Tag Archives: Daisuke Wakabayashi

Crisis Management, , , , , , , ,
Right to be Forgotten on Google

Many people are concerned with the volume of slanderous content about people on the internet…including websites that publish such material and then extort victims to pay to have it removed.

In 2021, Google announced plans to change its search algorithm to prevent predatory websites, which operated under domains like BadGirlReport.date and PredatorsAlert.us, from appearing in the list of results when someone searches for a person’s name.

In Google Seeks to Break Vicious Cycle of Online Slander, the article that broke this news, Kashmir Hill and Daisuke Wakabayashi, tech reporters for The New York Times, reported:

Google also recently created a new concept it calls “known victims.” When people report to the company that they have been attacked on sites that charge to remove posts, Google will automatically suppress similar content when their names are searched for. “Known victims” also includes people whose nude photos have been published online without their consent, allowing them to request suppression of explicit results for their names.

These are examples of personal information that Google will remove if you are unable to have a website remove it on request:

Non-consensual explicit or intimate personal images from Google

Involuntary fake pornography from Google

Content about you on sites with exploitative removal practices from Google

Select financial, medical, and national ID information from Google

“Doxxing” content – content exposing contact information with an intent to harm

Google may also remove personal information that creates significant risks of identity theft, financial fraud, or other specific harms.

If you believe your request meets one of the guidelines mentioned above, you can make a removal request at Google’s form, found here.

 
 
Internet Legal Issues, , , , , , ,
CDA 230

We rarely write about politics.

But President Trump’s attack on the legal loophole that allows online hate speech – Communications Decency Act, Section 230 — caught our attention. In short, he wants to do away with it.

We often lament the presence of the CDA 230, as it is known. In my recent article on Medium, I explain why:

On the internet, any of us can be impersonated, harassed or the focus of “fake news.” It persists because of the Communications Decency Act Section 230, a law that protects the platforms that publish such information — publishers like Google, Facebook, Twitter and millions of blogs, forums, and websites — against liability for third-party content on their websites.

We have helped many clients who have been adversely affected by the type of harassment the CDA 230 permits. So, we have been following this story with much interest. Why would President Trump want to remove that law? One reason: Twitter has been moderating his tweets and flagging content it considers questionable.

The New York Times described his intent:

The executive order that Mr. Trump signed on Thursday seeks to strip liability protection in certain cases for companies like Twitter, Google, and Facebook for the content on their sites, meaning they could face legal jeopardy if they allowed false and defamatory posts.

In another article, Times reporter Daisuke Wakabayashi explained how the CDA 230 works:

…Section 230 shields websites from liability for content created by their users. It permits internet companies to moderate their sites without being on the hook legally for everything they host.

Section 230 has allowed the modern internet to flourish. Sites can moderate content — set their own rules for what is and what is not allowed — without being liable for everything posted by visitors.

…Websites trading in revenge pornography, hate speech or personal information to harass people online receive the same immunity as sites like Wikipedia.

This topic will be in the news for weeks to come. Legal experts think it is unlikely that the CDA 230 can be substantially changed by President Trump’s action.  Our hope, like others who support updating it, is that it can be done through appropriate legislative channels.

Related reading: Removing Content from Google in the U.S.