3 ms·

This is a very strange article with very unsympathetic protagonists. So two Italian muckrakers can't make a living publishing random details about people's live

This is a very strange article with very unsympathetic protagonists. So two Italian muckrakers can't make a living publishing random details about people's lives, so what? The issue here is that unlike today, even 20 years ago finding information used to be non-trivial. So there was little long-term damage to having a small Italian paper publish your name, in relation to charges that were eventually dropped. It still wasn't ideal, but it wasn't fatal to your reputation. Today, anything and everything is online and follows people around like an unshakeable shadow. So of course these folks have the "right to be forgotten" -- it's bringing balance back to the equation. "Journalists" are the worst perpetrators of this -- shout the lies loudly, but whisper the retraction or the truth. Good for the Europeans to have this law in place.

duxup 7y ago
What makes them "muckrakers"?
- Barrin92 7y ago
  to me this stands out >But Vittorio Pecoraro argued that his privacy had been violated. The article was easily available and searchable online, and he had not been convicted of a crime. Yet because of PrimaDaNoi, what he considered a humiliating family argument had become the first thing that many people knew about him and his pizza and seafood restaurant, he said. >“I have a reputation, I have been here for 50 years, I am known all over,” Mr. Pecoraro said in an interview at the restaurant, Positano, where the 2008 fight had occurred. This situation has apparently threatened this man's business and it's not clear to me that there is a case for public interest. This journalist is literally a guy sitting in his apartment digging up stories on private citizens. I actually agree with the court ruling here and I'm glad that we have the right to be forgotten. I don't want to live in a society were the commercial interests of paparazzi can destroy entire existences of people even if the people in question have apparently moved on long ago. I don't want to live in a society where people's careers or personal lifes are ruined because someone at gawker or buzzfeed gets paid by clicks.
- Hendrikto 7y ago
  Digging around in other people’s dirt.
gwd 7y ago
> Today, anything and everything is online and follows people around like an unshakeable shadow. So of course these folks have the "right to be forgotten" -- it's bringing balance back to the equation. Right; but that would be a reason for Google to remove the information, not the newspaper. I mean, 20 years ago, it would have been possible to find such an article on microfiche in your local library if you knew where to look. It should still be possible to find it on the appropriate newspaper's website if you have the right link / look at the right date in history.
- NeedMoreTea 7y ago
  Needs to be deindexed at the news sites too. No use removing from Google if I can just go to bbc or YourHometownNewspaper and find the trivial but incredibly embarrassing thing, or old offence gwd did when younger. Some countries have the concept of spent convictions or rehabilitation, especially restrictive around minors. After some number of years the conviction no longer exists, unless you want to join the police or similar. It's not reasonable for these to crop up for trivial effort. If you get super rich and famous and have a tabloid digging dirt, well they might just send an intern to dig through 30 years of back issues... Not really a lot you can do about that.
occamrazor 7y ago
For this reason it is common in continental Europe (and in some jurisdictions required by law) to refer to defendants only by their initials, unless they are a prominent public figure.

duxup 7y ago

What makes them "muckrakers"?

Barrin92 7y ago
to me this stands out >But Vittorio Pecoraro argued that his privacy had been violated. The article was easily available and searchable online, and he had not been convicted of a crime. Yet because of PrimaDaNoi, what he considered a humiliating family argument had become the first thing that many people knew about him and his pizza and seafood restaurant, he said. >“I have a reputation, I have been here for 50 years, I am known all over,” Mr. Pecoraro said in an interview at the restaurant, Positano, where the 2008 fight had occurred. This situation has apparently threatened this man's business and it's not clear to me that there is a case for public interest. This journalist is literally a guy sitting in his apartment digging up stories on private citizens. I actually agree with the court ruling here and I'm glad that we have the right to be forgotten. I don't want to live in a society were the commercial interests of paparazzi can destroy entire existences of people even if the people in question have apparently moved on long ago. I don't want to live in a society where people's careers or personal lifes are ruined because someone at gawker or buzzfeed gets paid by clicks.
Hendrikto 7y ago
Digging around in other people’s dirt.

gwd 7y ago

> Today, anything and everything is online and follows people around like an unshakeable shadow. So of course these folks have the "right to be forgotten" -- it's bringing balance back to the equation. Right; but that would be a reason for Google to remove the information, not the newspaper. I mean, 20 years ago, it would have been possible to find such an article on microfiche in your local library if you knew where to look. It should still be possible to find it on the appropriate newspaper's website if you have the right link / look at the right date in history.

NeedMoreTea 7y ago
Needs to be deindexed at the news sites too. No use removing from Google if I can just go to bbc or YourHometownNewspaper and find the trivial but incredibly embarrassing thing, or old offence gwd did when younger. Some countries have the concept of spent convictions or rehabilitation, especially restrictive around minors. After some number of years the conviction no longer exists, unless you want to join the police or similar. It's not reasonable for these to crop up for trivial effort. If you get super rich and famous and have a tabloid digging dirt, well they might just send an intern to dig through 30 years of back issues... Not really a lot you can do about that.

occamrazor 7y ago

For this reason it is common in continental Europe (and in some jurisdictions required by law) to refer to defendants only by their initials, unless they are a prominent public figure.