Technology in terms you understand. Sign up for my weekly newsletter, "Confident Computing", for more solutions you can use to make your life easier. Click here.

“Right to be Forgotten”: Misguided and Misleading

The European Union’s highest court recently ruled that search engines, namely Google and maybe Bing, need to honor requests from individuals to be removed from their search indexes in support of a concept known as “the right to be forgotten”.

There are many ethical, political and moral discussions that are happening around the topic right now. While I certainly have opinions in those realms, I want to take a look at it from a purely practical point of view.

That view?

It just can’t work.

Become a Patron of Ask Leo! and go ad-free!

What a search engine is

Fundamental to the discussion is understanding exactly what a search engine is, and is not.

Search engines spend massive amounts of time and resources scouring the Internet to locate information. They then build massive indices that allow them to associate searches for information with the location at which the information is stored.

A search engine is a referral service, nothing more.

Consider a simple search for the name “Tesla”:

Searching for Tesla

The search engine reaches into its database of where it had previously found information on the term, and returns that list of websites.

Now, let’s say that Mr. Tesla comes along and does whatever it means to ask to be forgotten. The search then returns nothing:

Searching for Tesla - Fail

So far so good. Here’s the problem.

Still talking about Tesla

The only thing removal from the search engine did was remove the references to the data. The data itself remains wherever the search engine previously said it was, visible to anyone who happens to stop by.

Yes, it might be a little harder to find, but it’s still there.

You have not been forgotten. Not at all.

Removal from a search engine is misleading


The thing that most people don’t seem to grasp is that the search engines don’t contain or control the data that is stored on the web. They simply point to it.
The thing that most people don’t seem to grasp is that the search engines don’t contain or control the data that is stored on the web. They simply point to it.

Removing yourself from a search engine doesn’t remove the data that you’re wanting to hide. It only removes exactly one way of finding it.

Perhaps more important is the fact that there are thousands of search engines and archives. Just because you’ve removed yourself from the top one or two doesn’t mean that the information about you can’t or won’t be found. The internet never forgets. That information, once published publicly, simply cannot be completely hidden.

“The right to be forgotten”, at best, only makes it a little harder for people to find information about you. And if you think that it won’t be found, you’ve been seriously misled.

You can bet that parties interested in searching deeply will turn to alternative resources that will either not respect the right to be forgotten, or one of the thousands of other resources that you simply never got around to asking.

Yes, it’s a dilemma

I’m sure that there are things that all of us have in our past that we would prefer to never have see the light of day – particularly in response to a search on our name and for all the world to see.

Crippling the search engines isn’t a solution. It just isn’t.

There are simply too many ways that the information will remain publicly findable and accessible anyway.

13 comments on ““Right to be Forgotten”: Misguided and Misleading”

  1. ‘Right to be forgotten’
    How do you get you details taken off google and bing?
    Please reply as soon as possible.
    Many thanks
    James

    • You need to understand that your data is not “on” Google or Bing. It is only being “found by” Google and Bing. So the only way to hope to be removed is to find every website in the whole internet that has a reference to you, contact that website individually and asked to be removed. Some of them will, and some of them won’t. And then wait. Google and Bing cache information for a significantly long period of time – so searches for you may still show, but eventually the search engines will forget about you.

    • I honestly don’t know because – as I go to great lengths to point out in the article – it’s pointless. Your information remains elsewhere and easily accessible to those interested in locating it.

  2. And then there are the web companies which search every possible public record such as police reports available through E-news site articles, voters list’s, genealogy databases, searchable database of mathematics doctorates by advisor, school, year, thesis title, and thesis topic, public records databases, public employee salaries, Etc. The list of databases goes on and on.

    These web companies then sell this info to those who want information but do not want to take the time or else don’t know how to do the searches for themselves.

    To remain anonymous one should not be born nor live in a society which keeps any kind of records.

