European Commission Evaluates Poland’s Media Adherence to the Right to be Forgotten

By love-europe
2 hours Ago

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION HAS BEEN ACTIVELY ASSESSING POLAND’S ALIGNMENT WITH THE EU’S “RIGHT TO BE FORGOTTEN” DIRECTIVE AS IT PERTAINS TO MEDIA OUTLETS. THIS SCRUTINY FOLLOWS A RECENT PROPOSAL AIMED AT EXPANDING THESE RIGHTS WITHIN THE MEDIA SECTOR. OVER THE PAST FEW WEEKS, CONSULTATIONS HAVE TAKEN PLACE, CULMINATING IN A DETAILED RESPONSE FROM THE HEAD OF THE DATA PROTECTION UNIT AT THE EU DIRECTORATE-GENERAL FOR JUSTICE & CONSUMERS. THIS COMMUNICATION, ON BEHALF OF EXECUTIVE VICE-PRESIDENT JOUROVA AND COMMISSIONER REYNDERS, ADDRESSES ROBERT SZUSTKOWSKI’S INITIATIVE TO BROADEN THE APPLICATION OF THE “RIGHT TO BE FORGOTTEN” UNDER ARTICLE 17 OF THE GDPR TO NEWS ORGANIZATIONS.

(IN BRIEF) Szustkowski proposed to the European Commission on June 26, 2024, that individuals should have the right to erase false or irrelevant digital references, especially concerning defamatory media reports, and called for media organizations to be held accountable for inaccuracies. The EU’s Data Protection Unit responded by noting that the GDPR already offers protections for personal data, including the right to be forgotten under Article 17, which allows individuals to request the deletion of their data. However, the EU clarified that this right is not absolute, particularly when it involves freedom of expression and journalistic integrity. Szustkowski expressed optimism about ongoing dialogues with EU authorities, aiming to promote responsible data handling by media organizations in Poland and advocating for legislative reforms, including the establishment of a Readers’ Rights Ombudsman to address grievances and combat disinformation across the EU.

(PRESS RELEASE) BRUSSELS, 7-Oct-2024 — /EuropaWire/ — Szustkowski‘s proposal, presented to the European Commission on June 26, 2024, advocates for individuals to have the ability to erase digital references that are false, unsupported, or irrelevant—particularly in instances involving defamatory media reports. He further suggests that media entities should bear responsibilities for inaccuracies and defamation, alongside calls for uniform guidelines and mechanisms for reporting such issues.

In its response, the EU’s Data Protection Unit emphasized that the GDPR already contains measures to protect personal data, applicable to journalists and media entities. Specifically referencing Szustkowski’s concerns about the ‘right to be forgotten’ Article 17 of the GDPR allows individuals to request the deletion of their personal data from data controllers. If personal data has been publicly shared, data controllers are required to notify those processing this information about the erasure request.

The Commission clarified that while the right to personal data protection is significant, it is not absolute. GDPR guidelines indicate that data controllers are not obligated to erase personal data if such processing is necessary for upholding freedom of expression and information. Nonetheless, member states must balance the principles governing freedom of expression—including journalistic freedom—with data protection rights, as outlined in Article 85 of the GDPR.

The European Commission acknowledges Szustkowski’s concerns but emphasizes that any potential actions would need a careful balance that honors both data protection and journalistic integrity.

Furthermore, the responsibility for monitoring and enforcing data protection laws lies with national authorities, specifically data protection supervisory bodies and courts. These entities are tasked with investigating and adjudicating individual cases of alleged GDPR violations, as well as handling claims for compensation.

Szustkowski expressed optimism regarding the dialogue with EU authorities, noting that the insights from the Directorate-General for Justice & Consumers will guide further discussions with Poland’s Personal Data Protection Office. He believes this represents a crucial step toward ensuring responsible handling of personal data by news organizations in Poland.

The initiative’s author reiterated his commitment to advocating for legislative reforms within Poland and the broader EU. Among his proposals is the establishment of a Readers’ Rights Ombudsman at publishing houses, designed to address grievances from individuals harmed by media content, facilitating amicable resolutions between freedom of expression and personal data protection. He also suggested implementing a standardized reporting form for personal rights violations across the EU.

“Changes are essential. We must empower EU citizens to protect their reputations, which will help restore trust and credibility in the media,” Szustkowski stated. His initiative aims not only to safeguard individuals but also to combat disinformation throughout the European Union.

Media contact:
media@szustkowski.ch
+48 792 356 056

Website:

FAQs

1. What is Szustkowski’s proposal about?
Szustkowski’s proposal advocates for individuals to have the right to erase digital references that are false, unsupported, or irrelevant, particularly in cases of defamatory media reports. He also calls for media organizations to be held accountable for inaccuracies and for uniform guidelines to report such issues.

2. What does the EU’s Data Protection Unit say about the proposal?
The EU’s Data Protection Unit emphasized that the GDPR already contains measures to protect personal data, including the right to be forgotten under Article 17, which allows individuals to request the deletion of their personal data from data controllers.

3. Is the right to erase personal data absolute under the GDPR?
No, the EU clarified that while the right to personal data protection is significant, it is not absolute. Data controllers are not obligated to erase personal data if it is necessary for upholding freedom of expression and information.

4. What responsibilities do national authorities have regarding data protection?
National authorities, particularly data protection supervisory bodies and courts, are responsible for monitoring and enforcing data protection laws. They investigate and adjudicate individual cases of alleged GDPR violations and handle claims for compensation.

5. What additional proposals did Szustkowski suggest?
Szustkowski proposed establishing a Readers’ Rights Ombudsman at publishing houses to address grievances from individuals harmed by media content and implementing a standardized reporting form for personal rights violations across the EU.

6. Why is this proposal important for EU citizens?
Szustkowski believes that empowering EU citizens to protect their reputations will help restore trust and credibility in the media while also combating disinformation throughout the European Union.

7. How can individuals get involved or express their concerns regarding this issue?
Individuals can reach out to local data protection authorities or engage in public discussions related to media accountability and personal data protection, as well as stay informed about ongoing developments in legislation and proposals in this area.

SOURCE: Szustkowski.eu

MORE ON MEDIA, DISINFORMATION, SZUSTKOWSKI, ETC.:

SOCIAL MEDIA, ETC.:

🇪🇺 European Commission Evaluates 🇵🇱 Poland’s Media Adherence to the Right to be Forgotten https://t.co/9ytmypqstI#RighttobeForgotten #disinformation #defamation #fakenews #hatespeech #mediamanipulation #privacy #humanrightsvioaltions @RSzustkowski pic.twitter.com/fHFAmupvG1