3 ms·
I'm sympathetic to amending articles related to people who were accused of crimes they didn't commit, and were later acquitted or had those charges dropped—that
by karaterobot 2y ago
I'm sympathetic to amending articles related to people who were accused of crimes they didn't commit, and were later acquitted or had those charges dropped—that's a matter of correcting the record. I disagree with destroying the historical record itself, if the expunged stories were factual accounts of real events. Those things ought to be immutable. Journalists engaged in real journalism have special protections because they have special responsibilities in society, one of which is to truthfully document history as it unfolds. If they just give up those responsibilities, people may eventually start questioning what makes them different than everybody else with a hot take on the internet.
- ironmagma 2y agoI know someone who was (in my opinion, clearly) taken in to the witness protection program. That’s the only time I’ve seen every trace of a person disappear. Yes, there are a few stray dangling references to that person in a few documents I found. But if their life is legitimately threatened by an adversary, I can be sympathetic to having the records expunged.