Actor Salman Khan is learning, not the
easy way, about how the Internet
works. Two instances in the last few
days have shone the spotlight on the
actor's (or his legal team's) recent
moves on the Internet, involving a hit-and-run case which is currently
sub-judice:
Hemant Patel, an activist, a complaint
seeking action against Khan for
launching a website with information
on his hit-and-run court, which he
says is contempt of court. A few days
ago, Khan had launched Salman KhanFiles.com, where, at this point in
time, there are three updates related
to the hit-and-run Court case he is
currently the prime accused in. The
website claims that it is addressing
inaccurate and misleading media
reports, and his lawyers will be publishing factual information on the
website, without comments or the
intention to influence anyone.
I'm no lawyer, but I don't see what is
wrong with doing this: given that
media reports on celebrities are
sensationalized, the website appears
(at this point in time, if it hasn't been
changed) to only share updates on court orders. The information on the
website appears to be fact-driven,
and quite obviously updated by
lawyers.
Strategically, it appears to do two
things – control the conversation and
reduce the distortion by being a
primary source of information, and
make that information available to
everyone. Typically, facts get distorted or lost in the Chinese-
whispers that is modern day
reporting and re-reporting (not based
on primary information; similar to
blogging and re-blogging), and Khan
is attempting to reduce the number of layers (and hence distortion)
between himself and the reader. The
way TV in particular works is that it
often to blows things out of
proportion while trying to garner
eyeballs and TRPs.
The blog allows Khan to provide the
media and people with an alternative
(albeit quite a drab one). This is also
what Twitter also does, and why we
find many celebrities and politicians
on it – it gives control to the celebrity (or the brand), instead of them
depending on the media, which can
be selective.
The Internet is People Media, and if
you don't like what the media is
saying, start a blog or start tweeting.
I don't know whether it is contempt
of court, but it's not like our judicial
system has juries that might get
influenced by what they read online.
If the newspapers can publish about
the case (and there is no reason why they shouldn't be allowed to), I don't
see why Salman Khan's legal team
should not be allowed to publish
these facts online.
Where Khan's got it wrong was in
getting a blog post taken down. BollywoodJournalist.com had published
a post about a constable
who was a witness in this particular
case, and how, allegedly, he was
under pressure to change his
statement against Khan, was driven
to drink, his family disowned him, and how he eventually died. This post
and another one were taken down
after Khan, as per the blogger,
contacted him. There's no statement on whether
there was a legal threat from the
blogger against Khan, but
Soumyadipta Banerjee, who had
posted that report, mentioned that
the last two days were excruciating for him, and he has also issued a
public apology.
But then the Internet took over:
Google cache's of the now removed blog post have been circulated all
over social networks, copies of it
have been posted on forums. If a few
hundred people had read this post
before it was taken down, now it
would be in the hundreds of
thousands. This is the Streisand effect. Demands for "a public
apology" are a part of standard legal
notices, and lawyers who don't know
how the Streisand effect works need
to take their head out of the sand. This is the other side of People Media
– if people see that you're being a
bully (or being evil), especially if
you're a celebrity, they will form a
mob and go on a rampage against
you. There is no way out after a mob takes over, and even if you take a
few people down, legally, that will
only add fuel to the fire. You can take
on a few, thinking you might make
an example of them, but you'll never
be able to deal with millions. If you shut down one platform, another will
arise. To be fair, though, there is no
predicting how this will work. Sometimes, it's better to stay silent.
No comments:
Post a Comment