Fear of
the Unknown
by Steve Paul Johnson
June 8, 2001
Recently, a guy asked me to remove a cemetery transcription that he authored
and submitted. He was concerned that his family would suffer grief from
the hands of his pastor. That's right, his pastor of all people.
He created a transcription of his church's cemetery by visiting every
headstone and compiling records from the inscriptions, as well as supplementing
it with information he found from an older transcription. He compiled
just over 1,000 records, and submitted a copy to us for publishing.
But recently, he learned through his sister that his pastor disapproved
of this, and was seeking to have this transcription removed. So the author
contacted me, and asked us to remove it. Of course, I mentioned that the
pastor had no legal ground to stand on, and was just using scare tactics.
But, the author was concerned about keeping the good standing his family
had with the church. I understood completely, and though I respect his
concern for his family, I couldn't help thinking that this valuable resource
was lost.
I wondered why the pastor would raise a stink over this. The author did
not want to argue with him. I couldn't see an issue about protecting the
privacy of dead people. Besides, those people's names and dates are emblazioned
on the tombstones where they can viewed by any other member of the public.
Heck, if you're dead and you want privacy, you'd be more concerned about
the Social Security Death Index.
Perhaps the pastor wanted to produce and sell his own cemetery transcription?
I don't know, maybe. If you think about it, a lot of churches out there
could compile their marriage, baptism, funeral, and cemetery records,
publish them in books, and sell them online. Considering how popular genealogy
has become, and how easy it is to sell stuff online, a church could make
a lot of "blessings" this way.
Maybe the pastor has something against genealogists. Maybe he didn't
want the cemetery transcription online because it was resulting in too
many genealogists calling his office, or inviting too many genealogists
to trample over his cemetery. Maybe he came into work one day, and found
gobs of shaving cream all over his great-grandfather's tombstone.
But probably
the real reason is fear. I bet the pastor does not spend much time online,
and therefore does not understand the Internet too well. It's old the
"fear of the unknown" dilemma. He hears news reports of how hackers are
stealing people's credit card numbers, and how photos of nude children
are being traded online, and because he has not used the Internet much,
he thinks there is some way to track down the credit card numbers of his
parishioners by referencing the tombstone inscriptions of his cemetery.
He's not sure, so he assumes the worst. And as the saying goes, "You're
better off safe than sorry".
I've dealt with other cases where authors felt obligated to remove their
transcription from our website. And I honored all their requests, even
though I explained that the issue was unfounded or had no merit.
Some years ago, the television news program, "20/20" produced a piece
about how the Internet could be used to steal peoples' identities. The
piece has been replayed a number of times. They interviewed people who
claimed to be skilled in this crime, and explained how they use the Internet
as a tool. Interestingly, RootsWeb was mentioned as one of the popular
"tools".
I don't disagree that RootsWeb or any other website can be used to steal
people's identities. But for us to react by removing genealogical resources
will set us back even more. It WAS the Internet that made genealogy as
popular as it is today, and because of this new found popularity, we enjoy
a wealth of new tools, new publications, more databases, more seminars,
and so on.
To say that we should remove genealogical information from the Internet
in order to prevent identity theft is like saying we should outlaw the
use of message boards because they can teach kids how to blow up federal
buildings. Folks, the Internet doesn't turn people into criminals. If
someone wants to steal an identity, they'll do it with or without the
Internet. It's like the old saying, "Guns don't kill people, people kill
people."
A few years ago, President Clinton signed a bill into law called the
"Childrens Online Privacy and Protection
Act" (COPPA), designed to protect children from being exploited through
online means. It was created because there were exaggerated reports of
child molesters using online information to track down tens of thousands
of potential victims. The law established a series of restrictions and
requirements that caused many children-related websites to close up. These
were educational, entertainment, and community oriented websites I'm talking
about.
But no one
could prove that these websites were a primary factor in the molestation
of children. That is, of all the reported cases of child molestation,
no one could show that a significant number of these crimes were committed
as a result of online information. In fact, the majority of cases involved
adults who had access to their victims without the aid of the Internet.
Yes, there were cases that did involve the Internet, but those cases represented
only a fraction of the total cases. But the media got a hold of those
cases, blew them out of proportion, and caused moms and dads to go into
panic mode. COPPA was a solution waiting for a problem. It was turned
into law thanks to unfounded hysteria, and we lost many "made-for-children"
websites because of it.
What we cannot afford is to have a similar law preventing or regulating
the publishing of genealogical information online. All it takes is one
Congressman to become the victim of identity theft, and next thing we
know, there will be another law regulating the use of the Internet. It's
already illegal to steal identities. We don't need another law telling
us how to use the Internet.
I'm saying this because it's turning out that what some people don't
know is hurting the rest of us. This kind of panic poses a threat to Interment.net,
as well as other online publishers, including Ancestry, RootsWeb, DistantCousin,
etc. Ultimately, it spells bad news for all genealogists, even the ones
who don't use the Internet. We stand to lose a lot of media and materials
both online and offline, if we were prevented from using the Internet
the way we use it today.
While I have honored requests from authors to remove transcriptions,
I don't want to remove them. To those of you who have submitted transcriptions
to us, my hope is that you won't ask me to remove them. While it takes
value away from us, it also takes valuable information away from other
people. The transcriptions published on our website have already helped
hundreds of people, perhaps thousands, in finding the resting places of
their friends and family. Taking this information away may mean that some
people will never find their loved ones again.
- Steve Paul Johnson
If you would like to reproduce this article on your website
or publication, you can do so free of cost, by first contacting the author. |