Avoiding the Streisand Effect When Responding to Defamation

When you discover a defamatory statement about you or your business online, the natural instinct is to act immediately. Perhaps you want to send a cease-and-desist letter, file a lawsuit, or demand that the content be removed before more people see it. But what happens when your attempt to suppress the statement draws far more attention to it than it would have received otherwise? In defamation law, this is known as the Streisand Effect.

At Minc Law, we have filed over 350 defamation lawsuits across the U.S. and have removed over 200,000 pieces of unwanted content from the internet. We understand the risks of drawing unwanted attention to sensitive matters, and we know how to address defamation effectively while minimizing the chances of making things worse.

What Is the Streisand Effect?

The term comes from entertainer Barbra Streisand’s unsuccessful attempt in 2003 to suppress a photograph of her coastal mansion. A photographer had taken more than 12,000 aerial photos of the California coastline as part of a government-sanctioned project documenting coastal erosion. Among those images was a photo of Streisand’s home.

Streisand sued the photographer and the websites hosting the image for invasion of privacy, seeking $50 million in damages. Before the lawsuit, the image had been downloaded only six times—two of those downloads were by her own attorneys. After she filed the lawsuit, the image was downloaded more than 420,000 times in a single month.

The lawsuit was ultimately dismissed. But more importantly, her effort to keep the mansion out of public view had exactly the opposite effect. If she had done nothing, almost no one would have ever known the image existed.

Today, the Streisand Effect refers to any attempt to suppress information that results in far greater publicity than the information would have received otherwise. It is particularly common on the internet, where information spreads quickly and easily.

When Responding Makes Things Worse

A poor response to a negative statement online can be worse than no response at all. An overly aggressive reaction can expose you to humiliation and result in many more people viewing the negative content than would have otherwise seen it.

The internet has a distinct culture with an ingrained hostility to anything perceived as censorship. Legal threats that appear heavy-handed become popular topics of discussion online. An ill-considered response can lead to widespread mockery and dramatically increase the number of people viewing the very content you want to suppress.

Stop and Think Before You Respond

The single most important piece of advice we can offer is to stop and think before responding to negative online content. Impulsive attempts to suppress statements have a tendency to backfire. Do not act on impulse.

Consider the Current Impact

Before taking any action, honestly assess the current reach of the content:

• How many people have viewed it?
• Where is it published?
• Is it ranking in search results for your name?
• Is it actually causing measurable harm to your business or reputation?

A negative comment that only a handful of people have seen may not warrant aggressive action. Sometimes the issue is not really worth your time, energy, and money. If the content is inconsequential and not actually harming you, letting it go may be the wisest choice.

However, if the content is serious and could come back to harm you in the future if not addressed, handle it now rather than trying to ignore it and hoping it goes away.

Analyze Your Situation

Your job and influence can increase your risk of the Streisand Effect. If you are a politician or public figure, negative online content comes with the territory. Most statements made about public figures are protected by the First Amendment. Threatening legal action against people who speak their mind is certain to draw more negative attention.

Know who you are dealing with. Be mindful of the type of website or forum in question. Some platforms like Reddit have very loyal and dedicated user bases with strong anti-censorship views. Be careful what you say in response, or you might face a social media mob. One person making negative statements is manageable. Dealing with dozens or hundreds becomes much more difficult.

Response Options Beyond Legal Action

Legal threats and lawsuits are not your only options. In many cases, alternative approaches can address defamation more effectively with less risk.

Platform Reporting

Most platforms prohibit certain types of content in their Terms of Service. Reviews containing demonstrably false factual statements, harassment, impersonation, or intimate images can often be removed through platform reporting mechanisms. This approach allows you to address the content without ever contacting the person who posted it, which avoids drawing their attention and reduces the risk of escalation.

Direct, Professional Communication

Sometimes a polite, professional message explaining the inaccuracy and requesting removal works. Many people will remove content when they realize it is false or that they misunderstood the situation, especially if approached respectfully rather than with threats.

Online Reputation Management

Rather than trying to remove specific content, Online Reputation Management focuses on suppressing negative content by promoting positive content. This pushes problematic material further down in search results where fewer people will see it. In many situations, this approach is the best way to deal with negative content that might otherwise trigger the Streisand Effect if you tried to remove it.

Strategic Silence

Sometimes the best response is no response at all. If content has minimal visibility and is unlikely to spread on its own, letting it fade naturally may be wiser than taking action that could amplify it.

When Legal Action Is Appropriate

If legal action is necessary, the way you pursue it matters significantly.

Know the Law First

Meritless legal claims are much more likely to trigger the Streisand Effect and expose you to ridicule. Make sure you understand what is and is not defamatory before making legal threats.

Statements of opinion are protected speech. So are substantially true statements, even if they are unflattering. Hyperbole and satire are also protected. Only false statements of fact that harm your reputation may be defamatory.

Do not threaten websites or platforms about content in user comments unless you understand Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which protects platforms from liability for user-generated content. Threatening to sue Reddit or Yelp over what someone else posted demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the law and will likely be mocked.

Be Specific About What Is False

If you send a legal demand, identify the specific false statements. Vague threats that do not specify what content is problematic will be seen as an attempt to suppress all criticism. In internet culture, that is one of the most serious offenses.

“Your post is false and defamatory” is not specific. “Your post states that my company was convicted of fraud, but no such conviction exists” is specific.

Maintain a Professional Tone

Letters full of threats and exaggeration are tempting targets for ridicule. Nobody likes a bully, especially online. Remember that your audience may not just be the recipient of your letter, but anyone else who reads it if it gets published online.

Be clear and firm, but sound like a professional seeking to persuade, not someone trying to intimidate. An effective legal communication conveys that you are in the right and that a reasonable person would comply because it is the right thing to do, not out of fear. Such a communication does not create drama and is less likely to go viral.

Ensure Your Communication Can Withstand Public Scrutiny

Anything you say can be made public. Before writing or responding, imagine what would happen if your words were shared online. If your response contains inappropriate or unprofessional language, those words will be used against you. Make sure whatever you say is something you would not mind becoming public.

Working With an Experienced Attorney

An attorney unfamiliar with internet culture can be as dangerous as an attorney unfamiliar with the law. The attorneys at Minc Law have extensive experience addressing online defamation while minimizing the risk of unwanted attention.

Before offering any advice, we always consider the potential for the Streisand Effect. We work with clients to create effective strategies that address harmful content while remaining mindful of the potential for making things worse.

We can help you:

• Assess whether taking action is advisable or whether alternative approaches would be more effective
• Navigate platform reporting and removal procedures
• Implement reputation management strategies to suppress damaging content
• Craft professional legal communications when they are appropriate
• Develop contingency plans if initial strategies do not succeed
• Litigate defamation cases when the benefits outweigh the risks

Defamers often disregard demands made by victims directly. Contact from an attorney signals that a professional has reviewed the merits of your claims and lends credibility to your position. An experienced attorney can help you navigate the fine line between defending your reputation and drawing too much unwanted attention.

If you are facing defamation online and want to discuss your options, contact us for a consultation. Call us at (216) 373-7706 or fill out our online contact form.