A Group Of Advisory Councillors From Google

1025 WordsFeb 4, 20175 Pages
SUMMARY A group of advisory councillors from Google wrote a report on The Right to Be Forgotten policy in 2015. This policy was created in an effort to offer a balance between freedom of expression and the press. The Right to be Forgotten offers citizens the ability to request for their information to be removed from the results of a Google search. The removal of these search results, or links, upon the request of an individual is referred to as ‘delisting’ (Floridi et al., 2015). Delisting allows web users to maintain and protect their privacy by limiting the public’s access to information about them. It is important to note, however, that while citizens may apply to be delisted, Google does not have to comply with this request. “Google…show more content…
On the other hand, citizens should have the right to access information that is germane to the public. HIGHLIGHTS OF THE POLICY The policy first outlines the nature of the rights at issue in the ruling. Google must decide whether the general public should have the right to easily access an individual’s information via the search engine. Google must also consider if the individual requesting to delist “experiences harm from [public] accessibility to the information” (Floridi et al., 2015, p. 6). Next, the policy addresses the way in which Google must assess each delisting request according to four key pieces of criteria: the data subject’s role in public life, the nature of the information, the source, and time (Floridi et al., 2015). When evaluating the data subject’s role in public life, Google considers three different types of citizens: individuals with a public personality (e.g. politicians), individuals with no public personality (i.e. average citizens), and those with a defined role in public life (e.g. school directors). Ultimately, the more involved a citizen is in the public sphere, the less likely they are to be delisted. Google also considers the nature of the information. Financial records, private contact information, and false information, are all deemed worthy of privacy according to Google. If, however, the “information biases toward a public interest” (e.g. information related to criminal offences),

More about A Group Of Advisory Councillors From Google

Open Document