Monday, September 01, 2003

Streisand: Fair & Balanced, too?

File this under "When will they learn, part II" (Subcategory: Celebrity Stupidity)

A few short weeks ago, I railed in this very space against Fox's lawsuit versus Al Franken. That case, which has since become widely known as the "Fair and Balanced" lawsuit, had the perverse effect of catapulting Franken's book to the top of Amamzon's best seller list.

To add insult to injury, the Federal Judge on the case not only tossed the suit, he mocked Fox for being on the wrong side of a 1st Amendment case.

Fox execs have since "leaked" that they knew the case was a loser from the gitgo, but they were placating their signature star, Bill O'Reilly. It turns out that Franken had gotten the better of O'Reilly at some bookfair broadcast on C-Span. Wittle Billy's feewings were huwt, and daddy Fox was twying to make it awl better.

The Moral of that situation made it clear (at least to any one with half a brain) that in a modern, networked society, censorship works not to suppress an "undesirable" item, but rather operates to generate incidental exposure and publicity, thus promoting the object of the censorship.

Along that vein, I recently became aware of a new litigation very much along the same lines of Fox vs Franken. It seems that Barbra Streisand, well known for espousing an environmental agenda, sued the California Coastal Records Project, a "landmark photographic database of over 12,000 frames of the California coast shot since 2002."

Streisand was asserting that the inclusion of a single frame that includes her blufftop Malibu estate invades her privacy, violates the "anti-paparazzi" statute, seeks to profit from her name, and threatens her security.

The irony of this, is that had she never sued, the unlabeled photograph of home would have been one of 12,000, and no one would have been any the wiser. Prior to the lawsuit, her name was nowhere to be found on the California Coastal Records Project. Her home would have merely been "3850.jpg;" -- No name, just one photo out of 12,000. Instead, the story has been picked up by the media, and her home has been identified, and reposted around the internet. Kinda like this -

Barbara Streisand's House:
3850.jpg

Photo Courtesy of http://www.californiacoastline.org/

Folks, can you see the delicious irony here? Fox and Streisand, hardly political bedfellows, find themselves lumped together with the radical islamic clerics who sought to supress Salman Rushdie's Satanic Verses --and incidentally made it one of the most purchased, least read books in the history of movable type.

This is Public Relations 101, People!

I'm proud to display and identify Streisand's home; Based upon her behavior, its obviously what Babs wants -- more publicity for the mansion -- and as someone who likes her music, I'm only too happy to oblice her. I suggest that anyone with a blog post and repost this photo.

In a modern society, if you want something to go away, IGNORE IT. Making loud, whiny complaints -- and that especially includes litigation -- only draws attention to the item you want suppressed. The supresser functions as a publicity machine for the item sought to be supressed.

When will these people ever learn?

UPDATE: DECEMBER 3 2003 -- A Los Angeles judge today threw out Barbra Streisand's $10 million suit against a California environmental group that posted a photo of the singer's cliffside Malibu estate on its web site. In a 46-page tentative decision, the summary from which you'll find below, Superior Court Judge Allan J. Goodman declared that the aerial photo's publication was protected by the First Amendment and, to boot, was not "highly offensive to a reasonable person." Swatting away Streisand's claim that her privacy was violated, Goodman stated, "As a matter of law, there is nothing private or personal" about the photo, a copy of which you'll find at right. Making matters worse for the performer, Goodman indicated that he is ready to award legal fees to the California Coastal Records Project and the group's founder Kenneth Adelman, who snapped the image which so offended Babs.


Source: Smoking Gun, via Stare

Recent article:
Streisand goes coastal over Web photo effort
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2003/08/31/MN305247.DTL

Posted at 10:53 PM in Current Affairs, Web/Tech | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c52a953ef00d83420410c53ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Streisand: Fair & Balanced, too?:

» http://www.petebevin.com/subblog/archives/000637.html from Links
Barbara Streisand's House... [Read More]

Tracked on Sep 2, 2003 7:59:24 AM

» California Coastline from Pete Kruckenberg's Perfect World
This is an awesome site, with pictures of the entire California coast. All free. A sample picture, which happens to include Barbara Streisand's Malibu estate. Which she isn't too happy about. Maybe people in obnoxiously huge houses shouldn't complain s... [Read More]

Tracked on Sep 2, 2003 3:18:23 PM

» 9/11 Farenheit Presidential Indicator from BOPnews
Earlier this week, we took a look at a number of "Presidential Indicators" which might provide some insight into the outcome of the November 2004 presidential election. I'd like to, in advance, suggest yet another potential indicator: The 9/11 Farenhei... [Read More]

