Should a person be persecuted for his past sins? | Editorials

In a world where protecting privacy is increasingly difficult, news organizations are being asked to delete stories that are no longer newsworthy.

Metroland encourages newspapers and news sites not to publish or otherwise make invisible on the Internet news that members of the public (or their lawyers) do not want to share with the world.

Some of these inquiries involve past encounters with the police or the justice system, and some are simply innocent descriptions, now that the subjects are embarrassed or out of date years later.

There is an ongoing debate about how to handle these requests – and each one is different – but it's fair to say that many editors in the digital world tend to view the requests as part of a re-evaluation by the industry.

Editors have been saying for a long time that they are erasing history. Simply making an article unsearchable on Google does not mean it has been removed from the record. In many cases, these stories have appeared in print and are available on microfilm at your local library.

In other cases, the digital file is in a searchable database, and for a fee historians can often find it with difficulty.

Such queries are not the only reason why articles cannot be searched on websites. Many are lost to the ether during a digital replatforming or website refresh. Some throw it away by mistake.

But consciously removing articles is a big decision.

We don't tend to exclude stories about serious crimes, especially those with criminal records. If the case is dismissed or otherwise disposed of or the person found guilty is acquitted, the commission will consider the circumstances and make a decision.

If we miss the next court event, we will update the event if necessary. Sometimes we remove it.

Every decision is different, and like every news organization, rules evolve. There are rarely easy answers.

At Metroland, editors regularly meet as a group to discuss these requests. Should a person be held back by past misdeeds or bad decisions? Should this readily available record affect their ability to land a new job? Do they deserve a fresh start?

We often ask subjects for documents to help them make a decision if they miss a trial.

Indeed, many news agencies today do not publish the names of those involved in less serious crimes. We don't have the staff to monitor these people through the courts.

Ultimately, public safety trumps privacy.