    I, for one, do not have a Facebook account, LinkedIn account, or any other public account under my real name. I do my best to avoid the police blotter. Still a search for my name will probably find me as I own a home, graduated from high school and college, and will some day die.

  3. What’s wrong with making the information harder to find? Do we just give up and let any stalker or weirdo find a person’s last 4 addresses, the children’s names (and ages) at those addresses, and even phone numbers? All of this info was found when I simply typed in my name on a search engine. The very technology that makes this happen can also make it harder to access said information. And it’s not enough to throw our hands up in the air and give up protecting privacy. I understand public information is already there for all to see; the task is in regulating that private information from an Internet that is exploiting it. Search engines are already prohibited from displaying things, like torrents. The ability is there.

    • The problem is that it is not technology that made it happen in the first place. It was people. Each entry about you online was put there through the action of a person. Perhaps it was a person who wrote a program that scoured public records before those records were made secure. Perhaps it was a person who had a website and then sold the information they collected. Perhaps it was a well-meaning organization who published lists of members. Perhaps it was you posting it up somewhere before you knew that was going to cause problems.

      It’s nearly impossible create a technology to undo what lots of “people” around the entire world have done. If you can think of a way to actually do it, and write the code to accomplish the feat, and gather together the necessary funds to roll that solution out – my hat’s off to you.

    • I’m not saying it’s wrong. I’m saying it leads to a misplaced sense of privacy. Just because something is harder to find doesn’t mean it can’t be found. And many people requesting removal from the search engines are doing so because they believe that will somehow remove the information completely. Nothing could be further from the truth. “Making it harder” is very, very different than “forgotten”.

  4. Just a thought here………

    What if, you did request to be forgotten, and it was OKed?

    Now someone searches for, “people requesting to be forgotten”

    Wouldn’t your name appear on this list?

    I know if I found a name that I knew on that list, I would find that person to be of questionable character. What are they trying to hide? What don’t they want me to know? Etc. etc…..

    That to me seems to be more damaging than what you were trying to hide in the first place.

    Your thoughts?

    • @Alan M – do you really think that everyone who prefers privacy has “something to hide”? As in something discreditable? That’s just not the case. I lead a reasonably blameless life if we discount the odd speeding fine, parking fine and occasional overdue dvd hire. Yet I prefer to keep my private life just that; private. If you think that anyone who requests to have their name removed from search engines is of dubious character then you really have a problem.

  5. Newspapers have been publishing information about people and organizations for hundreds of years. You can ask for a correction or retraction, but you can’t request that they alter their archives. In a society that believes in freedom of information, would it even be ethical to remove information that is correct just because somebody believes that it is stale? Isn’t that an attempt to rewrite history? “Lest we forget/Je me souviens”

  6. I will show my ignorance. I understand the article and the fact that search engines only point to the information, but why can’t we push a button and have the search engine remove from their systems what I asked then to search? I am a CPA and if me can make a parallel here, what I do could be somewhat like a search engine. Client comes to me to prepare a income tax return. Many times, I may need to do research for the correct answer. Not unlike a search engine pointing to several resources for answers. I find the correct answer, prepare the clients tax return, disclose to him what the correct answer to the issue was and that is that. By law, I cannot disclose what I told my client to anyone. But the information is still in my knowledge base if the question ever arises again. Why is that any different than someone pushing a button to remove the fact they searched for something?

    • I think you are still misunderstanding where the information is actually located. It’s not located in the search engines. It’s located out on the internet in a web page somewhere. If for some reason one search engine would decide to allow you to remove searches from its database, the information would still be out there. It’s like removing an entry in the index of the book. It’s not in the index any more… but it’s still in the book for anyone to find.

Leave a reply:

Before commenting please:

  • Read the article.
  • Comment on the article.
  • No personal information.
  • No spam.

Comments violating those rules will be removed. Comments that don't add value will be removed, including off-topic or content-free comments, or comments that look even a little bit like spam. All comments containing links and certain keywords will be moderated before publication.

I want comments to be valuable for everyone, including those who come later and take the time to read.