Cleveland.com’s ‘right to be forgotten’ removes names from some crime stories • Hacker News Board

Re: Cleveland.com’s ‘right to be forgotten’ removes names from some crime stories

#21

Post by cortesoft » Fri, Oct 19, 2018, 5:08 PM UTC

mc32 wrote: post #7

I’d like to see a codified system where elsctronic docs and records must have timestamps and certain kinds of content must get “forgotten” de-indexed, over time. Midemeanor mentions get de-indexed afer x-years, felonies y-years, murders and the sort, never. Obviously this would require refinement. That said, someone could resurrect one of these records and reset the clock, but being derivative, the click would have t…

Not even sure how draconian enforcement would work, unless you forced every country to do the same. I could just set up a service that makes a copy of every document/record that is set to be deleted, and host it in a country that doesn't have that rule.

Re: Cleveland.com’s ‘right to be forgotten’ removes names from some crime stories

#22

Post by donatj » Fri, Oct 19, 2018, 5:11 PM UTC

Forbo wrote: post #4

nimbius wrote: post #3

this is important in the united states, as the criminal justice system is often used as a blacklist. Once convicted of a DUI or drug possession, this criminal record can be used to bar employment, rescind voting rights, and legally practice housing discrimination. American criminal justice is often a precursor for lasting biblical retribution. For example, sex offenders are often branded with scarlet letter for life…

Even more so than the sex offender registry, I think US news reporting is more problematic. I wish the US were more like Germany (I think?) in the regard that they don't identify people by name until conviction. By that time, there's less interest in sensationalizing a story.

I wasn't aware Germany did that, but that is great.

Right now an accusation can ruin your life even if later corrected. It's not how society should function.

Re: Cleveland.com’s ‘right to be forgotten’ removes names from some crime stories

#23

Post by notafraudster » Fri, Oct 19, 2018, 5:12 PM UTC

hirundo wrote: post #10

The ‘right to be forgotten’ is backwards. Much better would be a 'right to remember'. The right to be forgotten is a positive right, in that it requires other people to take action (e.g. delist a story from Google) to fulfill it. A right to remember would be a negative right. Like a freedom of the press doesn't require the government to subsidize a printing press or equivalent, a right to remember would just mean tha…

Positive rights and negative rights often clash, as the tension you correctly describe shows, but the implicit premise of your post is that all negative rights supersede all positive rights.

I do not agree. The very conceptualization of negative rights was in response to a feeling that the positive rights guaranteed by earlier liberal thought were insufficient to secure a just and free society.

It is far from obvious to me that there should be an expansive and universal right to be forgotten. But the position that there obviously should not be strikes me as ignorant to the changing balance of power between those two conceptions of the good.

No one asked for a right to be forgotten by erasing 30 year old newspaper coverage. And they ask for it now not because the list of things people wish were forgotten has changed; rather, it because technology has driven social change in terms of what forgetting occurs and what the consequences of that are. I think it naive that we would pre-assume the balance between those two rights would not change in light of that.

I also think it is possible to have a richer discussion about the issue if we do not immediately get bogged down in the contractualism that so often swamps out discussions about "rights".

Re: Cleveland.com’s ‘right to be forgotten’ removes names from some crime stories

#24

Post by PhasmaFelis » Fri, Oct 19, 2018, 5:14 PM UTC

comyesa wrote: post #6

Rehabilitation doesn't always work. I doubt a sexual degenerate can be "cured". It's okay if they stay in prison just to be punished and are taken apart from society. It's okay if they can never be around children.

> I doubt a sexual degenerate can be "cured".

What is your definition of "sexual degenerate"? Because that particular turn of phrase is rarely a good sign, in my experience. If you'd just meant "pedophile" you'd have said "pedophile."

Re: Cleveland.com’s ‘right to be forgotten’ removes names from some crime stories

#25

Post by matt4077 » Fri, Oct 19, 2018, 5:14 PM UTC

thefreeman wrote: post #14

Forbo wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The evidence suggests otherwise. Sex crimes researchers R. Karl Hanson and Kelly E. Morton-Bourgon of Public Safety Canada conducted a large-scale meta-analysis (quantitative review) of recidivism rates among adult sex offenders. They found a rate of 14 percent over a period averaging five to six years. Recidivism rates increased over time, reaching 24 percent by 15 years. The figures are clearly out of alignment wi…

Sorry but 25% of offenders committing another sex crime in the next 15 years more then enough for me to agree with the fact that they need to be identified and tracked.

It's far below the rate overall, which is 60%: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recidivism#Recidivism_rates

There's also the problem that stigmatisation helps more or less no one, because it's unlikely that parents can (or should) effectively supervise their children 24/7. And even if they did, it may protect their children at the cost of others, leaving the overall rate of these crimes unchanged.

To use an example with less emotional baggage: "Watch out for terrorists!" is a similarly useless warning.

