The Guardian's readers' editor has outlined the newspaper's firm stance on requests to delete articles from its digital archive, which now contains nearly two million pieces. Receiving at least two such requests per week, the editor emphasises that the archive is a historical record and that yielding to every demand would undermine reader trust.
Existing guidelines, drawn up two-and-a-half years ago, permit deletions only in specific circumstances: legal challenges supported by the legal department, threats to life or health, matters involving children, or fresh verifiable information discrediting a story. Requests based on 'source remorse' or minor indiscretions are routinely rejected, as they form part of the historical record often available elsewhere online.
However, the editor acknowledges exceptional cases, such as a young man whose work experience article about knife culture hampered his professional life. In that instance, anonymisation was granted. The editor suggests that for some crimes, permanent online exposure may be too harsh, and is exploring technical options to remove names externally while retaining them internally for editorial reference.
Alternative solutions include using other websites to push down unwanted Google results. The editor maintains that while the guidelines remain fair, consistent application is key, and occasional cases will fall outside them.
