Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google seeks to limit ‘right to be forgotten’ by claiming it’s journalistic

cjr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 334 posts

Re: Google seeks to limit ‘right to be forgotten’ by claiming it’s journalistic

#31

Post by jacquesm »

Heliosmaster wrote: post #21

I see here a few comments criticizing the right to be forgotten, but I pose a question a bit differently. Let us assume somebody commits a crime. He goes to jail, he pays for it, as society deems necessary. A local newspaper reported it and now every time you google their name such an article pops up. This makes every person they might do business with to withdraw. It seems to me the debt to society has been paid by…

It's about the searching feature, not about the fact that the data is recorded somewhere. So if you knew that it was published in some newspaper you could always go and look it up, but it wouldn't be the first hit in google anymore.

Re: Google seeks to limit ‘right to be forgotten’ by claiming it’s journalistic

#32

Post by j45 »

Disappointing to hear this with the "do no evil" ethos of Google.

Organizing all of the world's information is a great goal, but blurring the boundaries between personal, private information is another thing.

If Google is journalistic:

- Does Google know the difference between journalism and opinion/editorial content?

- Can standards of external journalistic integrity be applied to Google?

The majority of content online is OpEd and not subjective.

Re: Google seeks to limit ‘right to be forgotten’ by claiming it’s journalistic

#33

Post by jacquesm »

gressquel wrote: post #9

I am usually a advocate for privacy and right to be forgotten but in this case I am with Google. The criminals can easily erase their conviction and start 'scamming' victims again. Remember a time when I was looking for apartment and I Googled the name of the owner only to find news articles about how he had built 2 apartments inside one, even though they had no fire escape.

Criminals can not erase their conviction. At best they will be able to wipe out your ability to find out about that conviction. If you want to know stuff like that you'll have to do a background check and not everybody gets to do background checks on everybody else for no particular reason. And that's a good thing.

Re: Google seeks to limit ‘right to be forgotten’ by claiming it’s journalistic

#34

Post by lightbyte »

jbigelow76 wrote: post #22
darawk wrote: post #2

Seems pretty journalistic to me. This "right to be forgotten" seems incredibly dangerous to me. Should we give Trump the right for his bankruptcies to be forgotten? Do we give child molesters the right for their crimes to be forgotten? Why should people have the right to have things they don't like wiped from the historical record? EDIT: I should point out, I do understand the other side. People shouldn't be punished…

Should we give Trump the right for his bankruptcies to be forgotten? Removed from google != removed from public record. If google has become our only source of information we are pretty much screwed. If Trump were to have his bankruptcies "forgotten" by google then journalists would still report when relevant since he is a celebrity/(sigh)politician, and any entities considering doing business with him or anyone shou…

Why are we only forcing Google to remove this information when, as you say, it will still be in the public record. Why are journalists allowed to report on something that we aren't allowing a search engine to show?

Re: Google seeks to limit ‘right to be forgotten’ by claiming it’s journalistic

#35

Post by dvfjsdhgfv »

jbigelow76 wrote: post #22
darawk wrote: post #2

Seems pretty journalistic to me. This "right to be forgotten" seems incredibly dangerous to me. Should we give Trump the right for his bankruptcies to be forgotten? Do we give child molesters the right for their crimes to be forgotten? Why should people have the right to have things they don't like wiped from the historical record? EDIT: I should point out, I do understand the other side. People shouldn't be punished…

Should we give Trump the right for his bankruptcies to be forgotten? Removed from google != removed from public record. If google has become our only source of information we are pretty much screwed. If Trump were to have his bankruptcies "forgotten" by google then journalists would still report when relevant since he is a celebrity/(sigh)politician, and any entities considering doing business with him or anyone shou…

> Google CANNOT become our only source of truth.

Unfortunately we live in a world where if something is not listed in Google's SERP, we doubt it exists.

