Should Google try to interpret the ruling as closely as possible, only blocking the most clearly irrelevant information, and honoring requests for appeals from journalists whenever possible? That would limit damage to those seeking information, but risk another turn at the courts.

Or should they just implement it as broadly and bluntly as possible, lowering their risk of noncompliance, reducing their costs of evaluating each case, while increasing the chance that people will start to grasp the negative consequences they argued about to the court?

Despite the near term harms, if we're worried more about the long run, there's a case to be made for the latter...