Regulating The Digital Memory - The Right To Be Forgotten In India’s Digital Journalism Era

Author: LawSphereX

Category: Constitutional & Human Rights

Published: 2026-08-23T20:53:27.726801+00:00

Updated: 2026-08-26T17:09:48.64+00:00

REGULATING THE DIGITAL MEMORY: THE RIGHT TO

BE FORGOTTEN IN INDIA’S DIGITAL JOURNALISM ERA

Mr. Somnath Ratan Lal Saha, BBA LLB, Navrachana University Mr. Vidyamaan Singhal, Assistant Professor, Navrachana University

ABSTRACT

The digital connectivity has been growing rapidly in India, and it has totally changed the whole process of personal information creation, storage, access, and even remembering. Digital journalism, social media, and search engines are some of the new things going on, so people are more often than not finding their past actions, allegations, or personal details completely assigned to online public domain without any context, no consent, and no subsequent updates. This whole situation has been the foundation for very serious issues about privacy, dignity, reputation, and the right to rehabilitation which are all part of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The whole scenario is such that, the Right to be Forgotten (RTBF) concept is a very important legal solution to the problem of irreversible digital memory, although it is still developing.

This paper makes a critical analysis on the development and the extent of the Right to be Forgotten in India, moving from its judicial recognition in the landmark case of Justice K. S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India to its partial enactment under the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023. It looks at how digital reporting and real-time reporting, social media trials, and independent online news platforms have created more tension between the right to privacy and the freedom of speech and expression as protected under Article 19(1)(a). The paper furthermore points out the issues of technology and practices that make it difficult to enforce the RTBF, such as data persistence, virality, jurisdiction across the border and the limitations of complete erasure in the digital ecosystem.

Through the juxtaposition of the Indian situation and international norms, especially the European one, the article asserts that India's present-day regime is a very prudent yet partial move towards real data independence. It ends up offering realistic solutions like mechanisms for delisting, contextual updates to digital archives, minimization of traceability, and promotion of digital literacy, thus trying to locate the right balance between the individual’s dignity and the public's right to access information in the digital era.

Keywords: Right to be Forgotten, Digital Privacy, Digital Journalism, Digital Personal Data Protection Act 2023, Online Reputation, Data Erasure, Cyber Law.

1. Introduction

India’s journey towards the digital transformation formally began with the launch of ‘Digital India’, a flagship programme that was launched by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, Government of India, on 1 July, 2015 with the vision to connect every Indian citizen digitally and make the government services more accessible through technology. Although the idea was big, the real change in the digital world occurred when Reliance owned Jio launched its famous ‘Jio Welcome’ offer on 5th September 2016. The offer aimed to provide free 4G Internet service for almost 6 months and it changed the way Indians used to access internet. It was a time when people from a metro city, small town and even remote villages suddenly had access to 4G high-speed internet and without worrying about the cost. It changed how people in India used the internet in their daily lives.

Millions of people, many using the Internet for the first time, started watching YouTube, chatting on WhatsApp, doing online banking, and searching for jobs online. Because of so many people started to use the internet, something that is equally important, everyone started to leave their digital footprints. The digital traces existed even before, but after 2016, their volume and visibility increased even more. As more number of users shared, searched, posted, registered online, at the same time they also left behind their permanent marks, some knowingly and some without realising it. From ₹225 per GB in 2015 to about ₹9–₹20 per GB by 2022–2025, India’s internet prices have been dropped by roughly 95% in a decade, making fast internet accessible to nearly everyone in the country.

1 With this, India’s internet user base grew from under 250 million in 2014 to over 806 million by 2025, with more than half of all Indians now online. 2 In today’s digital world, it is easy to gather as much as possible information of a specific individual. Today, even a simple Google search of your friends name, let us take for example, “Swati Mishra” can reveal a surprising amount of information. Further, if you add little more basic detail such as the person’s city, their place of work, their university name, their educational qualification, or any other minor information you have, in the suffix, such as “Swati Mishra Hyderabad”, “Swati Mishra Deloitte”, “Swati Mishra IIT Hyderabad”, “Swati Mishra 1 Niharika Sharma, Reliance Jio’s Cheap Data Turned India’s Internet Dreams into Reality, QUARTZ INDIA, (Sept. 7, 2022).

2 Simon Kemp, Digital 2025: India, DATAREPORTAL, (Feb. 25, 2025).

BBA LLB” it becomes even easier to find the exact individual and gain information out of the available data in the internet. A person’s home is always considered as their most private and secure place, one that is out of the reach of the outside world and free from public interference but today the technology has become so advanced that if Swati Mishra’s address is mentioned somewhere in a public website, and it includes their ‘house number’, one can use the new feature of Google Maps i. e. “Google Map’s Street View” to locate and find the exact outward appearance of the building where that person lives. To some extent, it might be even useful for instances like background check of a candidate. However, the problem starts to arise when some irrelevant, deeply personal, or outdated data is available in the internet without the persons consent.

For instance, the old news about a divorce, a minor legal issue, or data regarding road rage, can stay online and remain easy to find for years. This thing can cause harm to that specific individual. A divorced woman might not be socially accepted, and these are her private personal matters that should be kept away from the public domain. Such easy access to the availability of personal data in the internet can impact someone’s reputation and it raises serious concerns about the individual’s right to privacy, granted by the Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. This situation is exactly when the concept of ‘Right to be Forgotten’ comes into play. It allows the individual to request the removal of such data.

‘The Right to be Forgotten’ empowers the individual to regain control over their personal data that is available in the internet, particularly when the data is outdated, irrelevant, or damaging the reputation of a person and when it has been shared without the knowledge or consent of the concerned person. Another important concern might arise when a person has already served their sentence in jail and is genuinely trying to start a new life, but their past continues to haunt them because of the personal data that is available on the internet. Old news articles, court orders, or even social media posts by third parties can easily be accessed online, and this can seriously harm their chances of rehabilitation. Even if the person has changed for the better, society often judges them based on their past rather than their present.

This can affect their ability to get a job, build relationships, and live with dignity. When past mistakes are permanently visible online, it becomes nearly impossible for such individuals to move forward, and their right to rehabilitation is effectively curtailed. In such situations, the lack of a proper legal mechanism to remove or restrict access to outdated and irrelevant information makes the problem worse. One serious angle to this issue is that nowadays digital crime is at its peak and it continues to

grow at a rapid pace. The personal data that is available on the internet is often shared by the individuals themselves, but in many cases, people are not even aware that their personal information is available online, or they might have forgotten that they themselves uploaded the information long ago, and this becomes the worst-case scenario. Cybercriminals do collect such data that is available in the internet and use it to gain the trust of the victim or manipulate them psychologically. For instance, if someone had shared years ago on Facebook that she was studying at Kendriya Vidyalaya in the year 2008, but is no longer active on Facebook for now, this information is still available in the internet and a cybercriminal might use this old detail to build trust with her.

