دانلود رایگان مقاله لاتین اصلاحیه قانون اساسی ایالات متحده از سایت الزویر
عنوان فارسی مقاله:
حقوق اروپایی که فراموش شده است: یک چالش برای اصلاحیه اول قانون اساسی ایالات متحده و اخلاق حرفه ای روابط عمومی
عنوان انگلیسی مقاله:
The European right to be forgotten: A challenge to the United States Constitution’s First Amendment and to professional public relations ethics
سال انتشار : 2016
برای دانلود رایگان مقاله اصلاحیه قانون اساسی ایالات متحده اینجا کلیک نمایید.
بخشی از مقاله انگلیسی:
2. Eroding the marketplace of ideas: legal and ethical implications
First,the establishment ofthe rightto be forgotten contradicts the notion ofthe marketplace of ideas and imperils the free flow of information in our society. The marketplace thus loses an inventory of information at the arbitrary hands of a search engine that liquidates data as the requests arrive. If the FTC were to allow Google to remove data, based on the request of individuals, Google is positioned to become a grand arbiter of information and thus may monopolize the marketplace with specific social, political, and economic ideas. Google’s transparency reportindicates that since May 29, 2014,the company has received 318,269 in Europe requests, and has removed 41.6 percent of the requests (Google, Transparency Report, 2015). As Google implements the “right to be forgotten,” the process itself may be characterized as arbitrary or decentralized. Google states that the process begins when a web form is initiated by an individual and is then reviewed on a case-bycase basis, considering the information’s accuracy, timeliness, and public interest (Google, Transparency Report Frequently Asked Questions, 2015). The right to be forgotten opposes the Marketplace of Ideas theory because it diminishes the ability of people to participate in the marketplace, it disrupts the natural process of communication, and it may misappropriate the marketplace regulation to a legislative function, rather than marketplace participants (Larson, 2013). The robust marketplace of ideas encounters trouble as information is lost and the currency of accuracy is no longer valued. The accurate re-telling of information is left in the bankruptcy court with no chance of resurrection as the information disappears. The right to be forgotten shuts down information transactions, obliterates accuracy, and imperils freedom inherent in the marketplace of ideas. Under the right to be forgotten, the power to control information rests with “data controllers” like Google and other search engines, which determine the availability of information in the Digital Age. Recorded “truth” will become an optical illusion, as search engines remove data. The Public Relations Society of America Member Code of Ethics, originally crafted in 1950 and revised in 2000 provides a code provision for the free flow of information (PRSA, 2016). The code of ethics states a core principle that “protecting and advancing the free flow of accurate and truthful information is essential to serving the public interest and contributing to informed decision making in a democratic society” (PRSA, 2016). The code further asserts that public relations professionals will “preserve the integrity of the process of communication.” Public relations scholars (Heath, 2006) contend that dialogue is a way to engage with key publics, and thatthe marketforces a condition whereby the best ideas rise to the top. The marketplace dynamics therefore suggest the use of dialogic dimensions and presume a position of dialogical ethics. Scholars (Grunig, 2001; Habermas, 1984) have asserted that dialogue facilitates ethical communication. Public relations scholars have suggested dialogic communication as a prevailing theory of public relations (Kent & Taylor, 2002) and have called for dialogic dimensions in the implementation of strategic communications plans (Botan, 1997). Today, public relations scholarship remains distinguished from other disciplines like marketing by the skill of public relations practitioners to formulate relationships by fostering a mutual orientation (Smith, 2012). 2.1. Communications ethics codes and free flow of information While the PRSA ethics code articulates a U.S.