Can I remove an old interview about me from Google
Whether you're searching for how to remove a past interview from search results, even if the interview was given willingly, or looking into delisting articles you consented to years ago, you will be pleased to learn that the right to be forgotten may apply.
Why old interviews on Google can still harm your reputation
Can you remove an interview you agreed to years ago
How to request Google to remove outdated interviews
What the ICO says about interviews and public domain content
Removing an interview from search: what success looks like
Lawyers' thoughts out the case
Why old interviews on Google can still harm your reputation
Our client, whom we’ll call Sophie, had spoken to a local newspaper about her experiences in the adult entertainment industry, her time in a toxic relationship, and her decision to rebuild her life. The journalist had written a fairly neutral piece at the time, but what Sophie didn’t expect was that a national tabloid would pick up the story, sensationalise it, and plaster her name across the internet in bold headlines.
Although the interview was technically voluntary, the final version felt anything but fair. The piece misrepresented key facts about her life, downplayed the abuse she had experienced, and left her looking reckless and unstable. As time passed and she transitioned into a career in healthcare, this outdated narrative became a major barrier to employment and personal peace.
Every time she applied for a job or even met new people, she worried what they might find by Googling her name. What Google presented was a version of Sophie that never truly existed, but could be detrimental to her future.
Can you remove an interview you agreed to years ago
This is where many people get confused. It’s natural to assume that if you agreed to an interview at the time, you gave up your rights over that content, however the law offers more protection than many realise.
Even when you consented in the past, you may still be entitled to request that the content be removed or delisted, particularly if keeping it online no longer serves a legitimate purpose or causes ongoing harm. UK law, specifically the General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR), allows individuals to ask for their personal data to be erased or delisted from search results.
This includes interviews and other content you once willingly gave. You may be able to request removal if the information is no longer needed for its original purpose, is inaccurate or misleading, causes distress, is outdated, or remains online without a proportionate public benefit.The right to be forgotten recognises that people evolve, and what once may have felt appropriate to share may no longer reflect your identity or serve your wellbeing today.
How to request Google to remove outdated interviews
Our strategy in Sophie’s case focused on a delisting request to Google. We argued that although she had once agreed to speak publicly, the content had been taken out of context, published without her express consent to the tabloid, and now caused reputational damage in a completely different chapter of her life.
We demonstrated how the article had become irrelevant and misleading. She was no longer in the adult industry: she was now volunteering weekly at a hospital, studying for a career in medical administration, and working hard to rebuild her life in a healthy, productive way. Our submission emphasised the emotional harm caused by the article, as well as its potential to harm job prospects and professional relationships.
What the ICO says about interviews and public domain content
In assessing whether online content should be delisted or erased under data protection law, the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) provides guidance that is widely followed by organisations such as Google when handling right to be forgotten requests. A key aspect of the ICO's approach is the recognition that not all personal data qualifies for removal simply because it causes inconvenience or regret.
If an individual voluntarily placed their personal information into the public domain, such as by giving an interview, publishing a blog, or posting on social media the ICO may view that consent as relevant when deciding whether the data should remain accessible. In effect, individuals who willingly disclose their data publicly may be seen as having relinquished some control over that information.
However, even in these cases, the ICO does not take an automatic stance against removal. Instead, it applies a balancing test. This includes assessing whether the continued availability of the information is still relevant and justified, whether the data subject is experiencing ongoing harm, whether they remain a public figure, and whether the public interest in retaining access outweighs the individual’s right to privacy.
The ICO explicitly acknowledges that consent given in the past does not automatically preclude the exercise of data rights today. If the data is outdated, no longer necessary, or causes disproportionate harm, there is still a strong argument under UK GDPR for its removal. The fact that information was once volunteered does not mean it must remain online indefinitely, especially when its impact has changed with time.
Removing an interview from search: what success looks like
In Sophie’s case, Google reviewed our submission and agreed to delist the article from search results associated with her real name. This meant that anyone searching for her online, from potential employers to acquaintances, would no longer encounter the outdated and misleading story that had shadowed her for years.
For Sophie, the delisting marked more than a legal victory. It was a personal breakthrough. The emotional burden of being defined by a misrepresented version of her past had finally been lifted. When we called her to confirm the outcome, she burst into tears of relief and joy.
For the first time in a long while, she felt she could present herself to the world as she truly is today, without needing to explain or defend her past every time someone typed her name into a search engine. This result reaffirmed the importance of digital reputation work- not just for legal rectification, but for the restoration of dignity, confidence, and future opportunity.
Lawyers' thoughts out the case
This case reminded us that the internet doesn’t always allow for growth. Sophie had done the hard personal work of rebuilding her life, but the online world kept dragging her back into the past. Our job wasn’t just legal, it was human.
We told her story to Google in a way that law and empathy intersected. The facts were there, but so was the narrative of someone trying to move forward. That’s the heart of our work in reputation law: giving people back the right to own their story.
