We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
GOOGLE SAID THAT it is “forgetting” things in Europe to comply with a legal ruling granting people the power to have certain information about them removed from searches.
“This week, we’re starting to take action on the removal requests that we’ve received,” Google said in an email response to an AFP inquiry.
“Each request has to be assessed individually and we’re working as quickly as possible to get through the queue.”
The California-based internet search colossus continues to work with data protection authorities to refine processes and standards regarding what information about people merits removal and which deserves to remain in the best interests of the public.
A Google spokesman said the world’s leading search engine received 12,000 requests from people seeking to be “forgotten” the day an online form went live in May.
Google set up the form page to allow Europeans to request the removal of results about them from Internet searches.
In May, the European Court of Justice ruled that individuals have the right to have links to information about them deleted from searches in certain circumstances, such as if the data is outdated or inaccurate.
Google has said that each request would be examined individually to determine whether it met the ruling’s criteria.
Privacy versus censorship
The ruling on the right to be forgotten comes amid growing concern in Europe about individuals’ ability to protect their personal data and manage their reputations online.
“The court’s ruling requires Google to make difficult judgments about an individual’s right to be forgotten and the public’s right to know,” a Google spokesman said in a previous statement.
Google created an advisory committee to help strike a balance between freedom of information and people’s rights when it comes to not being haunted by untruths or acts from the past on the Internet.
The group includes former Google chief Eric Schmidt, Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales, Oxford Internet Institute ethics professor Luciano Floridi, Leuven University law school director Peggy Valcke, former Spanish data protection agency director Jose Luis Pinar and UN envoy on freedom of expression Frank La Rue.
Links will only be removed in Europe, where a message accompanying search results will indicate that they have been modified to comply with legal requirements there.
Any links removed from searches in Europe would continue to appear in Google results displayed as they typically would in other geographic regions.
The court ruling has raised concerns about online censorship and how Internet search works in various countries.
Worries also arose that letting people edit their online histories could hamper investigative journalism.
The case highlights growing concerns about so-called online reputation management, which has spawned an industry that helps eliminate or minimize damaging information online.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
A host of Irish Z-listers are demanding to be put back into search results
lol.
Asking a private company with annoying links to the NSA to record your request to be forgotten so they can tell anybody that you have made a request to be forgotten…
Nothing f()cks with privacy better than curiosity.
“Google Search Removal Requests: European Criminals, Politicians And Pedophiles Exercising ‘Right To Be Forgotten’”
A company wanted links about it in a forum discussing consumer ripoffs to be removed.
A former politician requested links to a news article about his behavior when he was previously in office be removed because he wants to run again.
A physician requested that links to a review site about him be removed.
A man convicted of possession of child sexual abuse imagery requested links to pages about his conviction be removed.
A celebrity’s child asked that links to news articles about a criminal conviction be removed.
A convicted cyberstalker mentioned in an article about cyberstalking laws requested that links to the article be removed.
An actor wants articles about an affair with a teenager removed.
A tax scammer requested that links to information about his crime be removed.
An individual who tried to kill his family requested a link to a news article about the event be removed.
@David Jordan
Perpetrators of serious criminal offences won’t be able to have information about them removed from Google in Europe because such information about them is in the public interest to make available. Don’t blow it out of proportion.
Any journalist impeded by this will be able to just do the search through a non-European proxy.
I agree with the court ruling and don’t see what all the fuss and hoo haa is about. No information is being removed from the internet, at all. All that’s happening is that search engines have been told they can’t provide links to certain pieces of content under certain circumstances. That’s all there is to it. It’s very similar to having an ex – directory telephone number. In any case even though I agree with it I think that it’s a pointless ruling because it’s so easy to lawfully get around it. Unless of course other jurisdictions follow on and it becomes global but until then, the ruling is like a lighthouse in the Bog of Allen – brilliant but useless.
Take note dear journal, add a delete or at least an edit function.
Come and see the violence inherent in the system!
have your say