By citing such information from the available data online, the criminal can appear genuine and thereby exploit the victim more easily. The aggrieved victim might have tried to delete her Facebook profile earlier, but she could not because she may have lost access to her phone number and Gmail she used years ago to create Facebook. In these situations, the personal data stays publicly accessible even if the person tried to delete it at some point. This is where the concept of Right to be Forgotten directly applies. This can be further better understood with a practical situation. Suppose you need to interview a labour officer. The ministry provides an official list of all the Central Labour Officers, regionwise along with their contacts, on its official website. From that you identify that Welfare Commissioner (Central), Port Blair is Mr. Sandeep Dagar.

You decide to interview the officer and before approaching anyone for taking interview, it is natural to conduct a background check to find their interest and form questions accordingly. So, you search on Google using the keywords “Sandeep Dagar WC (C) Port Blair”. You find news articles stating that Rs. 35 Lakh in cash was recovered from his home and a case was registered against him by the Anti- Corruption Bureau. At this point, your immediate impression would likely be that he is a corrupt officer, even though there’s no information available online about what eventually happened in that case. There’s also a possibility that Mr. Dagar himself may not be aware of such false information and he being an honest officer, or that he was later acquitted of all the charges.

This highlights the emerging need and importance of Right to be Forgotten, which seek to protect the individuals form being judged indefinitely based on the information of past that may no longer be relevant or even in some cases accurate. The growing concern of digital privacy in India is increasing day by day. Although the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (DPDP Act), has been notified in the Official Gazzete, it is yet to take the effect. In this interim phase, the legal structure is not effective in practical

life. RTBF is not recognised as a fundamental right, it is only considered as a subset to Right to Privacy under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. But one big question still remains: can a non-fundamental right like RTBF be legally enforced against private entities, especially when fundamental rights are enforceable only against the State and not private individuals or organisations? Furthermore, in today’s digital world, considering the aspect of journalism where the trend is observed that most of the information is shared and stored online rather than on newspaper, the line between freedom of expression under Article 19 and the right to privacy under Article 21 has become increasingly blurred.

As we move further into a paperless world, it becomes even more important to find a balanced approach that protects a person’s privacy without unreasonably limiting the public’s right to know. In the year 2017, the Supreme Court of India made a landmark judgement in the case of Justice K. S. Puttuswamy versus Union of India3, just after a year of launch of ‘Jio Welcome Offer’ in the year 2016. The concept of ‘Right to be forgotten’ has been judicially acknowledged in this case but still the lack of clarity remains because of no proper statutory framework, as of now. The concept of Right to be Forgotten (RTBF) gained traction after it was recommended by the

2018 Srikrishna Committee, which drafted the original Personal Data Protection (PDP) Bill.

The 2019 and 2021 draft versions of the bill specifically included RTBF, allowing individuals to request limitation on disclosure of their personal information, especially after the original purpose for data collection is met, or consent by the concerned individual is withdrawn.

2. Forgetting In The Digital Age

2.1 The Digital Journalism And The Technological Shift

In the 21st century, journalism has transformed dramatically. With the advent of the internet, smart-phones, social media, blogging platforms and digital news portals, the traditional news media has been transformed to something which is called digital journalism. Digital journalism refers to news and information which are circulated via online platforms such as blogs, videofeeds, social networks, mobile apps, and through other digital means.4 Geographical boundaries have disappeared with the expansion of digital journalism. As also taught in the lectures of Law and Technology that cyberspace has no physical borders like those of between two nations.

3 Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors., (2017) 10 SCC 1 (India).

4 GURINDER KAUR, Exploring the Evolution and Impact: A Research Inquiry into the Decade of Digital

Journalism in India, 6 INT’L J. FOR MULTIDISCIPLINARY RES. 1 (2024).

Digital journalism exists beyond territorial limit which allows anyone from any corner of the world, to access, share, or publish, information anywhere else with just a click. This nature of the internet wherein there exists no borderline means that a news story uploaded in one country can instantly reach the audiences from various country anywhere across the globe and therefore it raised serious question about the jurisdiction, privacy, and accountability of the same in case of discrepancy. Today for instance, a person sitting in Hyderabad can instantly view global or local news coverage from Al Jazeera, a well-known news network based in Dubai, along with channels like BBC, CNN, or Reuters, which reflects how journalism has truly become borderless and globally interconnected. In the earlier times, international or global news did reach people, but not with the same speed as of today.

Such information was widely available through newspapers or television broadcasts. In remote areas wherein dish antenna or cable televisions were out of the reach, people used to get information and news in a subsequent day through newspapers due to the time taken for printing, publishing, and circulation. The process was slower and dependent on traditional media networks. However, now the time has evolved. Today, India stands among the countries with the cheapest and most accessible internet services, with world’s largest free Wi-Fi network zone in Patna, Bihar, covering nearly 20 kilometres of free Wi-Fi connectivity, the longest stretch across the globe, even surpassing Beijing, China, reflecting India’s digital growth. 5 These developments can be the reason why there’s a significant transformation in the way in which people consumed news and information has changed.

With the increase in usage of smartphones, affordable and almost free internet, news now travels within seconds rather than days, reaching millions almost instantly. Digital journalism has become a powerful tool in shaping a public perception across the globe due to the rapid digital connectivity. It has also accelerated the flow of reach of information. This has only become possible because of the technological advancement including the highspeed internets, reduced data costs, and widespread connectivity that ensures that news can now be published and accessed anywhere in the world instantaneously. At the same time, this rapid growth and reach of news through digital platforms raise serious questions of privacy, rights and responsibility.

6 In the current digital era, let it be news or any other information, once something is published, even for a moment, it may persist indefinitely, get copied, shared, archived, and become part of a person’s “digital footprint”. Let us consider if any content has

5 World’s Longest Free Wi-Fi Zone in India, NEW BUS. AGE (Apr. 19, 2015)

6 Pablo J. Boczkowski & C. W. Anderson, The Digital Journalism Ecology, in The Routledge Handbook of

Developments in Digital Journalism Studies 1–2, 6–8 (2019).

been posted online by a news agency, for example a news article in a web post and a user takes a screenshot of it. Then later on, even if the news agency deletes that post, the screenshot will still remain with that user despite deleting the original post by that news agency. It is very difficult and almost impossible to erase the information completely once posted because multiple users might have already saved it. This shows how once something enters the online public domain, it goes beyond the control of its original owner and it becomes an irreversible action. Even a single screenshot can keep that information alive indefinitely. Eventually it means even deletion of such content does not mean disappearance. To support the averment made above, it is worth to remember that in the case of Rout v. State of Odisha (2020)7, Justice S. K.

Panigrahi by refereeing to “one cannot put the toothpaste back into the tube once it is out. ” has mentioned that once the content or information is published and enters the public domain, it is almost impossible to erase the published content entirely. This clearly depicts the challenges of the current digital age. Even if a court orders removal of a specific content from the internet and the execution of the same is being carried on, but the copied versions and screenshots still continue to exist across various platforms, in that case, such execution would amount as null.

