Imagine, for just one second, how it would look like if Berlusconi, Le Pen and Putin had had access to such a law?

In effect you would remove the ability to censure politicians who’d done wrong in the biggest medium available to the citizenry.

No wonder EU politicians love that law.

Actually, yes. Anyone standing for public office today should be required to have to answer to prior opinions s/he might have had.

Especially today when a great number of politicians recently elected into parliament spent the last decade as part of a shaven-headed mob hunting immigrants and homosexuals for sport.

Can you imagine, even for one second, how a “right to be forgotten” if it was somehow made to work, would have ensured Berlusconi, Le Pen and Putin would never again be censured in the blogosphere?

“Yes, it has some slight chilling effect on journalism…”

By guaranteeing that journalism would be effectively dead in the single largest public medium the average citizen has access to, yes.

People keep forgetting that the dictionary definition of that EU law is, in fact, “censorship” – the real deal, enforced by a governmental decree and backed by the violence monopoly held by the state.

“The EU is properly mandating that people have the right to ‘be forgotten’”

No one has that right. Free speech is a human right. To be forgotten is not. Free speech is curtailed – currently – by only a very few exceptions, one of which is slander. And if that’s the case, then the EU regulation still makes no sense.