Tracked on Jun 26, 2004 8:34:32 AM

» 9/11 Farenheit Presidential Indicator from BOPnews
Earlier this week, we took a look at a number of "Presidential Indicators" which might provide some insight into the outcome of the November 2004 presidential election. I'd like to, in advance, suggest yet another potential indicator: The 9/11 Farenhei... [Read More]

Tracked on Jun 26, 2004 8:40:25 AM

» 9/11 Farenheit Presidential Indicator from BOPnews
Earlier this week, we took a look at a number of "Presidential Indicators" which might provide some insight into the outcome of the November 2004 presidential election. I'd like to, in advance, suggest yet another potential indicator: The 9/11 Farenhei... [Read More]

Tracked on Jun 26, 2004 8:44:32 AM

» 9/11 Farenheit Presidential Indicator from BOPnews
Earlier this week, we took a look at a number of "Presidential Indicators" which might provide some insight into the outcome of the November 2004 presidential election. I'd like to, in advance, suggest yet another potential indicator: The 9/11 Farenhei... [Read More]

Tracked on Jun 26, 2004 8:48:30 AM

» 9/11 Fahrenheit Presidential Indicator from BOPnews
Earlier this week, we took a look at a number of "Presidential Indicators" which might provide some insight into the outcome of the November 2004 presidential election. I'd like to, in advance, suggest yet another potential indicator: The 9/11 Fahrenhe... [Read More]

Tracked on Jun 26, 2004 8:53:22 AM

Comments

I agree Barbara is a whiner. The only reason I knew about her house was from Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh. They talked a lot about it saying Pete Kruckenberg did nothing wrong. I see no one else complaining. I even saw a person with a dog on the beach. I always thought her music sucked although she is hot for 61. The site is very interesting to see. Very educational.

Posted by: bgbabes | Sep 24, 2003 1:17:00 AM

[This cowardly entry has been edited. Note: I only do this when some pathetic weenie fails to have the balls to put down their real email address -Barry].


"Now about Streisand being hot? Dude, that is the grossest thing I've ever heard."

Posted by: Fair | Nov 4, 2003 3:57:40 AM

Streisand's name was affixed to the photos(ones I have seen and those of which offer close up shots to road entrances and exits). The photos not only label the estate as hers, but viewers can see details, such as poolside lounges. Funny that no other estates in the lot were labeled. Streisand lost to a conservative judge (California is loaded with them). When she lost, she took it well. But she clearly should have won; her privacy rights were violated to the extreme. Rich or not,she is am American and has the right to privacy. If it had happened to me or any other average American, we would have been shocked, offended and felt violated. She now has to up the security even more thanks to greed. Stop the Streisand bashing and look at the Constitution. Movie stars should not have to check their rights to privacy at the door.

Posted by: mike kent | Dec 26, 2003 9:11:44 PM

URL: http://www.malibutimes.com/articles/2003/12/10/news/news6.txt

The Malibu Times
News

Streisand's invasion of privacy lawsuit washes up[...]
By Massiel Ladron De Guevara/Special to The Malibu Times

Malibu resident Barbra Streisand's invasion-of-privacy lawsuit against
amateur photographer Kenneth Adelman washed up in a Los Angeles
superior court Wednesday.

Superior Court Judge Allen J. Goodman threw out the $10 million-dollar
lawsuit, requesting Adelman to remove an aerial photo he snapped of
Streisand's bluff-top estate from among the 12,700 photos posted on
his Web site, www.californiacoastline.org. In a tentative 46-page
ruling, Goodman wrote Streisand's privacy had not been invaded by the
retired software engineer who began photographing the California
coastline to aid in its preservation.

"The published image [of Streisand's home] represents the exercise of
Adelman's First Amendment rights in connection with a public issue and
an issue of public interest," Goodman wrote. "The California coastline
is far from a private place ... The purpose and function of the
photograph and its publication on the California Coastal Records
Project Web site are examples of speech protected by the state and
federal constitutions."
[...]
Frustrated with the ruling, Streisand's attorney, John Gatti claims
the main point of Streisand's case was never addressed.

"The decision ignored Ms. Streisand's main complaint, that her name is
used on the site to identify her home as hers, while tens of thousands
of other home owners are accorded anonymity," Gatti said. "The court
did what it did, and focused on what it focused on, but the point
remains, Ms. Streisand undertook this action because she sought to
reaffirm that everyone should retain the right to preserve their
privacy and security, even in this technologically invasive age."

Posted by: Barry Ritholtz | Jan 2, 2004 7:18:40 AM

Will someone please tell us why ALL of the names of those whose homes were photographed were not also published? Why were a few celebrities names used, and not all and why were not all of the residents' names published? Something or someone is screwy in the California courts! I've now read nearly all of the articles (most of which were clearly biased). Now, someone tell the truth for a change, without slandering or assaulting Streisand's good name. This is about privacy. Just because a tycoon decides to take on an altruistic hobby (to clean the slate perhaps?), does not mean he should have the right to trample on other's rights to protect his vision of environmentalism.

Posted by: mike kent | Jan 5, 2004 2:14:48 AM

No ones names were posted UNTIL Babs decided her lawyer was so awesome that he/she could throw the constitution out the window.

She asked for it, she go tit!!

Posted by: Darren | Mar 9, 2004 2:54:58 PM

If you and all like you only knew how really out of touch with the rest of America,you'd crap. When you give all your millions away and live on what the average person has to live on, and when all the sycophants kissing your ass tell you truly whats in their mind, then I may take you seriously.
Why do you think Hollywood is out of touch with real America. Look at the red and blue map,look at the discrepancy in area. Oh! You'll make up 70+ excuses why i'm wrong. All of your problems are you think you associate with the real people the brilliant ones. If the shit ever hits the fan,you and your friends could not survive.
You are all mental midgets. How may of your friends are headed to Cuba and your friend Castro. I'm an ex-cop. I reason weigh and decide what is real and what is not. It takes me just a short period of time to find out who is lying and who is not!!!!
You are full of shit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Dave

Posted by: Dave | Nov 8, 2004 11:03:59 PM

Barbara Streisand has her huge pious,Hollywood eliteous nose stuck so far up Kerry's ass she could never see clearly the deception that has her bound.....We would all love to see you "Moveon.org" with "Michael Moron" up to Canada...and remove the stench from the nostrals of the good people of America,that really love this country.....Oh and by the way...all your music sucks!!

Posted by: Barry | Nov 9, 2004 2:34:26 PM

Barbara sucks. She made most her movies in the 70's. Nobody gives a shit about her nowaday. She's just an attention-whore who wants some free publicity. I wonder if she's currently working on any projects. I doubt it. She is too much of an ugly whining bitch that nobody really wants to finance her. She has no sex appeal nor does her singing. If I'm not mistaking, she was famous by accident not by talent. She was a few actresses at that time who were willing to be in semi nude movies. Of course, with that ugly face she was excited when people suggested that.

[Editor's note: Streisand became famous because of her singularly talented vocals; Hardly an "accident." Reasonable people can disagreee with her politics or acting choices, but there's no room for debate about her vocal talent: She has an incredible voice]

Posted by: Uno | Nov 29, 2004 2:44:17 AM

"Babs" has made the mistake of more than one other talented person, which is to confuse her excellent voice, moderate talent, and mediocre notoriety with intelligence. More than lots of people don't give a crap what she thinks. You neocons should have the good sense to ignore her. You ranters use her as a stooge, and belittle yourselves. Not everything should be political. But, since I mentioned it, I am a dying breed, a moderate Republican. Pay attention. I am using simple sentences. When you grow up and learn to read you will wish you had not; grown up, that is. It will be embarassing for you to learn that the world is a complex place. Simple solutions have complex consequenses.

Posted by: J.Swedlund | Dec 6, 2004 5:58:12 PM

Barbara Streisand has always been a favorite of mine. Some people may not be able to get past her nose but look a little deeper and you will see a beautiful woman who can sing like an angel. She has plenty of sex appeal with her carriage, but she also reflects a considerable amount of intelligence with a pair of stunning eyes which reflect some mischief,plenty of moxie,a great artist,a hot temper and a loving human being.

Barbara is in other words a great talent, a woman who would be eternally loved by any man with a strong character. With her will and achievement she doubtlessly would be rejected by anyone with a weak spine. True I have not liked Ms. Streisand in every movie she's starred in, nor do I like all her songs;but on the whole Barbara is a phenomenal artist with an incredible personality.

I certainly love her artistically, academi- cally,physically and as a person in all her being. Like all of us she may have her shortcomings but her talents have far surpassed any of these. Barbara Streisand will be remembered by millions for all that is positive; and personally I always think of her as the ideal woman to know better as a great lifetime friend rather then the ideal woman to be married to because of her powerful individuality.

Posted by: walter Breitfeld | Mar 6, 2005 4:52:50 PM

Now you can see Babs house...from space.

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Malibu+CA&ll=34.015270,-118.791389&spn=0.007102,0.007714&t=k&hl=en

Say cheese babs!

Posted by: MisterKen | Apr 12, 2005 7:30:23 PM

Great job. May I ask you to visit my pages and tell me your opinion? Index Page
Utu74Bp3zk

Posted by: Jessica | Oct 26, 2007 6:14:00 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.