2.2 The Rise of Real-Time Digital Journalism: Twitter As The New News Room

It becomes equally important for us to understand how the methods of news dissemination have evolved in the modern digital age since we are discussing about news channels. Earlier, television was the primary source through which real-time information was shared among the public. The general public heavily relied on the scheduled bulletins aired by major news networks to stay informed. It truly feels nostalgic when I remember the era of 2012-2016, when Indian Premier League (IPL) schedules were used to be published in the sports section of the newspapers which generally used to be in the last pages, and as a child we would eagerly cut out that page to keep it safely with us to track every match. The situation has changed completely today. The way in which the news is created, circulated, and is consumed has changed significantly due to the advancement of technology.

Today one can check the live cricket score easily with just a click in their phone. 8 Among these, Twitter (now ‘X’) has emerged as one of the most influential mediums of

7 Subhranshu Rout v. State of Odisha, 2020 SCC OnLine Ori 878.

8 Seth C. Lewis & Oscar Westlund, Big Data and Journalism: Epistemology, Expertise, Economics, and Ethics,

4 Digital Journalism 1, 3–5 (2015).

information exchange. It can be considered that it functions as a real-time newsroom, where news often breaks before it even reaches the television screens. Be it a social, political, economic, almost any kind of incident, it first appears on Twitter, sometimes hours or even days before it is broadcasted by the news channels. This demonstrates that how the combo of instant communication with internet connectivity and smartphone has become a powerful tool for the general public as this has led the general public to be the first reporters of what’s happening around them. To illustrate, the viral video of Pahalgam terror attack that took place in Jammu and Kashmir in May, 2025 and shared by the survivor Rishi Bhatt was initially shared on twitter, even before it was even aired in any of the mainstream media.

Therefore, Twitter can be considered as a platform where immediate public awareness can be done. 9 This was not possible in the earlier times during the traditional newspaper system. In the times of political instability, natural calamities or protests by the citizens, first images and videos of those events are normally out in public domain either through tweets on twitter (now ‘X’) or video clips posted by common people on YouTube. This makes Twitter or YouTube a primary information sources. What used to take field reporters, cameras, and editing teams now takes the merciless actions of a few seconds, since this is as simple as it is to send a Tweet with a picture or a video.

This democratizing of the news-making process has broadened the media ecosystem, making information more accessible and more unstable at the same time as it can go viral and has not been checked or reviewed beforehand. Apart from Twitter (now 'X') and YouTube, Instagram Reels has also noticeably changed the people's perception of news. 10 The short video platforms cannot be simply classified as entertaining any longer. They have become powerful channels for information distribution and social awareness raising. The rapid and attractive formats draw large audiences, and the younger generations openly prefer short videos over long-form reporting. The traditional news organizations, as well as the independent and freelance journalists, have improved their skills and turned serious news coverage into short, consumable, and accessible snippets that are still relevant.

The short videos give the stories the most instant delivery ever, thereby creating the viral waves of attention to the topics that sometimes occur just a few minutes after they are posted. 9 Pahalgam Terror Attack: Tourist’s Video of Zipline Ride Captures Moment of Attack, THE HINDU (Apr. 30, 2025).

10 GURINDER KAUR, Exploring the Evolution and Impact: A Research Inquiry into the Decade of Digital

Journalism in India, 6 INT’L J. FOR MULTIDISCIPLINARY RES. 1 (2024).

2.3 The Revolution of Independent News Media

In the current time, people who have just a combo of basic editing skills with a good communication skill and a smartphone are running their on news channels on the YouTube platform. This has blurred the line between the professional journalism and an individual-led reporting. Popular content creators on YouTube like Dhruv Rathee, Raj Shamani, Nitish Rajput, Vivek Bindra and Akash Banerjee have built a significant influence and credibility through their YouTube channels. There are some people, who rely to these YouTubers more than the news channels. The mentioned YouTubers can be considered as digital public educators who guide their subscribers and the viewers in order to understand the policies, government decisions, or global events. This diversification of digital journalism has produced numerous sub-genres of the news.

There are YouTubers who focus upon specific genres such as technology, automobile, governance, tax, etc. YouTubers Arun Panwar, Gagan Choudhary, Pankaj Soni (Mechanical Jugadu) and Faisal Khan have revolutionized the auto journalism by developing a form of accessible content that relates to automobiles. Their accessible content includes reviews, comparisons, and information updates to help the public make better decisions. Their content reflects how journalism has moved from televisions, newspaper columns, and magazines to online platforms such as YouTube where people both consume and engage with the news. Audiences are no longer passive recipients of the news, they instead converse, comment, share, and argue in a real-time setting, allowing for a two-way channel for information and opinion sharing.

Additionally, consumers who face deficiency of service or product related issues in the automobile sector often use Twitter (now 'X') to publicly voice their complaints. 11 With the rise in the technological advancement, dish antennas and cable television has now evolved and turned into smart televisions. It has completely changed the way in which the people now consume the news. What once was limited to the fixed scheduled timings of the channels has now turned into an on demand, interactive experience where viewers can access anything with just a single click. Today, this digital change has gone even further with YouTube Application now available on every Smart TVs.

Earlier, televisions only showed scheduled news bulletins, but now the same TV has turned into Smart TV’s that allows us to open YouTube and watch live updates, independent journalism, and consumer awareness videos right from our homes. This shows how traditional media has transformed into the digital 11 Reuters Inst. for the Study of Journalism, Digital News Report 2025, at 12–15 (Nic Newman ed. , 2025).

media. 12 Television is not just a one-way medium anymore, it has become an interactive platform for people to engage and learn while it is happening. This transformation of independent news agencies in YouTube has created more power and influence. With the participating nature of digital journalism, there also exist certain important concerns. There is an absence of cross-verification the facts and editorial checks in the online platforms and the rapid spread of such unverified or misleading information can take place. Either wantedly or unwantedly, a single unverified or cross-verified tweet, edited video can lead to misrepresentation of the facts and reach millions of people without the correction version.

The same unverified content can even become viral in seconds and the truth is it is often observed that such false narratives travel faster than the truth, eventually creating a long-lasting impression. 13 As mentioned earlier that once the information is out in the public domain, it become almost impossible to delete it forever. Therefore, the Right to be Forgotten faces serious limitations. While this mechanism of YouTube wherein independent individuals also do share the news strengthens the Article 19 of the Indian Constitution that is, Freedom of Speech and Expression, but at the same time it also brings the legal challenges. The absence of cross-verification of the information leads to the spread of misinformation, defamation and sometimes copyright violation.

The growing of the digital journalism and its influence has blurred the line between journalism and personal opinion which leads to the situation where the accountability in case of discrepancy becomes questionable. While it empowers the people, at the same time it also the necessary awareness about the ethical standards and the legal consequences of not following the same is required. 14

2.4 Local News Dissemination & Instagram Local News Pages

Today, the concept of news niches has evolved to an extraordinary depth. People no longer depend solely on national or regional news channels to know what is happening around them at the local level. Instead, they now prefer hyper-local sources such as Instagram news pages and platforms that directly cater to their own city or community. In today’s time, if someone wants to know about their city’s latest developments, events, or even controversies, the most

12 The Great Indian News Divide: YouTube vs. Traditional Media, VRA (Jan. 18, 2024).

13 Alfred Hermida, Twitter as an Ambient News Technology, in The Routledge Companion to Digital Journalism Studies 359, 362–64 (Bob Franklin & Scott A. Eldridge II eds., 2017). 14 Anjani Agarwal & Aman Singh, The Right to Be Forgotten Under the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023: A Missed Opportunity in India’s Data Privacy Regime, 11 INT’L J. L. 57 (2025)

visited and trusted sources are often these Instagram news pages run independently for particular cities. For example, if we talk about Gujarat, in Vadodara people follow ‘Our Vadodara,’15 in Rajkot ‘Our Rajkot’16, and in Ahmedabad Instagram news pages like ‘Our Ahmedabad’17 or ‘Ahmedabad Live. ’18 These platforms have become the first and fastest sources of local news dissemination. It’s obvious that if someone wants local news, for example, in Vadodara, they will first look at local sources rather than national papers. 19 National news channels rarely cover small, city-level events, and with the instant nature of 5G, a local page like ‘Our Vadodara’ becomes the best, fastest option to get those updates.

The most interesting part is that these are not government-owned or big media house-driven news pages, but rather independent platforms, usually managed by a small team or even a single individual passionate about the city. The level of trust and engagement that people have in these pages is incredible. It has almost become a habit for urban citizens to rely on these digital local sources for real-time updates about traffic jams, civic issues, social events, and even crime incidents. This shows how journalism has truly decentralized in the digital age. Where once news travelled from a newsroom to a printing press and then to people the next morning, today it travels from a phone camera to an Instagram story in seconds. The speed and accessibility have changed the definition of “breaking news.

” Now, a common citizen, equipped only with a smartphone, has the power to inform thousands instantly. This also gives rise to a new form of journalism, not one controlled by traditional editors, but by the collective eye of society itself. Now, since I have mentioned about the local news pages in the Instagram, it is impossible not to recall the famous Holi 2025 incident, popularly remembered for the ‘Volkswagen Virtus’ case in Vadodara. I don’t wish to name anyone considering the sensitivity of the matter and after everything I’ve studied and understood about the Right to Be Forgotten (RTBF) so far, but the way that incident spread across digital platforms remains unforgettable. I remember watching the live coverage that night, the raw, unedited footage, streamed on the online platform through Instagram live. That case, more than anything else, taught me how digital memory works.

Even if the published content such as the videos, the posts, the comments, disappears from every corner of the internet, but the memory of it, once witnessed by

15 OurVadodara, Instagram Page, @ourvadodara, https://www.instagram.com/ourvadodara/.

16 OurRajkot, Instagram page,@our_rajkot, https://www.instagram.com/our_rajkot/.

17 Our_Ahmedabad, @our__ahmedabad, https://www.instagram.com/our__ahmedabad_/.

18 Ahmedabad Live, Instagram page, @ahmedabad_live, https://www.instagram.com/ahmedabad_live/.

19 Sumedha Bhatia et al., Hyperlocal Journalism: The Future of Community Reporting in India, 12 Media Asia 145, 147–50 (2025).

thousands, can never truly be erased. Every time people pass through that area wherein this incident occurred, they will definitely remember about the incident, and that strain will always remain. And as in the current case, the name has been already out in public from the day one, it somehow will stay forever. It becomes a part of collective memory that refuses to fade away. This is exactly where the legal and psychological dimensions of RTBF intersect. You can delete data from the servers, you can get court orders to take down the links, but you cannot erase perception from the human mind, especially in cases like the ‘Volkswagen Virtus’. 20 Once someone has seen an event live, the emotional and visual imprint of it stays. That is what I personally experienced with that case.

The matter is still sub judice before the District Court, and hence, I will refrain from discussing further details. However, one cannot deny that the Right to Be Forgotten faces its greatest challenge in this very aspect of the ‘human element’. Technology may allow us to delete content from a platform, but not from the collective consciousness of people who witnessed it. The law can protect privacy, but it cannot guarantee complete forgetfulness. And that, in itself, is the most complex dilemma of the digital era, how to balance the right of an individual to move on from their past, with the public’s natural tendency to remember. 21 In my view, the ‘Volkswagen Virtus’ incident serves as a perfect example of this. The live visuals, the discussions, and the public reactions spread faster than any traditional medium could have ever managed.

Even if the original post disappears, it continues to exist in some form somewhere and most importantly even if it is deleted through the online platforms; it cannot be removed from the minds of the humans by any means. This is exactly what Justice S. K. Panigrahi had highlighted in the case of Rout v. State of Odisha (2020)22, where he said that once something enters the online space, it becomes almost impossible to fully remove it, comparing it to how you cannot put toothpaste back into the tube once it’s out. That analogy feels incredibly accurate when we think about how social media today operates. Every screenshot, every screen recording, every shared story becomes another layer of permanence. Even if the original post disappears, it continues to exist in some form somewhere and most importantly it can never be deleted form the mind of a human.

This also forces us to rethink about the digital accountability. Who owns a story once it is shared publicly? The person who filmed it, the platform that hosted it or the audience that preserved 20 Court rejects bail plea of MS University law student from UP in Vadodara car crash case, The Indian Express (Nov. 19, 2025). 21 Ruth T. Givens, The Role of Emotion in Political Communication: A Critical Review, 17 J. of Political Comm. 1, 10 (2021).

22 Subhranshu Rout v. State of Odisha, 2020 SCC OnLine Ori 878.

it? In the traditional media structure, the responsibility was traceable. In contrast, digital media thrives in distributed responsibility, where everyone contributes to both the creation and the perpetuation of information. 23 An individual’s digital footprint gets bigger with every tweet, Instagram reel, or post on any digital platform, which may impact his/her personal reputation, employment prospects, and mental health. As a result, the Right to be Forgotten (RTBF) is recognized as an important legal protection, although its implementation is still difficult in terms of technology and jurisdiction. When the discussion is about the Indian media, one of the aspects that often get triggered is regarding the awareness in Indian public. The knowledge is the value of a mature and informed society.

Be it social, political matters, consumer rights or even consumer privacy, awareness enables individuals think and make informed decisions. However, issues that remain a significant issue in the Indian society is the fact that a significant proportion of the population is inclined to trust anything they see in the news. This blind following of the media published or aired content is not only threatening, but also misleading in most instances. The fact is that hardly any citizen will ever make efforts to even read the original FIR, the whole autopsy report or the complete judgement of a case. Individuals will just accept the brief, eye-catching piece of information in the social media since it is what draws their eyes first rather than what the facts are behind. Nobody will ever cross-verify the facts.

24 It is a simple yet harsh truth that majority of the general public rarely understand the difference between an allegation, a suspect, and a conviction. These three are completely different stages in the justice process, yet in the public eye, they often merge into one. These three words ‘allegation’, ‘suspect’, and ‘conviction’ may look like just ordinary terms, but understanding the difference between them is extremely important. The cause of this misunderstanding can be because of how information is presented by media in the current times. In a rapidly moving virtual age, nobody has the patience and time to read the whole FIR, grasp the provisions of law, or read through a lengthy judgment. 25 People will instead believe the brief, glitzy title or the 30-second video clip they come across on Instagram or YouTube.

