So someone that is falsely accused of a rape or murder, that is widely reported, shouldn't have any recourse after the fact to have those stories removed from searches? Often news organizations will only report on the accusation and rarely update when they are exonerated.
One of those things is a reachable legal entity. The other is a pop-up content farm whose next instance is a few hours of work away. Google is the logical one to ask.
A library is a reachable entity. Do we ask them to purge their catalog of metadata that indicates a particular source contains particular data about someone? The premise is absurd.
>Google doesn’t produce the content, sites do, the issue is with those sites surely?
Google decides what someone will see when they Google your name, they might decide that the articles where you were accused of CP have much more priority then the single article 1 month later where you were found not guilty.
That can be extremely difficult to do false information is spread widely. Say a story is published by the Associated Press and then is republished on hundreds of other websites.
