Robots.txt for the NYT has a specific exclusion for an 1996 news article

Re:Robots.txt for the NYT has a specific exclusion for an 19... by aaron695 on Monday March 29, 2021 @12:24AM (#26617683)

So does Wired and other news sites.

https://www.wired.com/robots.txt

It's concerning someone working for the news doesn't understand why.

This is their power of ruining lives forever.

This is a new thing, it should be taught, it's not hard to understand.

I don't know why journalist think they deserve respect when these things are not fundamentally in their ethos.

There should be a better process than robot.txt and some news sites are doing better. Europe has brought in laws. But if journalist want to be thought of as more than writing blog spam, they need a better answer to this.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Robots.txt for the NYT has a specific exclusion for an 19... by koheripbal on Monday March 29, 2021 @09:57AM (#26621612)

At some point they'll probably figure out they can charge money to hide articles.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Robots.txt for the NYT has a specific exclusion for an 19... by curt15 on Monday March 29, 2021 @08:59AM (#26620873)

Should Wired simply be required by law to delete the articles?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Robots.txt for the NYT has a specific exclusion for an 19... by michaelmrose on Monday March 29, 2021 @04:57AM (#26619007)

If he is innocent it should be sufficient to anmend the article so it shows the truth.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Robots.txt for the NYT has a specific exclusion for an 19... by DangerousPie on Monday March 29, 2021 @07:09AM (#26619970)

If you Google a job applicant's name and find several articles reporting that they have been accused of rape (with just a little note at the end that the charges have been dismissed), are you really going to give them a fair chance? I don't think anyone would look at them in an unbiased way, even if they tried to.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Robots.txt for the NYT has a specific exclusion for an 19... by michaelmrose on Monday March 29, 2021 @01:36PM (#26625378)

Why does it need to be a little note at the end. Change the title to so and so cleared of charges of rape if its so and yes I would give them a fair chance.

What is the alternative? I do not know anything about the particular case and make no claims about it but suppose the charges were dropped for political reasons or because the victim was intimidated? Shall we in such scenarios silence them entirely in order to protect a criminal?

[ Parent | on HN ]