As public editor [Kathy English] of Canada's largest-circulation newspaper {The Toronto Star] , I am increasingly faced with requests to remove published content from the Star's website.
The reasons for these requests to "unpublish" – a word media organizations have coined to describe public requests to remove content from news websites — are varied. Some believe the report is inaccurate or unfair. Some experience what might be called "source remorse" and rethink what they want the public to know about them. Others may be embarrassed by what is written about them; they decide they don't want the public to know their marital status, or what they paid for their home.
In many cases, these unpublishing requests emerge many months, even years, after original publication when those named in the news understand that through Google and other search engines, the news article in which they are named is easily accessible to the general public.
For journalists and news organizations, requests to unpublish raise questions about accuracy and fairness, as well as trust and credibility with our readers and the communities we serve.
What's fair to readers? What's fair to those we report on? How do news organizations respond to such requests in a manner consistent with journalistic principles of accuracy, accountability and transparency?
My paper, "The longtail of news: To unpublish or not to unpublish" (24 pages; PDF) examines how news organizations throughout North America are responding to requests to unpublish news content. Information was gathered in several ways, most notably through a North American-wide survey to which 110 news organizations responded.
Hat Tip: Cliff L.
FreePint Shop:
VIP LiveWire:
