The Right to be Forgotten in Post-Scarcity Culture
Abstract
My aim here is not to consider European legislative attempts to introduce a ‘right to be forgotten’ in terms of their strictly legal aims to limit the use of personal information in current data processing systems and offer data subjects additional control over the fate of their personal data. Rather, my perspective is one developed from the view of Digital Memory Studies: to treat the RtbF, in an extended, symbolic sense, as symptomatic of a sense of a loss of control over hyperconnectivity — a generalized compulsion to be continually connected via increasingly portable and pervasive digital networks.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The European 2012 legislation on Right to Be Forgotten is no longer adequate, if it ever was.
“The European 2012 legislation on Right to Be Forgotten (RtbF), which was once considered to be a breakthrough in the preservation of personal information online, is no longer adequate, if it ever was (Hoskins 2014).”
From AI and memory (2024) · cites this paper as Hoskins 2014
Cites
Lowenthal, D. (2012) · Historically Speaking · doi:10.1353/hsp.2012.0040 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Hoskins, A. (2024) · Memory, Mind & Media · doi:10.1017/mem.2024.16 · Cited by 64 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Hoskins, A.
- Corresponding author
- Hoskins, Andrew
- ORCID
- Hoskins, Andrew
- Venue
- The Ethics of Memory in a Digital Age
- Publisher
- Palgrave Macmillan UK
- Published
- 2014
- Pages
- 50-64
- OpenAlex
- W193435397
- Cited by
- 8
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 4.26
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Palgrave Macmillan eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Palgrave Macmillan UK eBooks (publishedVersion)
- ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Law › Digitalization, Law, and Regulation
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Privacy, Security, and Data Protection
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Memory, Trauma, and Commemoration
- Keywords
- right to be forgotten, post-scarcity, hyperconnectivity, personal data control, data subjects, personal data, digital networks, loss of control
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
