The Instigator
Forever23
Pro (for)
Winning
7 Points
The Contender
kasmic
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

We Should Adopt the Right to be Forgotten

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Forever23
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/10/2015 Category: News
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 421 times Debate No: 82396
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)

 

Forever23

Pro

Hello, my name is Forever23 and I am the first speaker on the proposition team in this debate. I am here to bring forth my premise that The United States of America should adopt the right to be forgotten. My ensuing roadmap will include defining this debate then framing it and then divulging 2 of my own points into the debate.

Should - used to indicate obligation, duty, or correctness, typically when criticizing someone's actions.
Adopt- take up or start to use or follow
Right to be Forgotten- an amorphous privilege that would allow individuals more control over their personal information, particularly that information collected and connected with new technology.

Allow me to now frame this debate. I would like to frame the debate to irrelevant information or information that is not true.

My first assertion is that Internet companies have an intimidating amount of unauthorized data and influence over the citizenry.With people effortlessly and frequently posting personal data on social networking sites and articles popping up with people"s names that are very easy to find, the internet has become an ever-expanding database. This leads to major companies behind websites to have a large amount of power. The Daily Beast stated that "With the Internet, our identities have metastasized. This situation is intensified by the fact that services like Google and Facebook have an incentive to intrude on as much personal information as they can. The right to be forgotten restores some of the privacy individuals have lost against the companies already dominating the Internet." This is significant because profit seeking corporations should not be allowed to use unauthorized data that they have about people at their own discretion or all citizens could suffer due to their leaked data being in the wrong hands.By adopting a right to be forgotten, we can place a check on the power of these companies and limit their influence using government authority.

My second assertion is regarding the social impact of having people base their impressions of others solely off what they see online on social networking sites. If internet users are unable to filter some of the information about them that is online, then people will undoubtedly hold bias against them. `Such was the case with Mario Gonzalez and will be for anyone who has harmful data about them posted on websites. The Director of Fundamental Rights and Citizenship, Paul Nemitz "emphasized the political dangers of a world in which information about everyone is available on the Web, and hence available to the government, which can use it to monitor and control the public. He emphasized the personal costs in a world in which one"s identity is defined by search results that reflect a slip-up from decades ago."Paying the price for a blunder you may have made in your adolescent years is simply unjustified. By extending the right to be forgotten on the internet, we ensure that people have the ability to remove malicious data so that the internet may not be used to facilitate falsehoods about people and hence result in defamation.

Thank you, please vote proposition.
kasmic

Con

Hi Forever23, I am Kasmic. Good luck to you!

My opponent is attempting to affirm that “that The United States of America should adopt the right to be forgotten.” I would like to note that I accept the definitions provided by pro.

Pro’s Case:

Pro offers two basic arguments

1. ”Internet companies have an intimidating amount of unauthorized data and influence over the citizenry.”

Pro argues this is significant in a bad way as it gives companies a large amount of power. I’m not seeing it, perhaps pro could explain why a corporation having my information gives those companies power that results in a net negative. Furthermore, pro concedes that currently companies get this information when people post personal data on networking sites. Thus, people are already equipped with a way to reasonably prevent businesses from getting their data. Of course that is by not posting their information online. No one is forced to put such information on the internet. This solution turns out to be more effective than what pro is suggesting. Ultimately it is up to people as individuals to protect their own information. We do not need a nanny state to do something for us reasonably easy to do.

2. “the social impact of having people base their impressions of others solely off what they see online on social networking sites.”

Again this issue already has a simple solution. Safe guard your own information and be careful what you post online. Ironically, pro’s example of Paul Nemitz demonstrates why we don’t want the government in a position to protect our personal information. “the political dangers of a world in which information about everyone is available on the Web, and hence available to the government, which can use it to monitor and control the public.” Thus we see that pro’s argument is self-defeating. She is simultaneously suggesting that we trust the government to protect its citizens by protecting their data and then uses the Government as the example of who privacy needs to be protected from.

Both suppossed harms propossed by Pro are better solved by people taking ownership of their own information. This plan is better for many reasons. Two main ones being that it prevents more effectively data breaches then the government ever could, and it would no doubt be cheaper than paying government to protect data. There is no need for a right to be forgotten when you already have the right to protect and secure your information. Again, no one is forced to post their personal information on social media websites.Thus far, pro has failed to demonstrate a need for this right, or any harm that is prevented or addressed by doing so. Consider the resolution unsupported.
Debate Round No. 1
Forever23

Pro

Hello once again, my name is Forever23 and I am here to bring forth the premise which is that we should adopt the right to be forgotten.

My roadmap will include first answering and clarifying my opponents questions and then quickly restating my assertions and finally putting 2 new assertions onto the table.

The opposition did not understand what was wrong with large companies owning tons of information about us. They mentioned if you have a problem with others knowing a lot about you, just don't post. However, this debate is framed to only irrelevant or untrue information. That means that if someone posts a picture of you drunk, you should have the right to take it off. You haven't made the choice of posting this... That was probably information that you wanted to keep private. This I assume, also answers the oppositions team second question.

Now to quickly restate my own assertions.

1. Internet companies have an intimidating amount of unauthorized data and influence over the citizenry.
2. The social impact of having people base their impressions of others solely off what they see online on social networking sites.

Now onto introducing two of props new assertions.

My third assertion is that the right will ensure the protection of citizens and their right to privacy. By adopting the right to be forgotten, we can ensure that citizens do not have to suffer because of something that has been posted about them on social media that is embarrassing or defaming and can have harmful effects on their life. According to NPR.org, "Proponents say the "right to be forgotten" strikes a fair balance between personal privacy and free speech and gives individuals the ability to control their own lives in a world where more and more personal data is collected, bought and sold by third parties." This is important because the people"s right to privacy must be protected since the effects of things on the internet can severely damage one"s life. By adopting the right to be forgotten, we can ensure that people"s lives are secure and their privacy is protected.

My fourth assertion is that it helps foster a safer online environment. The right to be forgotten makes mistakes by people amendable and creates an online community that is safer for a larger audience, including children or senior citizens."It creates more clarity and should create more trust in the online environment. Of course we must balance the right to access to information with the right to privacy. " (Neelie Kroes, Commissioner for the Digital Agenda). With an ever expanding number of users going on the internet, with many young and elderly people, the right to be forgotten ensures that all of these users will be active in a safer community. By adopting the right to be forgotten, the internet will become clearer, safer, and more trustworthy for all users.

Thank you Kasmic for accepting and thank you audience for reading my debate. Please vote proposition
kasmic

Con

Oops, haha. Looks like I did not read the initial round thouroughly. I concede this debate. Sorry Forever23.

Vote Pro....
Debate Round No. 2
Forever23

Pro

Haha. Good luck on your next debates!
kasmic

Con

Vote Pro!
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by fire_wings 1 year ago
fire_wings
Forever23kasmicTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Concession.
Vote Placed by lannan13 1 year ago
lannan13
Forever23kasmicTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Concession by Con.