Now it is the human nature that attention spans have reduced, and information is consumed not for understanding

23 Viktor Mayer-Schönberger, Delete: The Virtue of Forgetting in the Digital Age 112–28, (2009).

24 Reuters Inst. for the Study of Journalism, Digital News Report 2025, at 140–41 (Nic Newman ed., 2025). 25 What is the role of the media as the fourth pillar, and what challenges does it face in Indian democracy?, LEGAL WIRES (Dec. 2024).

but for instant reaction. The problem deepens when these half-truths or sensational stories start shaping public opinion. If a few major news channels, newspapers, and digital platforms repeatedly show the same version of a story, the audience automatically assumes it to be true. For instance, if all media outlets continuously report that a public figure say, a comedian or a YouTuber has “committed a crime,” people instantly accept it as a fact, without realizing that the person is merely accused, not convicted. No one questions what legal sections have been invoked, what does that section exactly mean, whether bail has been granted, or if there’s any substantial evidence. The image of the person gets tarnished forever, irrespective of what the final judgment might say years later. This manipulation of public belief is powerful.

As seen in the Elvish Yadav case, or even similar controversies involving other influencers, most people only read headlines like ‘Snake Venom Case’ and form opinions based on that. 26 Hardly anyone bothers to check the actual FIR or legal details. Media uses such stories to gain TRP and public engagement, diverting citizens from more serious matters like rising pollution levels, water contamination, or governance issues. The same pattern repeats whenever a new controversy arises, people are drawn towards drama rather than reality. In the end, the danger lies not only in misinformation but in incomplete information. Once a narrative is created, it stays in public memory even if proven false later. The human mind doesn’t erase easily what it has once perceived as truth.

Hence, the need for awareness and critical thinking is greater than ever because in this age of quick headlines, perception often becomes stronger than proof. The moment a person’s name appears in the news, people start forming opinions, even before any judicial finding. This has been a growing concern, particularly in the era of digital journalism and social media trials. 27 The situation becomes even worse when false or misleading information spreads online, as it directly affects the reputation and dignity of an individual, more importantly both of which are protected under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Digital content moves rapidly, duplicates, and frequently stays stored away in one form or another. This could be one of the main reasons that led to the birth of RTBF.

It should be noted that as soon as misinformation or a particular piece of content gets posted online, it becomes nearly impossible to fully remove it. By analysing different academic writings and court decisions, I have found that the right to be forgotten is mostly enforced by people when untrue,

26 Elvish Yadav Illegally Used Snakes, Exotic Animals in Music Video, Vlogs: ED, LIVEMINT.

27 Soroush Vosoughi et al., The Spread of True and False News Online, 359 Science 1146, 1147–49 (2018).

slanderous, or old information about them is made public on the internet. However, the real issue lies deeper than that, most people do not even know that such information about them exists in the public domain until someone else points it out to them. In today’s hyper connected world, personal information can include even the smallest details such as achievements, photos, academic data, or contact information and once these appear online by any website, the person loses control over them. Let's have a look at a case in point: a university decides to put the names of its graduates together with their job titles, email addresses, phone numbers, and other achievements on their official webpage. The situation looks good or innocent at first glance but what if one of those candidates does not wish his or her personal details to be shared online publically.

Even the achievements, when spread without permission, can transform into an issue of privacy. The important question that arises in these cases is ‘what about consent’? Did anyone seek the individual’s approval before publishing that information? This concern directly links to the essence of the judgment in Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan v. M/S Quintillion Business Media Pvt. Ltd. 28, where the court recognized that “the right to be forgotten and the right to be left alone are inherent parts of the right to privacy. ” This concept is very simple, and at the same time, very deep, the individual is the one who makes the decision about what info regarding them can or cannot be in the public domain. But in real-life situations, this freedom is usually disregarded.

Media tends to cross lines of ethics and legality which, however, may create confusion and problems, so in its pursuit of sensationalism and online click. Personal details like names, images, or private facts are often included in various online articles or reports without due consideration to whether the person whose data is being used has given his/her consent for such use. Likewise, the fact that the information is positive or even harmless is also no grounds for not asking the person concerned. The dilemma is especially true in the context of digital journalism, where data flows faster than regulators can catch up with. Cybercriminals are also taking advantage of this unwarranted trust. They get to these personal data’s as well. Initially, what seems like a privacy intrusion can progressively lead to cyber fraud, identity theft, character assassination, and so on.

Thus, the proximity of privacy violations and cybercrime is getting closer and closer at an alarming rate. Moreover, another problem created by digital records is their permanent nature. Rarely does anything that goes online disappear completely. Even if a content published online is deleted from its original source, it does not 28 Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan v. M/S Quintillion Business Media Pvt. Ltd. , CS (OS) 642/2018 (Del. H. C. 2019).

mean that it is actually completely deleted. It may still exist in someone else’s phone in the form of screenshots and screen recordings. The digital world is like a big memory, and it remembers almost everything. This scenario opposes the very idea of the Right to Be Forgotten. Online content can be directed to be removed by law, but it cannot be done for peoples' memories and their circulation offline cannot be hindered. The integration of technology and journalism has therefore brought both empowerment and risk. On one hand, citizens are more informed and engaged than ever before. On the other, misinformation, cybercrime due to privacy violations, and reputational harm have increased, challenging the principles of fairness and objectivity in journalism.

In this digital ecosystem, where “showing” often replaces “telling,” the visual and emotional appeal of content frequently overshadows factual accuracy. This observation resonates with a line from Criminal Justice: A Family Matter (Season 4), wherein the last scene the lady character says, “If you want

someone to believe a lie, the best way is not to tell them but to show them. ”29 This statement encapsulates how powerful images and selective storytelling can make falsehoods appear authentic, precisely what happens in digital journalism when sensational visuals go viral without verification. The RTBF is not only about removing the information of a specific individual which is published on online platforms. The core purpose of RTBF is about restoring the dignity of an individual and giving a second chance to them to live a new life and move on. Everyone makes mistakes, no one is perfect. Even the justice system beliefs on the concept of rehabilitation and reformation of an individual But where a person's past keeps nagging them online, rehabilitation loses its meaning. The society should realize that forgetting is equally a component of justice as remembering.

There is a fine line, however, between the Right to Privacy under Article 21 and the Freedom of Speech and Expression under Article 19 of the Indian Constitution. The press frequently rationalizes publication in the name of press freedom, claiming that the public is entitled to be informed and right to know. The problem arises in establishing where public interest ends and private intrusion starts. For example, information regarding a public official's abuse of power or corruption could fall well within the ambit of public interest, as it has a direct impact on the governance and society. But printing information on an individual's personal life, personal affairs, or domestic issues, even being true, does

29 Criminal Justice Season 4 Ending Explained: Who Is Real Murderer of Roshni Saluja and More,

BOLLYWOODSHAADIS (July 2, 2025).

nothing of that sort. The difference between what is essential to make public and what is purely out of curiosity-driven publicity needs to be upheld. Regrettably, this line has become blunted in the quest for online popularity and going viral. The current scenario of the journalism, the digital journalism, works on ‘speed’ but at the same time, the competition of publishing the content first compromises the process of cross-verification of the facts. Journalists and the independent content creators simply rely on social media posts, forwarded messages, or unverified sources. This culture of ‘publish now, verify later’, has not only reduced the creditability of journalism but also increased the instances of privacy invasions.

