Not that I want to pick on Computerworld, but…
I was reading their article, "Why IT should start throwing data away" and, while it's a great document with a lot of astute information, it still made my blood boil. Why?
This is a classic example of a terrific thought process that only considers one side of the equasion. The perspective is, 'Let's do what we can to eliminate as much data as legally possible to limit the strain on our resources, thwart adversarial e-discovery and lower costs'.
But here's the thing. Some of that data may exculpate the company and you may really regret deleting it. Sure, I've talked to many attorneys who operate under the philosophy that the least amount of data available, the better, and you know what? I don't agree. At least not without a case-by-case assessment, anyway.
Sauce for the goose is good for the gander. Don't be so efficient in your data sweeps that you have a defensible legal hold, but leave yourself with no line of defense.