Comment on Do people know what the Streisand effect was about?

• 4am@lemmy.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  Thing is, it wasn’t labeled as HER house; I don’t even think the photographer knew. They just took a picture of a large house on a beachside cliff.

  Once she began making a big deal out of it though, every newspaper and website had it published. She made it worse by making it a thing. It was the original celebrity self-own of the internet era.

  source

  • radix@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    And it was inside a huge (10k+) batch of pictures documenting the entire California coastline. Basically nobody had even seen it at the time she, or at least her lawyer, threw a fit about it.

    source
• Trex202@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  Victim blaming and gaslighting

  source

  • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    ??? How am I blaming her? Am I misunderstanding you?

    source

    • Trex202@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      The Streisand effect itself is victim blaming

      source

      • thinkercharmercoderfarmer@slrpnk.net ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        I see what you mean. In my experience of the internet it’s called “The Streisand Effect” only when the person complaining about something (and therefore giving an issue attention that it otherwise wouldn’t have received) is generally considered to be “in the wrong” on the issue. I can’t think of a case where someone received blowback for speaking up about an issue (professional repercussions, exclusion from social circles, “cancelling” by various parties, w/e) but was considered to be in the right by the the people calling it “The Streisand Effect”. It feels like there’s a necessary component of “you complained about something you shouldn’t have and were justly punished for it” schadenfreude attached to the term that differentiates it: if you don’t have that you’re just bravely and correctly shining a light on an injustice and it’s not called “The Streisand Effect”, it’s just raising awareness or something.

        I think you’re being downvoted because the victim of the alleged injustice complaining about that injustice and then deserving the backlash is baked into the term, and calling it “victim blaming” feels off, but it technically is, it’s just that calling something “The Streisand Effect” implies that the “victim” in the situation deserved what they got because they complained about something trivial, or an effect of privilege, or some other thing that, in the eyes of the public, makes them unworthy of sympathy. But I think carrying that implication of guilt means that it is, technically, victim blaming, and the person using the term “The Streisand Effect” implicitly agrees that the victim deserves blame for their actions. And knowing the internet, I doubt this assessment is correct 100% of the time.

        I’m curious to see if other people agree with this assessment. I haven’t done any research on whether my experience of the term is shared by other people, so this may not be a strong theory. Just a thought that spawned off your comment. But it is an interesting perspective.

        source
      • starlinguk@lemmy.world ⁨16⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        There was no “victim” originally. She turned herself into one by pointing out that it was her house. Before that nobody knew.

        source