In order to understand better, let us consider a high-profile criminal case on the stage of judicial trial and the media share the accused’s name, photos, address, even before the court reaches a verdict. 30 The media through continuous coverage shapes public opinion in such a way that even if the accused is later on acquitted and found innocent, the society will still view that person with suspicion. This is where the awareness becomes critical, people must be able to distinguish between the information which is shown on news channels and the final judgement. However, the Indian audience still believes whatever the media portrays. This perception is needed to be changed. The public must need to understand that whatever is shown in news is not always a fact, and headlines are not always the reality.

At the same time, the media also needs to be as a responsible mediator and not as a judge or an executor. The media should also understand that they are not the one who is going to decide a case; they should not forget what their exact purpose is. Sensationalism may attract attention for a moment, but at the end it will also lead to the evasion of trust people has on journalism. There should be a greater focus on media literacy through awareness on educational institutions such as schools and universities. The Indian public should be educated on how to cross-verify the news which is being shown on the SmartTvs and be able to differentiate between credible information and manipulated content. The right to express should coexist with the right to privacy, not overpower it. 31

3. Balancing Privacy & Public Interest

3.1 The Digital Data Protection Act, 2023

The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (DPDP Act) represents India’s first 30 G. Sadhana, The Study of Right to Freedom of Expression, Digital Media Laws and Demand for Innovation,

11 Law & World 114 (2025).

31 Ethical Dilemmas in Indian Media: A Reflection on Notable Breaches, Journalism University (Nov. 6, 2023).

consolidated statutory attempt to regulate processing of personal data in a way that recognises individual autonomy over personal information. But when we look specifically for a discrete, standalone “Right to be Forgotten” in the Act, what we find is not an obvious declaration and instead we find a cluster of remedial and rights-based provisions that together create a doorway to erasure, yet stop short of enshrining the Right to be Forgotten as an independent, express entitlement. Section 12(3) of the said Act becomes the pivot of this discussion, it gives the data principal rights of correction, completion, updating and erasure of their personal data when it is inaccurate, no longer required, or when consent is withdrawn and no other legal basis remains to retain the data.

32 On paper this looks promising as it recognises the hurt caused by obsolete or unwanted data and it gives people an instrument to ask for removal. In practice, however, the provision is written as a remedial limb of other rights rather than as an affirmative, standalone property of informational autonomy. 33 That difference is crucial. A statutory, named Right to be Forgotten performs several functions beyond the mere mechanics of deletion. First, naming the right symbolically affirms that individuals possess a continuing power to shape their digital identities, second, it obliges the legislature and regulators to set out clear standards, exceptions and procedural safeguards that prevent arbitrary denials, and third, it signals to courts, companies and citizens how to perform the balancing act between private dignity and public interest.

34 By embedding erasure under a broader clause, the DPDP Act leaves much of the heavy-lifting to interpretation to the Data Protection Board, to future rules, and to judicial gloss. 35 This creates uncertainty for data principals who want to know, concretely, when they may reasonably expect removal and what remedies they will be entitled to if their request is refused. The Act also builds in important and broad exceptions. It allows retention where necessary to comply with legal obligations, to pursue legal claims, to safeguard national security, or where public interest considerations such as journalism or historical research outweigh the individual’s claim.

These exceptions are necessary as no progressive privacy framework can ignore legitimate public needs but their breadth in the present text makes refusal of erasure 32 A Critical Evaluation of the Right to Be Forgotten in the Context of the 2023 Digital Personal Data Protection Act, The Amikus Qriae. 33 Swathi K. Hosamani, Analysing India’s Journey With the Right to Be Forgotten, Indian Journal of Law & Legal Research (IJLLR), May 19, 2024. 34 Vipul Maheshwari, Right to Be Forgotten: The Ongoing Battle Between Privacy and the Internet’s Memory, Legal Developments (Legal 500), Apr. 22, 2025.

35 Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, ch. 6, § 27, “Powers and functions of Board”.

requests easy for fiduciaries and harder to challenge for data principals. Put bluntly, the absence of clear tests (what constitutes public interest, when does archival value outweigh individual harm) converts a remedial right into a discretionary shield for data controllers. 36 Moreover, the Act’s enforcement architecture is still nascent. The Data Protection Board is intended to adjudicate disputes and impose penalties, but its powers, procedures and independence are not yet tested in the crucible of complex erasure disputes. 37 Who will decide whether a news archive qualifies as “public interest” or whether a ten-year-old conviction that has been expunged should remain discoverable online? The statute leaves much of that to the Board and the courts to fill in.

Without a firm statutory statement of the Right to be Forgotten and without a precisely defined adjudicatory pathway, citizens will face piecemeal outcomes shaped by resource disparities between large platform fiduciaries and individual data principals. 38 There is also the practical question of remedies. Section 12(3) allows for erasure requests, but the Act lacks a clear, accessible, low-cost pathway to compel compliance when fiduciaries are slow or non-cooperative. The formal complaint route to the Board is not an attractive tool for ordinary citizens who need timely fixes to avoid reputational or economic harm. Finally, there is a socio-legal texture specific to India that the statute has not fully accounted for. India’s digital ecosystem includes mass-market intermediaries, legacy government records, and a high proportion of users with limited data literacy.

Unless statutory procedures are designed to be user-friendly, the existence of a remedial clause translates poorly for ordinary citizens. In short, the DPDP Act opens the gate toward erasure but does not clearly push the gate open. It offers the instrument but does not make the path to use of that instrument clear, timely and equitable. This measured, cautious approach may reflect legitimate fears about censorship and historical erasure; nevertheless, the omission of an explicit, robust Right to be Forgotten is a missed chance to define standards, streamline remedies, and give every day 36 Poorvaja Subramanian & Anjali Viswanaathan, Erasing the Past: The Right to Be Forgotten in India – Progress, Pitfalls, and Prospects, Int’l J. for Multidisciplinary Research (IJFMR), Vol. 6, Issue 6, Nov. –Dec. 2024, at 1.

37 DPDP Act: Data Principal Rights, VistaInfosec Blog.

38 Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025, R. 8, “Time Period for Specified Purpose to Be Deemed as No Longer Being Served,”.

Indians a clear, enforceable power to shape their online lives. 39 It is hard not to think that the law both augments and postpones. It advances to a greater extent that it recognizes data subjects and grants erasure rights in principle; it postpones because it fails to articulate a clear and enforceable right with procedurally robust remedies. This relative incompleteness is what makes the phrase “missed opportunity” to be apt. The law could have benefited from the Puttaswamy ruling and thus it would have been a straightforward right defined with procedural timelines, clear exceptions, and an easy-to-access redressal mechanism. On the contrary, erasure is incorporated in such a manner that it will need future rule-making and judicial artistry to make it significant. 40 What does it mean in practical terms?

