Hello,<p>I'm a journalist looking for a way to identify results removed under EU law. I'd like a big set of pages to search/analyse.<p>I'm struggling to get my head around how to do this. If anyone has ideas, I'm all ears!
To the best of my knowledge: you cannot. (I'm an EU-based SEO. I don't know everything, but i might be a good source.) Most of the search queries that contain human names will be marked as "Some results may have been removed under data protection law in Europe." no matter wether a removal really happened or not.<p>Afais this is the "best" data you get from Google for this topic:
<a href="https://www.google.com/transparencyreport/removals/europeprivacy/" rel="nofollow">https://www.google.com/transparencyreport/removals/europepri...</a><p>When you look at the other transparency reports you'll notice that you're able to search through other types of removed results (e.g. copyright violations), but that this is not possible in the right to be forgotten area.<p>[Edit]
But you could ask any big newspaper Website for help. They receive a notice in their Search Console when a result is taken down.
To clarify, I want to shine a light on results wrongly removed: cases where freedom of expression, and the public interest in remembering, outweighs the right to be forgotten.
You're looking for Lumen[0] (formerly, Chilling Effects)<p>From Wikipedia[1]:<p>> The archive got a boost when Google began submitting its notices in 2002. Google began to do so in response to the publicity generated when the Church of Scientology convinced Google to remove references and links to an anti-Scientology web site, Operation Clambake, in April 2002.<p>[0] <a href="https://lumendatabase.org/" rel="nofollow">https://lumendatabase.org/</a><p>[1] <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lumen_(website)" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lumen_(website)</a>
<a href="https://www.google.com/transparencyreport/removals/europeprivacy/faq/?hl=en#provide_detailed_stats" rel="nofollow">https://www.google.com/transparencyreport/removals/europepri...</a><p>> <i>Can you provide more detailed statistics about the nature of these requests and removals?</i><p>> <i>We have provided statistics about the scale of our delisting process—updated daily—since October 2014 in this Transparency Report and have added anonymised examples of delisting decisions to provide color. Additional data on common material factors is available for download here. We continue to explore ways to provide more transparency into delisting decisions in an operationally efficient manner and with due regard to the sensitive and private nature of the requests.</i>
Please use the data that you gather responsibly.<p>There are some people who abuse the system (who I hope you identify), and also some people who really should have the right to be forgotten.<p>As far as I can tell, using a US based VPN/proxy does not censor results - at least, it does not show the message.<p>Therefore, you just need to cross-reference the results from different geographic regions. However, it will be difficult to tell whether a certain result is missing due to censorship, or the fact that result rankings are slightly different for different countries.<p>Once you find a "suspicious" result, I guess you could try searching direct quotes from the article - If it doesn't show up in those results, then it's probably censored.<p>This process will need to be automated, if you want to check every name.
Honestly, I don't understand how anybody can honestly think that there can or should be a "right to be forgotten." These laws are an abomination of freedom of information and are incredibly naive.
You can search for phrases such as "Unfortunately, the page we linked to was removed because of EU law". This will not give you the page itself though.
How about: don't? Your time to report on it was when it was online. If someone has something removed under a right to be forgotten, reporting on that pretty much violates that right, no?