Doesn't _Organisations would be able to oppose the deletion of information if they could show they have a right to publish the data under the fundamental principle of freedom of expression or if it is in the public interest for the data to remain in existence._ take care of it?
It wouldn't be hard to argue that that tweet serves the public interest by allowing the sunlight to shine on it in public.
Obviously this is a Register article so it's light on details, but it seems to me that this is targeted at organizations and you send them a message that says, "delete everything about me" ie a collection of data, not "delete this one thing about me" ie a member of data. How that is codified into law is unclear.
So this is where you and I disagree. You are seeing this as "well, ideally, the law would be seen this way" and I'm thinking, "well, this is how lawyers will try to interpret the law to bring litigation forward"
We aren't ideologically opposed, we have different pragmatic expectations.
It wouldn't be hard to argue that that tweet serves the public interest by allowing the sunlight to shine on it in public.
Obviously this is a Register article so it's light on details, but it seems to me that this is targeted at organizations and you send them a message that says, "delete everything about me" ie a collection of data, not "delete this one thing about me" ie a member of data. How that is codified into law is unclear.