The media in general and online editors in particular are not necessarily the bad guys here, far from it, they mostly just stick to their journalistic ethos... A possible solution could be that, after a set number of years, the article would either de-index itself or anonymise the individuals it cites. Some kind of "digital rehabilitation act" if you will, or a self-triggered right to be forgotten.
The Radar fiasco may yet have a happy ending, if it forces the Samaritans to focus again on the things that they do best. Given time, others will dream up better apps; Twitter will return to the fractious equilibrium it usually enjoys. And the Samaritans can go back to being the people I remember... the selfless heroes who always listen, and never, ever tell.
Imagine it was your first day in a new job... you'll spend time finding your way around filing cabinets and IT systems, reviewing information and locating documents you need to do your job... If the organisation you've joined has a solid information management process in place, this will be simple. If it doesn't, working life could quickly become a struggle.
I wouldn't hide behind a tree or a parked car to follow my ex-girlfriends every move? Nor would I invite every person I meet in a nightclub, to view my daughter's baby pictures. I don't stroll casually down the street screaming at the top of my lungs 'Well done me!' in regards to my personal achievements as I have no desire to be considered conceited or narcissistic.
The "right to be forgotten" could be seen as a potential coup for brands and consumers who wish to rid themselves of those old, embarrassing search links once and for all... Instead of being asked in the fine print if we wish to opt out, the marketing industry may need to get used to the idea of politely asking consumers to opt in.