The damage done to one's name and identity by online publication of one's past mistakes is already felt and needs to be fixed right away since it is a time-sensitive matter. 41 The whole process of getting one's reputation back, looking for a job, or even being stigmatized can happen in a blink of an eye through the internet. The legal system's failure to bring real justice to the people is when it forces them to wait for a long time to mirror the case of the tech company negotiations or slow court processes. The way the DPDP Act is structured can make people's right to erase their information almost a luxury that only those who have the means to go through a court battle can access while the majority of the citizens needing fast and less costly means are left with no option.

42 In comparison to the EU, the Indian Data Protection Law is much softer: it introduces some of the concepts but not as a coherent system centred on user-friendliness and enforcement. The EU’s model is, however, benefitting from a clear path where a request leads to timely action or a reasoned refusal with an immediate right to appeal; on the other hand, India has made the path tortuous and mainly relying on administrative progress. 43 A missed opportunity shouldn’t lead us to despair nonetheless. The DPDP Act is the foundation

for a stronger protection: the legal mention of deletion, the establishment of an enforcement

39 Bharvi Shahi & Anand Raj Dev, Navigating India’s Digital Personal Data Protection Act: Critical

Implications and Emerging Challenges, Int’l J. of Legal Stud. & Social Sci. (IJLSSS), Vol. 3, Issue 1, at 412 (2025). 40 Anjani Agarwal & Aman Singh, The Right to Be Forgotten Under the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023: A Missed Opportunity in India’s Data Privacy Regime, Int’l J. of Law, Vol. 11, Issue 6, at 57 (2025). 41 Mihir R, Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023: A Missed Opportunity for Horizontal Equality, Supreme Court Observer, Aug. 23, 2023

42 DPDP Rules and a Missed Opportunity, Lukmaan IAS Mains Focus (Feb. 18, 2025).

43 DPDP Rules and a Missed Opportunity, Lukmaan IAS Mains Focus (Feb. 18, 2025).

board, and a universal rights framework. If the lawmakers, the authorities, and the judiciary decide to act decisively by clarifying the rules on timelines, by empowering the Board with quasi-judicial authority, by establishing simplified processes for interested citizens, and by fostering international cooperation through negotiation, then India has the potential to transform the dormant right into an active one. The central dilemma is not whether India should safeguard privacy rights that decision has already been made but rather how aggressively it intends to actualize and recognize the right in a context of diverging values. 44 India has not completely failed; rather, it has not completed the task.

The DPDP Act is merely the initial stage, but the major part of the job is still to come, writing accurate rules, providing easy access to remedies, creating technical and institutional capacity, and stopping misuse. If India takes that next step, it will be able to create a context-specific Right to be Forgotten that both protects the individual and takes care of the democratic values. If not, the lack of such a right in the statute will be, definitely, a lost opportunity. 45

3.2 Technological & Practical Challenges

Discussing about rights on a paper is one thing, however, putting those rights into practice in sophisticated information ecosystems is another. The Right to be Forgotten faces numerous difficult technological realities that hinder the application of legal solutions. 46 Data persistence is, first of all, the main technical challenge. Nowadays, data is seldom stored only in one physical location, the same data is stored across servers, clouds and devices in the form of copies, backups, caches as well as in unsecured archives. Even if a main publisher takes down the content, it might still be present in third-party servers or backups, making it very hard to achieve complete erasure. This issue is not just a technicality; it is a factor that influences legal expectations.

A legal ruling that guarantees total erasure is actually very difficult to fulfil with the help of current infrastructure which does not facilitate such processes easily. Instead, the most that one can obtain through de-indexing and delisting (removal from 44 Dharmendra Kumar, The Right to Be Forgotten in the Digital Age: Challenges and Omissions in the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, Int’l J. Innovative Res. Eng’g & Multidisciplinary Phys. Sci. , Vol. 13, Issue 4, at (2025).

45 Anwesha Sen, DPDP Rules and a Missed Opportunity, Deccan Herald (Jan. 12, 2025).

46 The Right to Be Forgotten in the Digital Age: Legal and Ethical Challenges, Castilho Int’l Legal Corp (Aug. 3, 2023).

search indices) is discoverability reduced rather than complete deletion. 47 Secondly, the process of erasure is further complicated by the fact that search engines engage in indexing and caching. The search engine caches along with the third-party services that archive the internet, like web archives, are likely to keep the snapshots of the content that has been removed. 48 The GDPR model translates into obligations of removal from the indexes in case of data controllers, but even this method has its limitations: de-indexed content can still be found via its direct URL only or through non-compliant foreign servers.

If Indian data subjects are to be considered, it can be said that the domestic removal orders will not be fully effective unless there is cooperation from the part of the search engines and the global platforms for the removal of the indexed results throughout the world, the coordination being a challenge that requires either extraterritorial reach or international agreements. 49 Thirdly, decentralised technologies make the creation of high-level technical barriers possible. The characteristics of blockchain systems include immutability. It can be stated that personal data that has been written on a public or private blockchain can only be destroyed by changing the entire ledger structure. The use of cryptographic methods like redaction or key deletion can reduce the impact of the situation but still, these methods do not equal to traditional deletion.

The question, in this case, would be how to deal with the individual erasure rights when essential public records, identity registries or other services that have adopted immutable ledgers come into the picture? Legal frameworks will have to accept the fact that some architectures are not able to support full deletion by their nature. 50 The fourth issue is detection. Erasure requests imply that data subjects are aware of the location of their data which is often not the case. Automated discovery tools, consent managers, and strong registry requirements can assist, but they are not yet widespread in India. Data subjects often do not have the necessary technical expertise to monitor their digital footprint, and organizations seldom offer simple-to-use registries or dashboards where individuals can view and control their data.

In the absence of such access, the right to erasure turns into a request in 47 European Data Protection Board, Guidelines 5/2019 on the Criteria of the Right to Be Forgotten in Search- Engine Cases under the GDPR (v. 2. 0, adopted July 7, 2020). 48 E. Politou, E. Alepis & C. Patsakis, Backups and the Right to be Forgotten in the GDPR, 34 Computer L. & Sec. Rev. 1247 (2018).

49 Kevin Yun, Right to Be Forgotten: Deleting Your Digital Past, ComplyDog Blog (May 17, 2025).

50 When Blockchain Immutability Meets the GDPR Article 17 “Right to Be Forgotten”, SecurePrivacy, June 2, 2025.

the dark. 51 Fifth, cross-border enforcement is a complicated matter. Global platforms are located in different jurisdictions and commonly utilize servers that are divided among various continents. Domestic rules that support enforcement will still be of limited use without international cooperation or the sale of extraterritorial enforcement powers. The extraterritoriality of the GDPR is a positive factor, but it cannot solve the problem entirely; fragmentation and conflicts of laws can still be barriers to universal compliance. At last, corporate compliance costs and incentives are important factors. Platforms might choose to litigate or to just wait for the compliance to take place instead of complying immediately, since the disputes over erasure can cause difficult arguments about the public's interest, research value and freedom of the press to be raised.

