The Washington Post

Does a British pedophile deserve the ‘right to be forgotten’ by Google?

LONDON - FEBRUARY 03: The Google logo is reflected in the eye of a girl surfing the internet on February 3, 2008 in London, England. (Photo by Chris Jackson/Getty Images) The Google logo is reflected in the eye of a girl surfing the internet on February 3, 2008 in London, England. (Chris Jackson/Getty Images)

Earlier this week, Europe’s highest court ruled that Google must delete some search results people deem embarrassing. The landmark decision introduced the world to the phrase “the right to be forgotten.”

But should everyone have that right? A corrupt politician? A murderer? A man convicted of possessing child pornography?

That question confronted Google on Thursday. More than 1,000 people have now asked the search engine to be forgotten, including a former member of Britain’s Parliament seeking re-election, a doctor who received bad reviews and a convicted pedophile. (None were named in reports Thursday or Friday morning.) Google’s branch in the United Kingdom has received at least 35 such requests, including requests from 20 convicted criminals.

The cases, which there may soon be many more of, highlight a broader clash between one’s personal right to privacy and the public’s right to know.

On Friday morning, it wasn’t clear how Google will handle the requests. Under the ruling, if such personal data “appears to be inadequate, irrelevant or no longer relevant,” the search results must be removed.

[posttv url="" ]

The company, which said the ruling was “disappointing,” has not specified how it will respond to the cases. According to anonymous sources interviewed by the Telegraph, the “world’s biggest search company says [it has] yet to figure out how to deal with the expected flood of expected requests and will need to build up an ‘army of removal experts’ in each of the 28 European Union countries.”

Google conceded the ruling will have “significant implications for how we handle take-down requests,” a spokesperson told the Irish Examiner. “This is logistically complicated – not least because of the many languages involved and the need for careful review. As soon as we have thought through exactly how this will work, which may take several weeks, we will let our users know.”

The European Court’s ruling does not mean that damning information will be deleted from the Internet —  just the links to the information in a Google search. That means sites such as the Database of UK and Eire Pedophiles, dedicated to “naming and shaming UK convicted pedophiles,” isn’t likely going anywhere. But it may one day be more difficult to find it by searching its members.

Terrence McCoy covers poverty, inequality and social justice. He also writes about solutions to social problems.

The Freddie Gray case

Please provide a valid email address.

You’re all set!

Campaign 2016 Email Updates

Please provide a valid email address.

You’re all set!

Get Zika news by email

Please provide a valid email address.

You’re all set!
Show Comments

Sign up for email updates from the "Confronting the Caliphate" series.

You have signed up for the "Confronting the Caliphate" series.

Thank you for signing up
You'll receive e-mail when new stories are published in this series.
Most Read



Success! Check your inbox for details.

See all newsletters

Close video player
Now Playing

To keep reading, please enter your email address.

You’ll also receive from The Washington Post:
  • A free 6-week digital subscription
  • Our daily newsletter in your inbox

Please enter a valid email address

I have read and agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.

Please indicate agreement.

Thank you.

Check your inbox. We’ve sent an email explaining how to set up an account and activate your free digital subscription.