Re: Cleveland.com’s ‘right to be forgotten’ removes names from some crime stories

#26

Post by cortesoft » Fri, Oct 19, 2018, 5:15 PM UTC

hirundo wrote: post #10

The ‘right to be forgotten’ is backwards. Much better would be a 'right to remember'. The right to be forgotten is a positive right, in that it requires other people to take action (e.g. delist a story from Google) to fulfill it. A right to remember would be a negative right. Like a freedom of the press doesn't require the government to subsidize a printing press or equivalent, a right to remember would just mean tha…

Yes, this is always my argument against this sort of thing. Enforcing one person's right to be forgotten is infringing on someone else's right to remember.

Say, for example, I get beat up by someone. They are convicted and go to jail, but then in 10 years time they get their record expunged. Am I no longer allowed to tell people about what happened? I should be allowed to tell my story. I should be allowed to tell people what that guy did to me. If I want to write about it, I should be allowed to do that.

It is my right to decide how long I want to remember, and who I want to tell. If I don't want to forgive, and I want to tell people "This guy beat me up 10 years ago, I don't think you should have them around", that is my right, too.

The government doesn't get to decide how long I can hold that grudge.

Re: Cleveland.com’s ‘right to be forgotten’ removes names from some crime stories

#27

Post by kamarg » Fri, Oct 19, 2018, 5:18 PM UTC

thefreeman wrote: post #14

Forbo wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The evidence suggests otherwise. Sex crimes researchers R. Karl Hanson and Kelly E. Morton-Bourgon of Public Safety Canada conducted a large-scale meta-analysis (quantitative review) of recidivism rates among adult sex offenders. They found a rate of 14 percent over a period averaging five to six years. Recidivism rates increased over time, reaching 24 percent by 15 years. The figures are clearly out of alignment wi…

Sorry but 25% of offenders committing another sex crime in the next 15 years more then enough for me to agree with the fact that they need to be identified and tracked.

Do you support tracking non-sex crime criminals that have been released given they have a higher rate of reconviction than sex offenders?

"Recidivism rates for sex offenders are lower than for the general criminal population. For example, a Bureau of Justice Statistics study of 108,580 non-sex criminals released from prisons in 11 states in 1983 found that nearly 63 percent were rearrested for a non-sexual felony or serious misdemeanor within three years of their release from incarceration; 47 percent were reconvicted; and 41 percent were ultimately returned to prison or jail."[1]

[1] - https://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=90200&page=1

Re: Cleveland.com’s ‘right to be forgotten’ removes names from some crime stories

#28

Post by pc86 » Fri, Oct 19, 2018, 5:18 PM UTC

cronix wrote: post #13

> the site would remove names from older stories if their records were expunged. That seems reasonable. If the record is "expunged", you can legally say that you have not been convicted of that crime. So it can't legally be used against you (like on a job application)... so references to that crime should be removed from public view.

Yes, but a news article saying you were arrested for something still happened, and is still factual.

Re: Cleveland.com’s ‘right to be forgotten’ removes names from some crime stories

#29

Post by danso » Fri, Oct 19, 2018, 5:20 PM UTC

Forbo wrote: post #9

comyesa wrote: post #6

Rehabilitation doesn't always work. I doubt a sexual degenerate can be "cured". It's okay if they stay in prison just to be punished and are taken apart from society. It's okay if they can never be around children.

"The evidence suggests otherwise. Sex crimes researchers R. Karl Hanson and Kelly E. Morton-Bourgon of Public Safety Canada conducted a large-scale meta-analysis (quantitative review) of recidivism rates among adult sex offenders. They found a rate of 14 percent over a period averaging five to six years. Recidivism rates increased over time, reaching 24 percent by 15 years. The figures are clearly out of alignment wi…

Furthermore, the evidence suggests that the U.S. Supreme Court has made an assumption of extremely high recidivism (as high as 80 percent) based on questionable research:

> And where did the government come up with their numbers? As it turns out, the solicitor’s brief in McKune cited a government manual that in turn cited a single article published in 1986 in Psychology Today, a mass-market magazine aimed at a lay audience. It was there that Ellman found this sentence: “Most untreated sex offenders released from prison go on to commit more offenses—indeed, as many as 80 percent do.” The article did not even pretend to be a scientific study. It offered no hard data, and its author was neither a scientist nor a professor, but rather a man with a degree in counseling who ran a program for sex offenders in an Oregon prison.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudenc...

Re: Cleveland.com’s ‘right to be forgotten’ removes names from some crime stories

#30

Post by jfim » Fri, Oct 19, 2018, 5:21 PM UTC

Forbo wrote: post #4

nimbius wrote: post #3

this is important in the united states, as the criminal justice system is often used as a blacklist. Once convicted of a DUI or drug possession, this criminal record can be used to bar employment, rescind voting rights, and legally practice housing discrimination. American criminal justice is often a precursor for lasting biblical retribution. For example, sex offenders are often branded with scarlet letter for life…

Even more so than the sex offender registry, I think US news reporting is more problematic. I wish the US were more like Germany (I think?) in the regard that they don't identify people by name until conviction. By that time, there's less interest in sensationalizing a story.

It's definitely a cultural thing in the US to identify and show people that have purportedly committed crimes prior to their conviction.

This article shows a Canadian perspective on how France and the US looked at the media during the DSK affair a while ago: https://www.thestar.com/news/insight/2011/05/20/dominique_st...

You can see how the different perspectives clash.