Skip to content

Comment on A list of search results omitted due to the “Right to be forgotten”parent

Comments

OMG they're stealing my rights!!!

Except not really. Google, despite what many might like to think, is not an "official" entity, it's a private company. They aren't disseminating information for the public good, whatever that is, but so they can slap an ad on it and make some profits. So what if Jo(e) Bloggs did something embarrassing a decade ago? If one of your friends was constantly bringing up things from years ago, you'd get tired of them doing so pretty quickly. Why should Google get to do it to make some money off of it? And what sort of gossip monger even wants this to be possible?

So the New York Times isn't a private company then? Just repeating "private company" is meaningless as a justification for well...just about anything. You'll have to find a different point to argue.

The NYT did the work and wrote the story and the editor decided it was worth publishing. The don't just dredge it up, slap an ad on it, and call that adding value. And if a newspaper gets something wrong, it does retract it.

You've just made a case for censoring all comedic works based on any real-life events. Was that your intention?

AboutSource Built by g1lg1l

Hackerly is an independent reader for Hacker News, built on the public HN API. Not affiliated with Y Combinator.