Moving on from the adult industry is never easy, and removing your past from the internet can feel impossible. When a tabloid article resurfaces every time someone searches your name, it can become a barrier to rebuilding your life.
Rebuilding your life after the adult industry: what happens when search results won’t let go
How a public interview can become your biggest online regret
Removing search results from Google after a public interview: What are your rights
Is it possible to delist information I put online myself
How we used the Right to be Forgotten to get content removed from search results
Lawyers’ thoughts about the case
Rebuilding your life after the adult industry: what happens when search results won’t let go
When someone searches your name online, the results should show who you are today, not a distorted version of your past. That’s exactly what our client, Sophie, was trying to change when she contacted us.
Years earlier, Sophie had been in the adult entertainment industry during a difficult chapter in her life. It wasn’t a decision she took lightly, but one rooted in a desire for acceptance and stability after growing up in a turbulent home. She had been caught in a toxic and violent relationship, which left her emotionally and physically scarred. During this time, she also struggled with alcohol.
The pressures of her relationship and the industry led to a period of self-medication, and she often drank heavily to cope. At one point, she was hospitalised after vomiting blood from excessive drinking. It was a clear cry for help. Sophie eventually found the strength to leave both the industry and her abusive partner.
She began to heal and turned her attention to helping others. She started studying and volunteering at a local hospital and committed to a new life entirely. It was during this period of rebuilding that she agreed to speak openly about her experiences in an interview with a small local newspaper, in hopes of encouraging others to leave abusive relationships.
How a public interview can become your biggest online regret
The article was picked up by a national tabloid, which republished her story without asking for her permission. The republished version twisted her words, exaggerated events, and misrepresented her. It claimed that most of the abuse she suffered had been verbal and emotional, when in truth, the relationship had been severely physically abusive.
The article described her as someone who drank a bottle of vodka a day, making it seem as though she had brought all her troubles upon herself, while completely missing the context of her youth, years shaped by instability, emotional neglect, and a desperate need for belonging.It portrayed her as reckless and broken, ignoring the fact that her behaviour was a reaction to trauma, not a character flaw.
This article- containing her full name and images- soon became the top search result when anyone searched for Sophie online. Despite her efforts to start over, this one outdated and misleading story defined her digital identity.
Removing search results from Google after a public interview: What are your rights
Whilst usually placing information in the public domain voluntarily would often prevent you from applying for a delisting under the Right to be Forgotten , this isn't always the case. Sophie came to us not to deny her past, but to protect her future. She had worked hard to rebuild her life through study and charity work, but the presence of this article online was a constant obstacle.
She worried that potential employers or colleagues might judge her based on an untrue and outdated version of her story. Each time she submitted a job application or introduced herself professionally, the fear of being searched on Google and misunderstood loomed large.
Sophie had reached out to the national tabloid that published the article (the Daily Mirror) asking them to delete it. Despite her request, and even after explaining the harm it was causing, the newspaper refused to remove the article. They argued that they were merely republishing content that had already appeared elsewhere, even though Sophie had never given them permission for the republication.
The story had been sensationalised, removed from its original context, and twisted to attract attention. Yet, even in the face of a clear lack of public interest in keeping it online, the newspaper declined to take it down. This left Sophie feeling powerless.
The article had originally been published during a time of vulnerability in the hope of helping others. That article was then taken and exploited by a larger outlet, without her input, consent, or the full truth. It was this injustice that pushed Sophie to seek our help and find a legal solution where journalistic ethics had failed her.
Is it possible to delist information I put online myself
It is possible to delist information you placed online yourself. However, one of the most complex aspects of this case was the fact that Sophie had originally agreed to the interview, albeit with a local publication she trusted.
The law around the Right to be Forgotten is complex. Generally, people are more likely to succeed in having links removed when the information is outdated, inaccurate or serves no public interest. There is an added difficulty when the individual themselves placed the information in the public domain, even if it was years earlier and under different expectations.
In Sophie’s case, we had to address this directly. Just because she had once agreed to talk about her past didn’t mean that the consent was unlimited, permanent, or transferable to other outlets. Consent can be context-specific and time-bound. We argued that while she once gave a small local paper permission to publish her story with the intent of helping others, she never agreed to the large-scale republication that followed, nor did she expect the article to be twisted or used in ways that harmed her.
This issue is an exception to many successful Right to be Forgotten cases, but not an absolute barrier. With careful legal reasoning, a compelling personal narrative, and evidence of the real-world harm being caused, it is still possible to remove such links from search engine results. This case showed that the law can account for change, and that individuals who once spoke publicly have not necessarily forfeited their rights to privacy forever.
How we used the Right to be Forgotten to get content removed from search results
We advised Sophie to file a Right to be Forgotten request. This is a legal mechanism available under UK and EU data protection law that allows individuals to request that search engines like Google remove links to personal information that is outdated, irrelevant, or excessive.
In Sophie’s case, all of those applied. We drafted a detailed submission to Google, explaining not only the inaccuracies in the article, but also how it continued to cause real harm to Sophie’s current life.
We highlighted that she had never given permission for the national tabloid to republish the interview, that the article misrepresented her experiences, and that it contained sensitive personal data that no longer had any legitimate reason to appear in public search results. We argued clearly that the article served no public interest and that its continued availability online was an intrusion on her privacy.
One of the main challenges we faced was Google’s lack of initial engagement. It’s not uncommon for search engines to delay or dismiss requests like these without thorough consideration. We followed up persistently, re-submitting materials and documenting the ways in which Sophie was being affected.
We also made it clear that, if necessary, we would escalate the matter to the Information Commissioner’s Office, which has the authority to require Google to take action. Behind the scenes, this required careful coordination, evidence gathering, and legal reasoning to present a strong, factual and persuasive case. We had to strike the right balance between advocating forcefully and meeting the strict standards required by data protection law.
Eventually, our persistence paid off. Google agreed to remove the link from search results for Sophie’s name. This meant that while the article still existed on the newspaper’s website, it would no longer appear in searches related to her identity, giving her back some control over her online presence.
Sophie was enormously relieved. She could now pursue job applications and community roles without fear of being defined by something that no longer represented her. It marked a new beginning for her, and a victory for the idea that people deserve a chance to be seen for who they have become, not who they once were.
Lawyers’ thoughts about the case
This case wasn’t about hiding the truth. It was about correcting a false and damaging narrative. Sophie was incredibly brave to share her story, but it was twisted by a tabloid for attention. She had rebuilt her life with courage and determination, and it was our job to make sure that her digital footprint didn’t undo that work.
In my view, Sophie is a real hero. Leaving the adult industry is not easy as it takes immense strength, especially when it's bound up with emotional trauma and a search for validation in the wrong places. What makes her journey extraordinary is what she chose to do next.
Instead of disappearing quietly, she turned her life around and used her experience to make a contribution to her community. She volunteered, studied, and tried to help others who may be suffering in silence. Her actions speak volumes. Sadly, the national tabloid that republished her story showed little regard for the impact their coverage had on her life.
They refused to remove the article even when it was clear that it served no public interest. It was a story lifted from a moment of vulnerability, exaggerated for clicks, and then left online to haunt her. That indifference is what makes our work even more important.
We at this firm are committed to standing beside people like Sophie: people who are not trying to erase the past but are fighting for the right to grow beyond it. Those who are willing to help themselves deserve support from others. I am immensely proud of the work we did in this case, and even more proud of the strength and dignity Sophie has shown throughout.
