Google asked to take down 2.4 MEEELLION URLs under EU law

But only delists about half

Google has received takedown requests for 2.4 million URLs since 2014 – but said yes to less than half.

As a result of a 2014 ruling from the European Court of Justice, EU citizens can ask Google to remove information about them from search results.

According to Google's transparency report, published today, since 28 May 2014 there have been 654,876 requests made, with 2,437,271 URLs singled out for delisting.

Google doesn't have to comply with the request, though. The biz appoints at least one reviewer to assess each case, who will weigh up whether the information is "inaccurate, inadequate, irrelevant or excessive".

chocolate factory

Europe's shock Google privacy ruling: The end of history? Don't be daft


The firm can refuse to take links down if there is a public interest in the information remaining in the search results, for instance business information might be useful for potential customers, while content about a violent crime could be of interest to the general public.

The report indicates that URLs are more likely to stay up than come down. Since May 2014, Google has not delisted 56.7 per cent of URLs. In the UK, some 60.2 per cent of URLs were not taken down.

The biz's decision-making in such a case is coming under the scrutiny of the High Court for the first time this week, in a case brought by a claimant who wants information about a 1990s conviction for conspiracy to falsely account stripped from the search engine's results.

In its transparency report, Google offered up some examples of cases when it has refused the request.

Among them is a Brit who asked Google to delist almost 300 articles related to a 2012 benefits fraud conviction. On the basis of a document that suggested he was later found innocent of the crime, Google delisted 239 URLs.

But then the same person asked the biz to delist a number of other pages related to a separate conviction for forging documents, and Google probed into the case a little deeper.

"After re-reviewing the original document he submitted as proof of his innocence in the benefits case, we discovered that it was a forgery," the biz said. "We reinstated all of the URLs we had previously delisted."

Since January 2016, Google has also kept track of the type of content that people want to remove from its search, with 18.1 per cent relating to professional information and 6.1 per cent to crime.

Paris Hilton in Faster Pussycat! Kill! Kill!

Google: Grab our TOOL if you want your search query quashed


In a separate paper, Google said that there are two dominant reasons for a right to be forgotten delisting request.

"33 per cent of requested URLs related to social media and directory services that contained personal information, while 20 per cent of URLs related to news outlets and government websites that in a majority of cases covered a requester's legal history," it wrote.

And what information is requested for delisting changes depending on the country: Italians and Brits were three times more likely to go after news sources, while French and German citizens frequently want social media and directory pages.

France, Germany and the UK were also the most active, accounting for 51 per cent of URL delisting requests. A quarter of a percent of people requesting that information be taken down generated 15 per cent of all URL requests – unsurprisingly, many of these were law firms and reputation management services. However, some 87 per cent of requests do come from private individuals.

The site that has been most affected is a French directory of professionals, with 7,701 URLs delisted. Second to that is Facebook, with 6,846 URLs delisted, while Twitter is fourth, with 5,476 URLs delisted. ®

Similar topics

Broader topics

Other stories you might like

  • Brave roasts DuckDuckGo over Bing privacy exception
    Search biz hits back at 'misleading' claims, saga lifts lid on Microsoft's web tracking advice

    Brave CEO Brendan Eich took aim at rival DuckDuckGo on Wednesday by challenging the web search engine's efforts to brush off revelations that its Android, iOS, and macOS browsers gave, to a degree, Microsoft Bing and LinkedIn trackers a pass versus other trackers.

    Eich drew attention to one of DuckDuckGo's defenses for exempting Microsoft's Bing and LinkedIn domains, a condition of its search contract with Microsoft: that its browsers blocked third-party cookies anyway.

    "For non-search tracker blocking (e.g. in our browser), we block most third-party trackers," explained DuckDuckGo CEO Gabriel Weinberg last month. "Unfortunately our Microsoft search syndication agreement prevents us from doing more to Microsoft-owned properties. However, we have been continually pushing and expect to be doing more soon."

    Continue reading
  • I was fired for blowing the whistle on cult's status in Google unit, says contractor
    The internet giant, a doomsday religious sect, and a lawsuit in Silicon Valley

    A former Google video producer has sued the internet giant alleging he was unfairly fired for blowing the whistle on a religious sect that had all but taken over his business unit. 

    The lawsuit demands a jury trial and financial restitution for "religious discrimination, wrongful termination, retaliation and related causes of action." It alleges Peter Lubbers, director of the Google Developer Studio (GDS) film group in which 34-year-old plaintiff Kevin Lloyd worked, is not only a member of The Fellowship of Friends, the exec was influential in growing the studio into a team that, in essence, funneled money back to the fellowship.

    In his complaint [PDF], filed in a California Superior Court in Silicon Valley, Lloyd lays down a case that he was fired for expressing concerns over the fellowship's influence at Google, specifically in the GDS. When these concerns were reported to a manager, Lloyd was told to drop the issue or risk losing his job, it is claimed. 

    Continue reading
  • UK competition watchdog seeks to make mobile browsers, cloud gaming and payments more competitive
    Investigation could help end WebKit monoculture on iOS devices

    The United Kingdom's Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) on Friday said it intends to launch an investigation of Apple's and Google's market power with respect to mobile browsers and cloud gaming, and to take enforcement action against Google for its app store payment practices.

    "When it comes to how people use mobile phones, Apple and Google hold all the cards," said Andrea Coscelli, Chief Executive of the CMA, in a statement. "As good as many of their services and products are, their strong grip on mobile ecosystems allows them to shut out competitors, holding back the British tech sector and limiting choice."

    The decision to open a formal investigation follows the CMA's year-long study of the mobile ecosystem. The competition watchdog's findings have been published in a report that concludes Apple and Google have a duopoly that limits competition.

    Continue reading
  • Google offers $118m to settle gender discrimination lawsuit
    Don't even think about putting LaMDA on the compensation committee

    Google has promised to cough up $118 million to settle a years-long gender-discrimination class-action lawsuit that alleged the internet giant unfairly pays men more than women.

    The case, launched in 2017, was led by three women, Kelly Ellis, Holly Pease, and Kelli Wisuri, who filed a complaint alleging the search giant hires women in lower-paying positions compared to men despite them having the same qualifications. Female staff are also less likely to get promoted, it was claimed.

    Gender discrimination also exists within the same job tier, too, the complaint stated. Google was accused of paying women less than their male counterparts despite them doing the same work. The lawsuit was later upgraded to a class-action status when a fourth woman, Heidi Lamar, joined as a plaintiff. The class is said to cover more than 15,000 people.

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022