Seeking Digital Redemption: The Future of Forgiveness in the Internet Age
Santa Clara Computer and High Technology Law Journal, Vol. 29, 2012
2012
- 1Citations
- 3,942Usage
- 2Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Paper Description
The Right to be Forgotten, a controversial privacy right that allows users to make information about themselves less accessible after a period of time, is hailed as a pillar of information privacy in some countries while condemned as censorship in others. Psychological and behavioral research indicates that one’s capacity to forget features of the past — or remember them in a different way — is deeply connected to his or her power to forgive others and move on, which in turn, has dramatic impacts on well-being. Second chances and the reinvention of self are deeply intertwined with American history and culture. Yet the possibility of a shared perpetual memory stored on and accessible through the Internet threatens to make it impossible to forget even the most insignificant transgression. This article examines whether the march of technological progress should retire notions of forgiveness as a social value, or if the privacy rights of individuals should include the ability to move on and afford second chances after information about them has been available for a certain amount of time. By analyzing a variety of well-established U.S. laws that provide for forgiveness, this article proposes a framework for crafting a response to the forgiveness void of the Internet Age within the U.S. legal system.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know