Georgetown University’s Newspaper of Record since 1920

The Hoya

Georgetown University’s Newspaper of Record since 1920

The Hoya

Georgetown University’s Newspaper of Record since 1920

The Hoya

Panel Discusses EU Privacy Law

CHARLIE+LOWE%2FTHE+HOYA%0AA+panel+discussed+European+internet+privacy+laws+on+Monday.
CHARLIE LOWE/THE HOYA A panel discussed European internet privacy laws on Monday.

A panel of experts debated the European Court of Justice’s ruling about the right to be forgotten online at an event called “An Evening Not to be Forgotten” hosted by the university’s communication, culture and technology program in the Walsh Building on Monday evening.

The European Court of Justice ruled that under certain conditions, individuals have the right to ask search engines to remove links with personal information about them.

The event was moderated by Mark MacCarthy, an adjunct professor in the communication, culture and technology program. The panel was composed of Assistant Professor of Communications Meg Ambrose, Counsellor for the Digital Economy at the Delegation of the European Union Andrea Glorioso, 2014 Open Government Fellow John Tran and Gabe Rottman, the legislative counsel and policy advisor at the American Civil Liberties Union.

Glorioso said that she feels that the right to have expunged online records is fundamental for Europeans.

“We need to be very clear, that Europeans have the right to be protected and have the right to privacy when it comes to personal data. This is a fundamental right that all Europeans share. This has to be balanced with the right to freedom of expression, the right to access information and the right to conduct a business” Glorioso said.

MacCarthy questioned whether the court’s decision went too far.

“We tend to think of privacy and freedom of expression as two things that go together. But in fact, there is a tension between the two and there has always been. Privacy and freedom of expression no longer walk hand in hand,” MacCarthy said.“It makes me wonder whether if it essentially allowed privacy to choke free expression and maybe there needs to be balance and the extent to which privacy can weigh more heavily than freedom of speech.”

Tran said that he does not agree with this concept.

“I think that this way of framing the issue is actually inaccurate. It is not an issue of privacy versus freedom of expression, but rather privacy versus the public’s access to information and the commercial interest of search engines. I don’t think we should be pinning these two principles against each other,” Tran said. “I think a good example of that tension is that the court does not say that newspapers have to remove any information, because it touches on freedom of expression. I think that this is an important distinction which changes the framing of the discussion.”

Rottman also supports the decision of the court and said that it is unfair for personal information to be made public online.
“There is a social interest at stake here. I don’t discard the harm caused by the radical advances in our ability to collect and analyze information which is available to the public. This creates problems that we haven’t seen in a long time. If you wanted to go and find out whether someone has been arrested or divorced, now all of that is available in a click of a button, and this is a problem,” Rottman said.

Ambrose pointed out some issues that  may be caused by this ruling.

“Currently, when Google gets a take-down request, they not only have to verify that the user is who he or she claims to be, that they are from where they say they are from and then figure out what the right to be forgotten might mean in that country, which has not been decided for itself. This is a massive compliance task that they are having to deal with,”Ambrose said.

Madeline Westrick (SFS ’18), who attended the event, said that she liked the broad scope of opinions represented in the debate.

“I really appreciated the fact that there was a panel of different speakers, as opposed to just one person speaking individually and giving just their viewpoint. I was able to see the issue, which is quite a controversial one, from four different perspectives and that really helped me formulate a more educated opinion on the topic,” Westrick said.

Leave a Comment
Donate to The Hoya

Your donation will support the student journalists of Georgetown University. Your contribution will allow us to purchase equipment and cover our annual website hosting costs.

More to Discover
Donate to The Hoya

Comments (0)

All The Hoya Picks Reader Picks Sort: Newest

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *