suspends Accounts of Half a Dozen Journalists". The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/15/technology/twitter-suspends-journalist-accounts-elon-musk.html.

## External links

* "The perils of the Streisand effect". Parkinson, Justin. BBC News, July 31, 2014.

* v
* t
* e

Unintended consequences

* Abilene paradox
* Adverse effect
* Butterfly effect
* Campbell's law
* Cobra effect
* Counterintuitive
* CSI effect
* Externality
* Excess burden of taxation
* Failure mode and effects analysis
* Goodhart's law
* Hawthorne effect
* Hutber's law
* Hydra effect
* Inverse consequences
* Jevons paradox
* Murphy's law
* Nocebo
* Osborne effect
* Parable of the broken window
* Perverse incentive
* Risk compensation
* Self-defeating prophecy
* Self-refuting idea
* Serendipity
* Social trap
* Streisand effect
* Tragedy of the commons
* Tyranny of small decisions

Template:Barbra Streisand

0.00

(0 votes)

Original source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand effect. Read more

|

Retrieved from "https://handwiki.org/wiki/index.php?title=Philosophy:Streisand_effect&oldid=4302796"
*[v]: View this template
*[t]: Discuss this template
*[e]: Edit this template