Skip to comments.Google Is Being Forced To Censor The History Of Merrill Lynch — And That Should Terrify You
Posted on 07/03/2014 7:10:15 AM PDT by EBH
The European Union's new law giving people a "right to be forgotten," which requires Google to remove links to information about them, is having exactly the effect its critics predicted: It is censoring the internet, giving new tools that help the rich and powerful (and ordinary folk) hide negative information about them, and letting criminals make their histories disappear.
Exhibit A: Google was required to delete a link to this BBC article about Stan O'Neal, the former CEO of Merrill Lynch. O'Neal led the bank in the mid-2000s, a period when it became dangerously over-exposed to the looming mortgage crisis. When the crisis hit, Merrill's losses were so great the bank had to be sold to Bank of America. O'Neal lost his job, but he exited with a $161.5 million golden parachute.
There is nothing incorrect in the post, in fact it's a rather mild account of O'Neal's incompetence during the period. O'Neal was forced out of the company after he began discussing selling it without informing his board of directors. This is ancient, well-established history. Having it removed from Google doesn't undo the fact that it happened...
...So pedophiles can take advantage of this law as well.
Forget.me, a company that expedites Google deletion requests, tells Business Insider that it is fielding 250 requests per day. Here's a breakdown of what is being deleted from the world's greatest search engine:
(Excerpt) Read more at finance.yahoo.com ...
I used to think Google was owned by the U.S. government. Now I’m beginning to think it’s owned by the U.N. And the NSA also answers to the U.N.
A quick glance at this article and my first take is I agree with the EU’s law.
Everyone has a right to something other than the God-given rights outlined in the Constitution’s Bill of Rights.
What an upside-down world this has become.
So we should censor all of 0bama’s past, just because he says so?
So letting them control the historical context is OK with you?
Frankly, I see this more as another Glenn Beck was right moment when he told us to buy books, OLD BOOKS, so we don’t lose our histories...
|Freedom ≠ Free Stuff☭|
|I, for one, welcome our new Cybernetic Overlords /.|
I may have missed something but I look at this as being more of an advantage for the average person.
I also strongly agree with this law.
Unless your a public figure or a criminal, you own the information about you and within reason should have the right to control that information.
What if there is was an arrest and charges have been dropped.
The arrest record is still in the google results.
How does one stop these sites from extorting 39.95 to remove the record of the arrest?
As I recall there were several “memory hole” events that took place regarding TWA 800.
“How does one stop these sites from extorting 39.95 to remove the record of the arrest?”
A well designed and enforced law is the only solution. That comes from someone who thinks at least 50% of existing laws should be repealed.
Technology is way ahead of culture and law and it might be to late to do anything about it.
Anything you have ever posted to the Internet (even for 1 second), is there forever.
If people realized how much information Companies and the Government have about us people would freak. Knowledge is power.
Would that include you birth certificate, or the record of any trial in which you have been convicted? Blanket statements are often wrong. Note that I didn’t say “every blanket statement is wrong”, because that would be an incorrect blanket statement. But, you probably get my drift.
There have always been other ways to find such information if it's important enough for you to know it.
Otherwise if they are not behind bars, people have a right not to be haunted by their past mistakes for the rest of their lives.
The funny thing about big data, is like subatomic particles, when it's being observed, it changes.
So when people finally do become aware of the dangers, they'll either stop posting their opinions and activities online, or post neutral drivel, which latter would not be much fun for them, so maybe they'll stop online activities altogether and get a real life, which is what they should have been doing all along.
That statement is inevitably, indubitably, invariably correct!
So letting them control the historical context is OK with you?
Whatsthematter, forgot how to go to a library and do some real research? Or is that too much trouble for you to get information that is so incredibly important to you?
Do you include Ted Kennedy’s little kerfuffle on a bridge one night?
Do you think you’d know more or less if FReeRepublic got censored because someone here wanted all their content removed?
Don’t be so obtuse in this modern day of information...how many folks do you know who actually still bother to even open a book!
Is his Wiki page still up though?
When you realize this site is a mix of good and bad information, it's a wash.
Technology doesn't just make it easy to disseminate helpful information, it also makes it just as easy to disseminate harmful information.
how many folks do you know who actually still bother to even open a book!
Those of you infatuated with technology, do not yet realize that the soon and ultimate result of technology, will be the loss of freedom--not just through surveillance, but in numerous other ways, ways that are already happening.
When machines do all the work--and that day is fast approaching and will arrive within the working lifetimes of many here--how will you find a job? Most of you won't.
You'll be on the dole.
There will be no way for any of you to improve your lot through hard work, because there won't be any work.
It's a kind of tragedy of the commons, but in this case the common resource that is being used to the max is technology, and the resource that is being destroyed is the human workforce.
You had to wait forty years for Google before you found out about that?
You probably didn't know the moon landings were faked, either, until the internet came along.
“You had to wait forty years for Google before you found out about that?”
No I didn’t. I’m saying that censorship is wrong. To say Google can’t link to articles about it is censorship.
I would rather switch than support Google!!!
“Would that include you birth certificate, or the record of any trial in which you have been convicted? “
No and No.
If you see me at Starbucks every morning that is incidental contact and no big deal.
However if you follow me around all day, recording everywhere I go, everything I say and Everyone I have contact with.
Well, that is stalking and harassment.
I’m sure you get my drift.