Bullying Documentary Receives An R Rating - Meaning the Kids Who Need It Most Can't See It

Pretty disgusted at the moment. Motion Picture Association of America just reaffirmed it's R rating for "Bully," a documentary showing the lives and death of the victims of bullies in a Sioux City Iowa High School in 2009/2010.

Apparently kids aren't to young to have to have live through it, but they can't watch the documentary itself.

As Access To Private Information Increases, So Must The Consequences of Misuse Increase

A string of recent articles concerning court cases in the US and Europe have revealed a disturbing, but easily predictable trend. Officials, judges, law makers, police officers, and others with access to the most highly private information are using that access to stalk, harass, and manipulate unsuspecting citizens.

Inside sources state that police in several jurisdictions are using their access to Department of Motor Vehicle records to "rate and date" women they search for in the data base. When questioned it was revealed that officers scanned the photos of thousands of women on the database and then used the information to stage "run ins" to ask for dates or simply stalked the women.  Officers admitted to using their access to keep tabs on ex-wives or ex-girlfriends, to gain private information about "friends" and family members and even changing information to cause distress or embarrassment to their victims. 

Several judges have also been caught up in recent cases concerning access to private information. The now disgraced Judges Mark Ciavarella and Michael Conahan took nearly $3 million in payoffs to jail juveniles in a private jail system. The judges allegedly targeted children of poor or working class families, especially single parent families, who would be unlikely to have legal counsel. By discerning which parents would have the financial ability or education to fight their actions, the Judges were free to operate this "jailing kids for cash" scheme for years. 

Of course it isn't just officials who misuse their access and abuse their power, with medical files, credit reports, criminal files, and passport information now stored online, data entry people are using their access to stalk and harass as well. Some have even made a profitable sideline be providing the media (and others) with private information about the famous. In 2008, a former analyst for the State department Bureau of Intelligence and Research admitted to accessing the passport records, including applications, social security numbers, and other information of about 200 politicians and celebrities, including the Presidential candidates. He wasn't alone. 

Most of the private data held on Americans is controlled not by government agencies, but by private contractors, many not even housed in the United States. With little in the way of incentive to keep them from accessing and even disseminating private information, these data processing centers have become an identity theft and stalker's paradise with private information being sold online.  But equally troubling is the unfettered access by officials, some of which clearly do not have their responsibilities and oaths in mind. 

Of course its human nature to snoop. But it is because of this human nature factor that we must make the penalty for accessing and using private information, counter to purpose, a serious offense with painful consequences. 

Is the Media Celebration of Stalkers a New Trend?

Public figures have come to expect and accept a degree of unwanted attention and even stalking. In an industry where success depends largely on a popularity built on accessibility, people in the public eye quickly become aware that their every move is monitored, photographed, reported, and discussed.

Unfortunately, this gives the mentally unstable unprecedented access and ability to not only reach out and touch, but reach out and harm. 

Until recently, the media fell into either the journalist category, reporting the court cases and unfortunate after math of violence and even death perpetrated by stalkers or the tabloid category, providing the gory details. 

Today however, I read an article in the New York Daily News that not only blurred the lines between journalism and tabloid tattle, but actually took the side of the stalker against a famous victim in an effort to titillate. 

For four pages, the article, which featured a huge picture of the smiling, blonde, stalker sipping cocktails, detailed the allegations of the woman, including an affair, pregnancy, abortion, etc. against Brian Cashman, the married General Manager of the Yankees Baseball Team. 

The article, which includes numerous threats made by the woman, also features a photo of Cashman who was recently served divorce papers by his wife, citing extramarital affairs. 

Not until the last paragraph of the article do the authors include the fact that this woman is wanted for two outstanding harassment warrants, is currently on probation for stalking in New Jersey, and apparently stalked her ex-boyfriend. Her own mother called the police recently due to her behavior and threats and her own psychiatrist has classes her as a psychotic danger to herself and others.

The fact that the authors of this article decided to craft what is essentially a character assassination against a public figure, using the extremely dangerous activities and threats of a deranged woman is really unconscionable. This is the online version of the Princess Diana crash. Desperate to not only "report" tragedies, but also have a hand in creating them, the authors have set a new low in journalist standards.