-centric perspective, the free flow of information is valued globally. In an analysis of 107 ethics codes for public relations, free flow of information has been characterized a relativistic value, similar to the understanding of fees and gifts (Kim & Ki, 2014). Therefore, the free flow of information remains exercised in various degrees per the country’s law and cultural limitations. Globally,theWorld Public Relations Forum has adopted the Stockholm Accords that encourage communicators to apply skills and tools to “interpret stakeholder’s and society’s expectations as a basis for decisions.” (WPRF, 2010). Further, the accords state that professional communicators must conduct activities to enhance transparency and trustworthy behavior (WPRF, 2010). The right to be forgotten conflicts with these principles by compromising the continuity of accurate information instead of respecting the free flow of information. Further, the integrity of the communication process is irreparably harmed when information is taken away from the search engine, leaving a gap in history. Yet professional communicators in the United States and abroad have a long history of advocating for the protection of free flow of information. The International Public Relations Association (IPRA) code, which served as a foundation for multiple national public relations codes, maintained a strong linkage to the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Watson, 2014). An examination of Article 19 of the UN Declaration asserts, “Everyone has the rightto freedom of opinion and expression;this rightincludes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers” (United Nations, 2016). The declaration’s language remains relevant to the current technology-driven information society and underscores the fundamental human right to have ideas shared through search engines as any media. Yet while no global ethical standards for public relations have emerged, core professional values have been identified by scholars citing aspects of professionalism, advocacy, moral standards, clients’ interests, expertise, and relationships (Taylor & Yang, 2015). By examining the history ofthe PRSA Code, insights are gained aboutthe adherence and reverence to the paramount value ofthe freeflow ofinformation in society. The PRSAcode was originally drafted two years after the formation ofthe society. The document was revised five times before the 1988 iteration that for the first time recognized the dual obligation to the client andthedemocraticprocess (Fitzpatrick, 2002b). Thedeclarationofprinciples of 1988 states: “Members ofthe PublicRelations Society of America base their professional principles on the fundamental value and dignity of the individual, holding that the free exercise of human rights, especially freedom, freedom of assembly, and freedom of the press, is essential to the practice of public relations.” (Fitzpatrick, 2002b). Without the ability to accurately gather information, some question the ability of democracy to appropriately function. Scholars (Aiello & Proffitt, 2008) have argued that citizens in a functioning democracy must have access to information to make “reasoned, rational decisions.” In this ecosystem, the audience takes an active role questioning authority, seeking additional information, and forming relationships with others. Yet, if the information is no longer accessible, the decision-making process is imperiled. The incorporation of the right to be forgotten calls into question freedom and democracy because news media and everyday citizens no longer have access to an accurate recollection of facts and occurrences in public life. While some advocates would argue this sacrifices privacy, the U.S. adherence to tenets of liberty and freedom from government intervention provide a strategic foundation for arguments against a right to be forgotten environment.
Google's right to be forgotten appeal heading to Europe's top court ... https://techcrunch.com/.../googles-right-to-be-forgotten-appeal-heading-to-europes-to... Jul 19, 2017 - Europe's 'right to be forgotten' ruling, which allows private citizens in the region to make requests that search engines delist incorrect, irrelevant ... right to be forgotten | TechCrunch https://techcrunch.com/tag/right-to-be-forgotten/ Europe's 'right to be forgotten' ruling, which allows private citizens in the region to make requests that search engines delist incorrect, irrelevant or out of date ... Consent and Right to be Forgotten - EU Data Protection Regulation www.eudataprotectionregulation.com/consent-and-right-to-be-forgotten Consent for processing an individual's data must be explicitly obtained, and it can be revoked at any time. The right to be Forgotten will now be law. EU judges to tackle 'right to be forgotten' again - Reuters www.reuters.com/article/us-google-privacy-court-idUSKCN18C1QX May 16, 2017 - The "right to be forgotten" - or stopping certain web search results from ... for people's names - will be debated at the European Union's top court ... The “Right to Be Forgotten” in European Union Law - Feb 24, 2016 journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1077699016628824 by KH Youm - 2016 - Cited by 7 - Related articles European Union Committee. (2014, July 23). EU data protection law: A “right to be forgotten” (European Union Committee Second Report). Retrieved from ... Searches related to European right to be forgotten right to be forgotten form right to be forgotten uk right to be forgotten us right to be forgotten definition right to be forgotten gdpr right to be forgotten case right to be forgotten article right to be forgotten debate