Correction

I have a theory, it's rather far fetched but I think there's a ring of truth in it somewhere.  People often ask why things in the world can at times seem like they are getting worse and that everything is bad.  Now obviously that's not true, there's plenty of things going right we just don't focus on them enough or give them prominence.  When it comes to the things that are going wrong however, I have a theory as to why things appear to get worse with time passing.

We live in a society where technology follows every movement we make, sometimes metaphorically, and sometimes literally.  With technology invading our everyday life to such an extent there's an impact that isn't really talked about much - that is, the right to make a mistake.  The EU introduced a privacy directive known as the 'Right to be forgotten' and when it did so it was met with derision by many people - why?  There are those who claim that such a right would be exploited to cover up the past discretions of powerful people and that it would ultimately lead to censorship.  The question I have in response to that is, why do you think you have the right to know?

When we live our lives, as human beings, it is inevitable that we will make mistakes.  In the past when this was the case it was a lot easier to accept them, move on, and forget them.  People were allowed to grow, and develop.  There were always those people who remembered everything that happened no matter how big or small that may be, and they were often met with derision, regarded as gossips and people who ultimately didn't want to let people move on from their past.  That impedance of growth is destructive to the individual, and when that mentality is extrapolated to society as a whole, it becomes destructive to society.

The right to admit you were wrong, and try and correct it, or move on if you can't, is something which has now been lost in society.  People are held to their word no matter how salient or inconspicuous their remarks were.  There is a belief that these people are "held to account" by doing this, but whilst that may be the case in some situations, in most however there is little reason to pin someone down to the person they were rather than the person they have become.

People grow, and peoples' point of view can evolve, and people who are incredibly close can become incredibly distant.  Yet with the insidiousness of technology we now find ourselves in a place where every detail is recorded and can be invoked, every action can be taken and repeated, and every word we say or write can be copied and pasted.  This isn't about denying that you ever did or said that which is quoted, this is about acknowledging the path and the growth that has occurred since.

This works in reverse as well.  People recall the way you used to be and use that as their impression of you as a person.  Whilst everything above is written in the context of someone who did something bad who now wishes to be good, you can take this idea and apply it to people who did something good, and now act in a way that is bad.  The same mentality of holding on to the person they were rather than the person they have become is prevalent.  This can lead to great abuse of that perception.  Those who had relationships for instance that were once loving and have now become hateful, often hold onto the image of the person they loved, and don't see the person that now exists, leading them to stay in that place of abuse.

In both cases the point you must concede is that the actions of a person in the moment and going forward are more important than those of the past.  The fact someone never killed you before shouldn't make you believe they wouldn't kill you now if there is evidence to suggest they would.  You need to be present in the moment.  The fact that someone killed many people in the past, equally, doesn't mean they would kill you now, although the immediate perception is to assume they would - again the problem is the lack of presence and the fixation on the past as an indicator of the present.

To better understand the actions of a person and their behaviour, you need to understand the motivation that exists or existed at the time.  Motivation is not something that remains fixed, it fluctuates and changes form and focus constantly.  When dealing with conflict and resolution, as well as the management of violence, aggression, or perceived aggression, it's important to be aware of the developing situation otherwise you won't be able to handle it effectively.

Society is filled with conflict, and much of that is fuelled by perception more than reality.  The legacy of the past and the intense documentation of it, combined with the ease of access to that documentation creates an environment where you can frame any person's actions or current state with their previous actions.  You can make people think quite easily that they will behave in the same way as before.  If there's one thing human beings are however, it is not reliable.  People are unpredictable, primarily because of emotion.  If you take the parable of the human condition portrayed in movies like The Matrix, the underlying message conveyed by characters such as the Architect who attempted to account for all of humanity's actions, is that emotion creates chaos and chaos is inherently unpredictable.

The attempt to rationalize human behaviour and make it something logical and coherent is a pursuit of many industries.  Advertising, Marketing, even Psychology itself all attempt to analyse human behaviour with the ultimate goal being to create models that can accurately predict how people will react in any given situation.  Whilst there are successes and there are trends and leniences that can be cited as evidence for this being a fruitful endeavour, the fact that no universal model has ever emerged is evidence in itself that it's not possible to account for everything.

What does this have to do with deleting data and the right to be forgotten?  Well, to have a system where every detail is recorded, catalogued, indexed, and searchable for citation is to have a system that implies human beings are infallible, that they don't make mistakes, that every record you can make is an accurate depiction or indication of the person that record pertains to.  To have a system that actively encourages us to look at what a person did, more than what they are doing, is to have a system that places more weight and value on that which came before rather than that which is coming now.  To have a system that values the past more than the present is to have a system that values the mistake, more than the attempts to correct it.

How then do you prevent the fixation on the mistake and shift the focus to the attempts to correct it?  The answer is, for now at least, you can't.  Attempts to do this have failed, and the right to be forgotten is an attempt to enable the mistakes to be deleted in order to force people to use newer information as a source.  The reaction of society it seems was one of derision because of our fixation on the past.  The reason I believe we are in a position where things feel like they are always getting worse is because with many things we're not allowed to fix the mistake, and when people try to correct theirs there is a desire to focus on the fact they were wrong to begin with, rather than what they are doing to try and fix it.

This mentality penetrates every part of society, ask yourself when was the last time you saw someone in the public eye admit they were wrong, and then ask what happened next.  Where was the focus, and from memory what did they do to try and fix it?  Take the time to actually look and research it and see if your memory actually lines up to reality.