In order to prevent performance that is purposely delayed, the legal systems have to not only impose rights but also come up with obligatory timeframes, notification obligations and penalties that allow for actual responsiveness at a calibrated level. 52 For the right to erasure to be practically applied in India, the law should go hand in hand with technology policy: these might include data retention and deletion standards, the obligation of search engines to comply with de-indexing across jurisdictions, user-friendly data inventories, and incentives for platforms to comply. Without this technical and procedural scaffolding, the legal right could turn out to be more symbolic than substantive. 53 India has not completely failed; rather, it has not completed the task.

51 Challenges in Data Deletion and Permanent Erasure, YouAccel.

52 Tilman Harmeling, How Much Does GDPR Compliance Really Cost?, Usercentrics Knowledge Hub, Nov. 5,

2025. 53 The Right to Be Forgotten in the Digital Age: Legal and Ethical Challenges, Castilho Int’l Legal Corp (Aug. 3, 2023).

54 Anwesha Sen, DPDP Rules and a Missed Opportunity, Deccan Herald (Jan. 12, 2025).

4. Suggestions

4.1 Create a Centralised Online Delisting Portal Modelled like the EU and Spain System

Perhaps the easiest to use and most successful mechanism, among others, has been the European model that allows the public to make requests for delisting via online platforms directly operated by search engines. After the Google Spain v. Costeja González decision, the EU set a standard for a systematic and uniform procedure that gave the public the right to ask for the removal of obsolete, irrelevant, or overly damaging information. India may bring such a system into force by creating a centralised online delisting mechanism under the Data Protection Board or through a government-sanctioned co-ordinating body. Through this system, people would be able to complete a standard form, prove who they are, upload necessary documents (like acquittal orders, proof of age, evidence of compliance or rehabilitation), and request removal from search engines and other indexing services.

This not only simplifies access but also eliminates the demand for a court proceeding as the first step which was a barrier before.

4.2 Mandate Compliance Obligations for Digital Journalism Platforms and Long-Term

News Archives The digital journalism in today's media environment is a lot different compared to traditional print media. With online publishing, articles are more likely to get indexed, shared, archived, and republished by aggregators and third-party platforms permanently. Unlike print, digital content does not fade, it multiplies. Therefore, there is a pressing need to establish journalistically and legally responsible compliance standards for online news portals, independent journalism pages, and long-term digital archives. Digital news organisations should be required to maintain metadata and update protocols, ensuring outdated stories are contextualised with follow-up developments such as acquittals, retractions, corrections, or rehabilitation.

Instead of deleting content outright, platforms may include updates like: “This individual was later acquitted”, or “This case is now closed. ” Besides, long-term data storage should incorporate ethical access filters, which will allow courts, researchers, and journalists to keep their access while imposing restrictions on the public indexing that is not allowed. The introduction of mandatory expiry review cycles could

happen as well, where media companies would have to evaluate after a certain period, for example, seven or ten years, if the content still has a legitimate public purpose. These obligations would not undermine freedom of the press. Rather, they reinforce responsible journalism grounded in dignity, proportionality, and accuracy, values already recognised under journalistic ethics and global privacy norms.

4.3 Minimise Digital Traceability Rather Than Attempting Full Erasure

One thing that becomes very clear while examining the Right to Be Forgotten in the digital context is that viral content behaves very differently from ordinary online information. Once a piece of news, a video clip, or even a blog post goes viral especially on platforms like Instagram reels, WhatsApp forwards or Twitter (now ‘X’), it spreads rapidly, gets reshared, archived, screen-recorded, and sometimes repackaged by third-party pages. At that point, the internet almost stops functioning like a filing system and starts functioning like an echo chamber. In such cases, expecting complete deletion from every location on the internet becomes unrealistic. The “toothpaste analogy” fits perfectly here that once information has been squeezed out and circulated at that scale, it cannot be put back into the tube in its original form.

So instead of designing a legal system that promises a kind of “total wipe-out” (which is impossible after virality), India should adopt a more practical remedy that is to minimising search ability and public visibility. This means ensuring that outdated or unfair information stops appearing every time a person’s name is searched online. The focus should shift to tools such as: • De-indexing from search engines, • Lowering the ranking of outdated content, • Geo-blocking access where necessary, and • Preventing further algorithmic amplification. This approach does not erase the event from history, but it stops it from overshadowing a person’s present life especially when the viral moment no longer reflects who they are or when legal findings have changed (like acquittals or mistaken identity cases).

Specifically for the viral content, the realistic and meaningful remedy is not complete erasure, but controlled invisibility. This protects dignity without denying historical context and ensures that a temporary digital uproar does not permanently define an individual.

4.4 Increase Public Awareness and Digital Literacy Regarding Data Rights and Remedies

The efficiency of all legal rights, such as the Right to Be Forgotten, is closely linked to the public's awareness of these remedies and their accessibility. In India, although the number of internet users is growing, the digital literacy level is still not the same everywhere. The reputation of many users who are affected by old or bad online content about them continues to be damaged only because they are unware of their rights or the way to seek redressal. In order to fill this void, it would be beneficial to conduct awareness campaigns at universities, public institutions, bar associations, media institutions, and on different digital platforms.

Multilingual guides and step-by-step assistance modules explaining the process of filing an erasure or delisting request, appropriateness of the remedy, and functioning of public-interest exceptions could be developed by government, civil society, and academic institutions working together. Besides, embedding privacy rights like the Right to Be Forgotten in the school and university syllabus, journalism training, and professional certification programs would secure cultural acceptance in the long run. Public awareness is crucial for not just empowering individuals but also developing a media and technology environment that respects dignity, privacy, and responsible information handling principles. Ultimately, the Right to Be Forgotten cannot function as a meaningful remedy unless individuals know they possess the right and have the confidence and clarity to exercise it.

5. Conclusion

In the digital era, the sheer permanence of online information means that individuals, for example, those acquitted of crimes or long-solved offenses, can find their reputations imperilled by old news reports and social media posts. India’s judiciary has begun to balance individuals’ privacy against the public’s right to know. The 2017 Puttaswamy decision firmly declared privacy a constitutional right, implicitly opening the door to RTBF claims, but it also stressed that any erasure must be weighed against freedom of expression and information. In

practice, courts have been mixed. While some High Courts have allowed limited relief (for example, masking names from online court records to protect dignity), while others have resisted RTBF claims where information is part of the public record. In the absence of an explicit statute, litigants seeking RTBF relief must fight lengthy cases. Various reports suggest dozens of petitions are pending, especially by those who have served sentences or been exonerated. This piecemeal approach has led to unpredictability. While one commentator notes “notions of indistinctness and unpredictability in law and judgment confuse those who wish to rehabilitate themselves” under RTBF.

India’s new Digital Personal Data Protection Act (DPDP Act) 2023 finally grants individuals a right to request correction or erasure of personal data, but it contains no free-standing “right to be forgotten” provision and exempts the State from erasure obligations. As some analysts put it, the DPDP Act gives only a “limited recognition” of erasure rights.