Chicago Sun-Times’ New “Right to Be Forgotten” Policy Doesn’t Help Most Illinoisans Who Deserve a 2nd Chance

Earlier this week I received an e-mail excitedly announcing the Chicago Sun-Times’ new “Right to Be Forgotten” policy, which considers requests to remove certain crime stories.

Having previously written about the adoption of such policies, I was obviously thrilled to hear that, finally, an Illinois newspaper was joining the ranks of other socially progressive news organizations. Unfortunately, the policy doesn’t live up to its surrounding hype.

A Problem in Need of a Bold Solution

In explaining its rationale for adopting the policy, the newspaper’s Executive Editor, Jennifer Kho, cites to both Chicago’s “history of unjust arrests” and national statistics showing that “Black people are overrepresented in these stories compared to their proportion of arrests.”

However, the Sun-Times’ policy ends up falling well short of my expectations. Why? Because the newspaper only plans to remove or “de-index” stories reporting an individual’s arrest, provided that the charges are later “dropped, dismissed, reversed or expunged.”

The policy does not apply to those who: 1) are a current or past elected or public official, 2) are seeking public office, or 3) have been previously convicted of “most felonies” or a crime of violence, even if the individual is the subject of an otherwise eligible arrest story. The policy also does not explain what it means by “most felonies.”

Sun-Times’ Policy Doesn’t Go Far Enough

The problem with the Sun-Times’ Right to Be Forgotten policy is that it does not go far enough.

While the Sun-Times pays lip service to Chicago’s ugly history of unjust arrests of people of color, its fails to acknowledge the true impact of such biased and craven policing practices.

It should not come as a surprise that Cook County ranks first in the U.S. with respect to the number of exonerated persons -- innocent people (mostly African American men) who were convicted of serious crimes (usually murders) and sentenced to lengthy prison sentences. See The National Registry of Exonerations

Even where the individual has committed the crime, does it make sense for that person to live under the cloud of a story about the dumb (and criminal) thing s/he when 17 or 21 years old – particular where the underlying offense has been sealed and, thus, is no longer a searchable official record?

Sealing a Criminal Record Doesn’t Disable a Google Search

The Sun-Times’ policy runs counter to the Illinois General Assembly’s multifaceted efforts to help individuals overcome the obstacles they face due to having a criminal background. It has been more than five years since Illinois permitted judges to seal most misdemeanor and felony convictions records.

I’ve represented several individuals whose crimes received media coverage. Even when a judge agrees to seal such criminal records, I still have to explain that sealing a conviction won’t erase the previous media coverage or give then a legal right to demand that a newspaper or TV station remove its stories about the case.

It is a bitter pill for clients to swallow. By the time someone contacts me, many have spent years or decades rebuilding their lives one brick at a time. Despite their best efforts, a Google search is only a click away from reminding the person (and potential employers) of the worst decision s/he ever made.

Give More People an Opportunity to Be Forgotten

If the Sun-Times genuinely wants to make a difference in the lives of people such as my clients, it should expand the policy to include stories about crimes that have been sealed by a court’s order.

Such a policy would help to advance and strengthen the legislative steps the General Assembly has taken over the past decade.