Re: Google seeks to limit ‘right to be forgotten’ by claiming it’s journalistic

#36

Post by rectang »

Heliosmaster wrote: post #21

I see here a few comments criticizing the right to be forgotten, but I pose a question a bit differently. Let us assume somebody commits a crime. He goes to jail, he pays for it, as society deems necessary. A local newspaper reported it and now every time you google their name such an article pops up. This makes every person they might do business with to withdraw. It seems to me the debt to society has been paid by…

To me, that the "internet is forever" is utterly inhumane.

But I live in a country (the US) which is savagely vindictive towards "criminals" (though only poor criminals) both by cultural tradition and as a means towards suppression of minorities.

I'm white, but my name is more common amongst black Americans. If you google me, some of the top image hits are mugshots of unfortunate black people. It doesn't affect me, but it reminds me of how awful it is that mugshots have become so easily aggregated and republished.

Re: Google seeks to limit ‘right to be forgotten’ by claiming it’s journalistic

#37

Post by leereeves »

jbigelow76 wrote: post #22
darawk wrote: post #2

Seems pretty journalistic to me. This "right to be forgotten" seems incredibly dangerous to me. Should we give Trump the right for his bankruptcies to be forgotten? Do we give child molesters the right for their crimes to be forgotten? Why should people have the right to have things they don't like wiped from the historical record? EDIT: I should point out, I do understand the other side. People shouldn't be punished…

Should we give Trump the right for his bankruptcies to be forgotten? Removed from google != removed from public record. If google has become our only source of information we are pretty much screwed. If Trump were to have his bankruptcies "forgotten" by google then journalists would still report when relevant since he is a celebrity/(sigh)politician, and any entities considering doing business with him or anyone shou…

> If Trump were to have his bankruptcies "forgotten" by google

... would Google be allowed to link to stories that mention those bankruptcies?

Re: Google seeks to limit ‘right to be forgotten’ by claiming it’s journalistic

#38

Post by firasd »

I think part of the solution here is going to need to be social. We need to move beyond the Gawker-like era where if there's an awkward photo of you out there suddenly there's perpetual mass shaming about it. As we grow to know more info about each other we need an increase in societal maturity.

Re: Google seeks to limit ‘right to be forgotten’ by claiming it’s journalistic

#39

Post by leereeves »

dvfjsdhgfv wrote: post #35
jbigelow76 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should we give Trump the right for his bankruptcies to be forgotten? Removed from google != removed from public record. If google has become our only source of information we are pretty much screwed. If Trump were to have his bankruptcies "forgotten" by google then journalists would still report when relevant since he is a celebrity/(sigh)politician, and any entities considering doing business with him or anyone shou…

> Google CANNOT become our only source of truth. Unfortunately we live in a world where if something is not listed in Google's SERP, we doubt it exists.

And we argue about how that power should be used, when we should be trying to limit that power instead.

Re: Google seeks to limit ‘right to be forgotten’ by claiming it’s journalistic

#40

Post by losteric »

jbigelow76 wrote: post #22
darawk wrote: post #2

Seems pretty journalistic to me. This "right to be forgotten" seems incredibly dangerous to me. Should we give Trump the right for his bankruptcies to be forgotten? Do we give child molesters the right for their crimes to be forgotten? Why should people have the right to have things they don't like wiped from the historical record? EDIT: I should point out, I do understand the other side. People shouldn't be punished…

Should we give Trump the right for his bankruptcies to be forgotten? Removed from google != removed from public record. If google has become our only source of information we are pretty much screwed. If Trump were to have his bankruptcies "forgotten" by google then journalists would still report when relevant since he is a celebrity/(sigh)politician, and any entities considering doing business with him or anyone shou…

Google cannot become our only source of truth, but should we eliminate it as a source of truth?

What about other search engines? Social media shares? What happens when a journalist publishes an article based on offline investigation, does the right to be forgotten still apply? Search engines need to fight libelous SEO attacks, but this is a deeply unsettling over-reaction.

Let's drop the Orwellian phrasing and call it what it is: "Right to hide the past". Forget the truth, security through obscurity.

Knowledge is power, and search engines are the map.

edit:

And hopefully it's obvious the issue of search results is separate from consumer data mining/ad profiling.

Post reply on HN