The Streisand effect highlights a crucial aspect of online reputation management (ORM) in today’s digital age: information suppression rarely works. In fact, it can often have the opposite effect, amplifying negativity and damaging reputations.

This blog delves into the Streisand Effect, exploring its psychological underpinnings and its potential impact on brand reputation.

The Streisand Effect Origin Story

The California Coastal Records Project, founded in 2002, captures aerial photos of the California coastline from a helicopter flying parallel to the shore. The website offers access to these images, with one photo taken every 500 feet, covering most of the coast. The site features an interface for comparing photos taken in different years.

Kenneth Adelman photographed the coast as part of this project to document coastal erosion, aiming to influence government policymakers. In 2003, a single image, titled ‘Image 3850’, unintentionally included Barbra Streisand’s Malibu mansion among the 12,000 photos on the site. Streisand sued for privacy violation, but the lawsuit was dismissed, with Streisand ordered to pay Adelman’s legal fees of $155,567. The court ruled that the distant aerial shots didn’t reveal anything truly private about Streisand.

Interestingly, before Streisand’s lawsuit, ‘Image 3850’ was downloaded from Adelman’s website only six times, two of which were by Streisand’s lawyers. However, after the lawsuit, public interest surged, with over 420,000 people visiting the website in the following months. The image spread widely, appearing in newspapers and media across the globe.  Streisand’s actions inadvertently amplified the image’s exposure.

Psychology Behind the Streisand Effect

The Streisand effect taps into a few different psychological principles:

• Reactance: Imagine being told you can’t do something. Suddenly, the forbidden action becomes more appealing. This is the idea that people feel a sense of rebellion when their freedom to access information is threatened. When an organisation attempts to suppress information, it can spark public curiosity and a desire to see what’s being hidden. 
• Curiosity Gap: Our brains are wired to seek out missing information. When something is forbidden or hidden, it creates a gap in our knowledge that we naturally want to fill. This can lead us to actively search for the censored information, further amplifying its reach.
• Social Proof: We tend to follow the lead of others, especially when it comes to what information is important. If there’s a big fuss being made about something being suppressed, it can make us think it must be important and worth seeing for ourselves.

These principles intertwine to create a perfect storm for online reputation woes. By trying to suppress information, organisations inadvertently pique public interest, potentially attracting more attention than the issue would have garnered otherwise.

The Streisand Effect in Action

Let’s explore two real-world examples that illustrate the Streisand Effect’s impact:

London Taxi Dispute (2014): In 2014,  an estimated 4,000 to 5,000 black cabs participated in the protest against ride-hailing app Uber. They were convinced Uber was operating illegally in the city.  Their attempt to highlight Uber’s perceived unfair advantage backfired spectacularly. The media frenzy surrounding the protest introduced Uber to a wider audience, many of whom were unaware of the app’s existence. In fact, Uber reported an 850% increase in downloads that week. Instead of crippling Uber, the protest inadvertently boosted its brand awareness.

School Lunch Photo (2012):  A nine-year-old Scottish girl who attracted two million readers to a blog documenting her school lunches, consisting of unappealing and unhealthy dishes served up to pupils, was forced to end the project after the council banned her from taking pictures of the food in school.

The school’s attempt to enforce the rule sparked outrage from parents and the media. The story went viral, painting the school in a negative light and highlighting concerns about school lunches nationwide. Within days, the council reversed its decision under immense public pressure. After the reversal of the ban, the blog became more popular than it was before.

The Streisand Effect’s Impact on Reputation

The Streisand effect poses a significant threat to online reputation. Here’s how it can damage your brand:

• Negative Attention: By drawing unwanted attention to something an organisation wants to be hidden, the Streisand effect can damage brand image and create a negative public perception.
• Loss of Trust: Transparency is paramount in today’s digital landscape. Suppression attempts erode trust and make organisations appear secretive or dishonest. 
• Loss of Control: The Streisand effect wrestles control of the narrative away from PR professionals. It becomes difficult to address the issue effectively when information is widely shared.

Navigating the Streisand Effect: PR Strategies for the Digital Age

So, how can PR professionals avoid falling victim to the Streisand effect? Here are some key strategies:

• Embrace Transparency: Open communication is paramount. If an issue arises, being upfront with the public about the situation can help limit the damage and rebuild trust. Focus on acknowledging concerns and outlining a plan for improvement.
• Focus on Solutions: Rather than trying to suppress information, PR should focus on addressing the underlying problem that’s causing the negative attention. This demonstrates a commitment to resolving issues and regaining public trust.
• Embrace the Power of Online Conversation: The digital age makes information suppression nearly impossible. PR professionals should focus on crafting a positive narrative that can compete with any negative attention. This means actively engaging with online conversations, addressing concerns directly, and promoting positive stories about the organisation.
• Proactive Monitoring: Keeping a close eye on online mentions and social media conversations allows PR professionals to identify potential issues early on. This enables them to develop a proactive strategy to address concerns before they escalate.
• Prepare for the Worst: It’s always wise to have a crisis communication plan in place. This plan should outline steps for responding to negative press, online criticism, and other potential PR nightmares.

The Streisand effect serves as a stark reminder that information suppression rarely works in the digital age. PR professionals who understand the psychological underpinnings of this phenomenon and implement proactive online reputation management strategies are best equipped to protect their clients’ brands and navigate the ever-changing online landscape.

Curzon PR is a London-based PR firm working with clients globally. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact our Business Development Team [email protected]