From Being Forgotten To Being Found: Balancing Digital Reputation With Right To Information & Freedom Of Press

The Right to be Forgotten has rapidly gained currency with the advent of technology and personal data protection. Rooted in individual privacy and dignity, it allows individuals to seek removal or de-indexing of personal information that is outdated, or perhaps disproportionately harmful.India, following the recognition of right to privacy as a fundamental right by a 9-judge bench of the Supreme Court in Justice KS Puttaswamy (Retd.) & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors., has embraced the Right to be Forgotten through judicial orders.However, as digital ecosystems mature, a deeper problem has emerged— erasure does not always preserve rights or triumph truth.In many cases, initial accusations receive massive coverage from the media, etching the public memory. Whereas subsequent acquittals are ignored, resulting in lasting damage to an individual's reputation. Objectively speaking, harm is then not caused by the presence of outdated information, but by the absence or invisibility of correct and exculpatory information.For instance, Right to Be Forgotten pales into insignificance in high profile cases, where no matter the redaction— the public knows the identity of the accused.The Madras High Court had, back in 2021, recognised this predicament when it said that erasure may prove to be “counterproductive” for a person if they want to prove their innocence.Even speaking constitutionally, the Right to be Forgotten presents a fundamental conflict with the Right to Information and the Freedom of Press.This gap has given rise to an emerging idea: the Right to be Found.While not formally recognised in any jurisdiction, the Right to be Found offers a more nuanced approach to digital reputation, one that may be better suited to constitutional democracies.What Is Right to Be Found?The Right to be Found refers to an individual's right to ensure that accurate, updated, and exonerating information about them is visible, discoverable, and contextualised online, particularly when older adverse material continues to dominate public perception.The Right to be Found doesn't seek deletion or suppression information. It rather promotes updating of archive reports, linking of acquittal or quashing orders to prior allegations, and contextualisation of information so that truth is not fragmented by algorithms. In essence, it addresses informational imbalance in the public domain.A writ of mandamus may be issued to media houses, to update their prior reports with subsequent developments and/or to run a fresh report intimating the public of the latest development. This would instantly serve a dual purpose— preserve individual dignity by contextualisation and foster the citizens' right to information.Why Right to Be Found?The Right to Be Forgotten often attracts criticism for encouraging historical amnesia. Courts may be understandably reluctant to delete judgments or news reports that were factually correct at the time of publication.The Right to be Found avoids this problem. It retains the historical record while ensuring that subsequent developments—such as acquittals—are equally accessible. This preserves the “whole” truth instead of erasing history and strengthens the integrity of public records.Erasure-based remedies also sit in direct tension with freedom of expression. De-indexing orders against search engines or takedown directives to media houses can appear as judicially mandated silence.The Supreme Court recently said that a Delhi High Court order directing a digital platform to remove certain news reports concerning the arrest of a former banker in a money laundering case, following his discharge, would not operate as a precedent in other cases.This, because the Top Court felt that erasure of past information is not innocuous. Rather, it raises the question of how the right to privacy and the right to be forgotten under Article 21 of the Constitution is to be reconciled with Freedom of Press under Article 19(1)(a).A mature understanding of digital rights must acknowledge that the Press has a legitimate constitutional right to report arrests, remands, and ongoing criminal proceedings when they concern matters of public interest or public importance. Such reporting, if accurate at the time of publication, does not become unlawful merely because the accused is later acquitted. The Indian Constitution is not known to mandate erasure of truthful journalism. Nor does it impose retrospective silence on the press. What it demands however, is fairness. In this context, the Right to be Found promotes freedom of speech and expression. It requires addition of context rather than removal of content, making it more compatible with constitutional free-speech guarantees.Also significant to note that modern reputational harm is rarely caused by publication alone; it is caused by algorithmic prioritisation. Search engines amplify the first arrest report but rarely elevate the acquittal that followed years later.The Right to be Forgotten responds ...

From Being Forgotten To Being Found: Balancing Digital Reputation With Right To Information & Freedom Of Press

Akshita Saxena

Tags