Google faces data watchdogs over 'right to be forgotten'

Shadow falls over a banner saying "Google Deutschland" The ruling only applies to search engines viewed from within the EU

Related Stories

Google has met data regulators from across the European Union to discuss the implications of the recent "right to be forgotten" ruling.

An EU court ruled in May that links to "irrelevant" and outdated data should be erased from searches on request, leading to censorship concerns.

The decision and Google's handling of the requests have been heavily debated.

The BBC understands that the search firm informed the watchdogs that it had now received more than 91,000 requests.

These in turn covered a total of 328,000 links that applicants wanted taken down.

Start Quote

All this talk about rewriting history and airbrushing embarrassing bits from your past - this is nonsense, that's not going to happen”

End Quote Christopher Graham UK information commissioner

The regulators were told that the greatest number of these came from France, followed by Germany, then Great Britain and Spain.

Across Europe as a whole, the search engine - which has been critical of the court's ruling - has:

  • Approved more than 50% of the requests
  • Asked for more information in about 15% of the cases
  • Rejected more than 30% of the applications

According to a report by Reuters, EU regulators were specifically concerned about the fact that Google had notified the owners of affected websites when it removed their links.

In one case this led the Wall Street Journal to write again about a Netherlands-based investor who had been linked to a sex workshop in 1998, after he had asked for the link to be removed from Google's results.

Technology reporter Dave Lee explains how the controversial system will work

In another example, the BBC's economics editor Robert Peston brought attention to one of his blog posts that had disappeared from Google's search results.

Furthermore, a website has been set up to log examples of reported erasures.

Speaking to Bloomberg, the Irish data protection commissioner Billy Hawkes expressed concerns about this knock-on effect.

"The more they do so, it means the media organisation republishes the information and so much for the right to be forgotten," Mr Hawkes said.

"There is an issue there."

Reuters also reported that the watchdogs were concerned that the removed results could still be found on the international site even though they had been taken off local variants such as

Working party

The meeting in Brussels also included representatives from other search engines, including Yahoo, and Microsoft's Bing.

They met with a group known as the Article 29 Working Party, a gathering of data commissioners from across Europe concerned about the future direction of the "right to be forgotten" ruling.

Christopher Graham Christopher Graham said he expected many complaints about the ruling

Ahead of the meeting, the Society of Editors - a group representing media organisations in the UK - wrote a letter to Prime Minister David Cameron urging him to resist the ruling.

The society warned that a "vital principle" over the free publishing, and archiving, of information was at stake.

But UK information commissioner Christopher Graham said that some of the concerns expressed by newspapers and broadcasters were overblown - and that there may have been some media manipulation on Google's part.

"Google is a massive commercial organisation making millions and millions out of processing people's personal information. They're going to have to do some tidying up," he told Speaking to Radio 5 Live's Wake Up To Money.

He added that the censorship debate should not hide the fact that people should be allowed to move on from some incidents in their past.

"All this talk about rewriting history and airbrushing embarrassing bits from your past - this is nonsense, that's not going to happen," he said.

"There will certainly be occasions when there ought to be less prominence given to things that are done and dusted, over and done with.

"The law would regard that as a spent conviction, but so far as Google is concerned there's no such thing as a spent conviction."

Follow Dave Lee on Twitter @DaveLeeBBC


More on This Story

Related Stories


This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
  • rate this

    Comment number 315.

    Google is a search engine, not the Internet. You will still be able to search using other search engines, none of which are facing the same trouble from the EU.

    This whole situation shows how ignorance of IT is rife.

    The 'right to be forgotten' has nothing to do with ordinary citizens, it's all to do with companies, politicians and protecting their interests.

    Respect to Google.

  • rate this

    Comment number 287.

    For once, I'm with Google. Someone earlier said, destroying the index does not destroy the book. All that Google has done is to make the search much easier. What is on the internet, is in paper form elsewhere, Newspaper Archive, County Court, British Library, etc etc, Are you going to ask for those records to be removed ? If so you had better look up the word censorship and I dont that in the UK

  • rate this

    Comment number 52.

    Google is effectively just an index. Telling them to remove entries in their index, without getting the underlying content removed, seems pointless to me - surely if there is to be a "right to be forgotten" the focus needs to be on the content, not the indexing?

  • rate this

    Comment number 25.

    Why should Google have the right to persist out of date or inaccurate information about us?
    Because Google doesn't have the information. It just indexes material stored on other websites.
    Burning a library's index cards doesn't make the books disappear!


More Technology stories


Features & Analysis

BBC Future

(US Navy)

The world’s noisiest spy plane

The Soviet giant that still soldiers on


  • TomatoesClick Watch

    The smart garden that fits inside your house and provides fresh healthy food

Try our new site and tell us what you think. Learn more
Take me there

Copyright © 2015 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.