A prominent Romance publisher
is suing an equally prominent blogger
for libel.
The publisher wants the blogger
to produce proof
what she reported on
is true.
Legally, the publisher might have a case
but strategically, this tactic
is a dumb a$$ move.
Why?
Because readers/bloggers/reviewers/booksellers
view this lawsuit
as an attack against ideals they hold dear.
They see it as suppression of information,
a form of censorship,
a way to force a journalist
to expose her sources.
They’re actively boycotting
the already financially challenged publisher.
I suspect the publisher
has already lost more money
than they’re suing for
and
some of these relationships
will never recover.
Just because the action is legally right
doesn’t mean it is the right action.
The court of public opinion
can be as important
as a court of law.
In the first stanza,
should liable
be libel?
And I agree with you – the publisher is invoking the Streisand Effect.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect