I recently came across an article with the provocative title "How I Stole Someone's Identity," in which a baby-faced computer security professor details how he broke into the online accounts (with permission, all in the name of science) of a hapless acquaintance named Kim. He didn't use any programming skills or esoteric techniques — only search engines and cleverness. Here are three lessons I learned from his article:

1. Be aware of what personal information you share online. Blog posts, myspace pages, and even web forums can be sources of personal information for identity thieves to mine. Paranoia isn't necessary, but remember that not everyone who accesses the Internet is your friend.

2. Don't use personal information to safeguard your identity. Once information is posted on the web, you should assume it cannot be removed, thanks to caches and mirror sites. (For example, when something is "deleted" from Wikipedia by an administrator, it is really just protected from viewing. It can later be restored by any administrator.) Your phone number, your pet's name, your mother's maiden name, and above all your date of birth: none of these are private enough to be the basis of your online security.

3. Keep your e-mail passwords at maximum security. E-mail password security has to be your top priority because your e-mail account is the key to the rest of your online accounts. In the article, e-mail was the key to all of Kim's accounts because most sites reset passwords via e-mail. Security Focus has a great article on password-security best practices.

And here is a bonus tip that was not addressed in the article:

4. Be aware of sites that do not encrypt your password. If you receive (or can ask for) an e-mail with your password in it, then that site does not encrypt your password. Your password cannot be retrieved if it is encrypted, which is why most sites will reset your password but not send it to you. StumbleUpon is one major site that does not encrypt passwords.

Do you have any stories about a stolen online identity? Are there any tips you would like to share for keeping your accounts secure?

The Texas Association for Infant Mental Health (TAIMH) brings to six the list of organizations denouncing "Baby Borrowers." In fact, this organization feels so strongly that the front page of their website is devoted to the subject. Thanks to commenter Carol for the update.

TAIMH contacted a number of the sponsors of "Baby Borrowers" and published responses from three of them on their website. Nestlé Corporation immediately withdrew their ads. In statements reeking of corporate Newspeak, Pervetti Van Melle (manufacturer of Mentos) and Combe Incorporated (manufacturer of Just For Men, Odor Eaters, and other personal care products) were not courageous enough to do the same and instead referred the issue to their marketing directors.

Knol is Google's newest launch. It's a site where authors can write articles on any topics they like. "Knol," if you were wondering, is a neologism meaning "a unit of knowledge."

ProBlogger wondered whether Knol will be a Wikipedia-killer. I love Darren's ministry very helpful site, but I have to say that if he is even asking that question, then he does not know very much about Wikipedia.

Wikipedia may seem both wide and deep (with almost 2.5 million articles in the English version, more than twice as many as when I first started as an editor), but casual readers may not realize how much isn't there. The Wikipedia community loudly declares that it is not many things, among them "a publisher of original thought" nor a "manual, guidebook, or textbook." And while anybody is free to add to Wikipedia, they are not free to add anything they like to Wikipedia.

At least several hundred entire articles are deleted every day. Over 3000 pages were deleted in the last 24 hours (including articles, images, user pages, and all other types of pages). That's not counting content edited out of existing articles, which is immeasurable (literally — there's no way to tell from the logs).

I imagine that little of what will likely be found in the Knols will overlap with Wikipedia's scope. And virtually none of it will carry authority remotely like Wikipedia's. Since anybody with an Internet connection can change Wikipedia instantaneously, one might think Wikipedia would not have much authority, but the net energy put into keeping Wikipedia sound is far greater than the net energy put into Wikipedia misinformation and disinformation. And that is why so many people trust Wikipedia. (More than they really should; even Wikipedia rejects its own self as an adequately reliable source for Wikipedia.)

Knols may give About.com a run for its money, and may nudge a few Wikipedia articles around in the Google rankings, but Wikipedia is a behemoth that won't feel much from the little flies that are Knols.

In my post "Is Rent-To-Own a good idea?" I mentioned some terms that are red flags for a rip-off. Here is a collection of them. Use of these terms does not necessarily signify a bad deal, but it is a sign for the buyer to be especially aware. Look out for any "deal" that mentions the following:

• Buy now, pay later
• No money down
• Insider secrets
• "They" don't want you to know
• You'd be crazy not to
• Extended warranty
• Act fast
• Important information — do no discard
  

Update: The American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychology and (reportedly) the Connecticut State Child Advocate have joined the list of organizations issuing negative statements about "The Baby Borrowers."

Thanks to commenter Matt for information on Ace Hardware, which has declared it is not a sponsor of "The Baby Borrowers." And kudos to Ace for refusing to sponsor this program.

NBC's website has a poll asking when people are best prepared for parenthood: teens, 20s, 30s, 40s, or later. This show reeks of a major trend in American culture: Becoming a parent has become just one more thing you do in order to "have it all." The view that children are gifts has given way to family planning in which births had better be planned — or you are not a good parent.

A quick note: The child welfare group Zero to Three has issued an official statement against "The Baby Borrowers." They join the list compiled here.

Here is a list of child advocates and child welfare groups which have officially protested, spoken out against, or otherwise denounced "The Baby Borrowers." This post is updated as necessary.

• The Natural Child has issued an open letter of protest, February 27, 2008.
• Attachment Parenting International has formally issued a strong objection to NBC Studios, June 21, 2008.
• The Texas Association for Infant Mental Health has "released an opinion denouncing" the program, June 26, 2008.
  
• Zero to Three has issued a sharply critical statement, no date.
• The Connecticut State Child Advocate has reportedly protested the show in a letter to NBC, although I was not able to confirm this from their website.
• The American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychology has issued a call to NBC to pull the program, July 2, 2008.
  

Do you know of any other groups protesting this program? Leave your tip in the comments below or visit my profile for my e-mail address.

Attachment Parenting International (API) has issued a press release to draw attention to their letter of protest (PDF) sent to NBC Studios.

API makes reference to the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of the Child of 1959. More recently, the U.N.'s 1990 Convention on the Rights of the Child reiterates a key point: "In all actions concerning children, whether undertaken by public or private social welfare institutions … the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration" (Article 3). NBC's role with regard to the "borrowed" children is closest to that of "a private social welfare institution." It has utterly failed to take the best interests of the "borrowed" children into consideration.

I have used the provocative epithet "The Baby Kidnappers" to highlight the effects of the experience from the child's point of view. From the point of view of the parents, who have given permission and who are right next door, there is no kidnapping involved. To these parents, who obviously love their children, the arrangement is no different that hiring a babysitter — safer, even, since they can supervise and intervene at any time. But young children are not able to understand any of that. They don't know their parents are nearby. They only know that their parents have disappeared and that suddenly they are in the care of total strangers. To a baby, this is exactly the same as being kidnapped.

The "borrowed" babies have no choice in the matter. Their lives are being manipulated by adults, who are placing them in a terrifying situation — a situation that does these children no good. NBC has created a situation uniformly harmful to young children, placing their interests last.

API rightfully protests this program, and so should the rest of the informed public.

A famous American aphorism, variously attributed to Abraham Lincoln, P.T. Barnum, and Bob Dylan, observes:

You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.

With "The Baby Borrowers," NBC has fooled some of the people by gravely asserting, "It's not TV, it's birth control." In promoting this program, NBC weeps crocodile tears over teen pregnancy, and successfully has fooled many, many people, among them Sandy Maple of Parent Dish; a nameless rumor blogger, and even, astonishingly, The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy (PDF).

Let me be very clear about this. "The Baby Borrowers" is not about preventing teen pregnancy.

This program has teens live together, which is a recipe for teen pregnancy. When young couples live together, we all know they are having sex; let's not beat around the bush. Sex leads to pregnancy. Birth control has never been 100% effective, especially when used by inexperienced, impulsive youths. Therefore, "The Baby Borrowers" is not about preventing teen pregnancy. Q.E.D.

The show does not even focus exclusively on teens having babies. Why on earth would a show about teen pregnancy show how difficult it is to take care of an elderly person? It wouldn't. But it is already established that "The Baby Borrowers" is not about preventing teen pregnancy.

Do not let NBC's marketing fool you. "The Baby Borrowers" is not about helping teens. When someone says "The Baby Borrowers" will help teenagers, they are either lying, or they have been fooled by a liar.

Just for the record, in response to the sundry comments that have popped up lately:

• I am not for teen pregnancy.
• I care very much about teens and "the future of this country." I also care very much about babies.
• I never said anything about day care being harmful to children, and I am bewildered that anyone thought I did.
  
• I never said that I oppose "using kids" on TV.
  
• Obviously the babies are more or less safe, thanks to the show's precautions, but that doesn't make them any less scared, sad, or emotionally hurt. In other words, the adults know they are safe, but the babies don't!
  

If you want to know why I am so cranky about The Baby Borrowers, read about what I think is wrong with it. And please do actually read it before you accuse me of being ignorant, stupid, or closed-minded.

This post was originally published on Leave the lights on.

~ ~ ~

An update on the countdown:

As of today, Realityworks, Inc. is no longer listed as a sponsor of "The Baby Borrowers" on NBC's website. There are 32 sponsors still on the list.Baby Borrowers sponsors: One down

This post was originally published on Leave the lights on.

~ ~ ~

An anonymous commenter on my first post about "The Baby Borrowers" remarked that he or she felt the show is a "fantastic idea." He or she suggested that I "find out just what precautions were taken before these babies were 'borrowed'--- No parents would just willingly hand over there (sic) child for NO money, which I hear is exactly what happened. NO ONE was paid to do this."

So just what is my problem, anyway? Why don't I just lighten up? What about all the good the show will do?

Let's consider:

1. The show will help teenagers.
The show puts unmarried teenage couples into the same house to live as if they are married. It presents this arrangement as socially acceptable and no big deal, which ignores the fact that living together before marriage increases the statistical odds of divorce if the couple later marries. It puts girls in a position to be used by their boyfriends, as in the crude old saying, "Why buy the cow if you can get the milk for free?" You don't have to consider cohabitation immoral to see this as a problem; these kids, while legally adults, are still very, very young to be thrust into an arrangement that is so frequently problematic even for mature adults.

2. It's not TV, it's birth control.
NBC's slogan seems to promise that the TV program is meant to reduce teen pregnancy. It's not; that's a marketing gimmick. It's meant to sell sponsors' products by drawing viewers with the most lurid and shocking content possible -- just like all reality TV shows. Consider this: The first thing you see on the official "The Baby Borrowers" website is a poll about which teen couples stay together. That's not about preventing teen pregnancy. And later in the show, the couples will have to take care of an elderly person. That's not about preventing teen pregnancy. For that matter, having teenage couples cohabitating is not about preventing teen pregnancy.

3. The producers were very careful to make sure nobody got hurt.
Why does the graphic above use the inflammatory word "kidnappers"? Why such over-the-top language? Because I am describing the show from the babies' and toddlers' point of view. As Jan Hunt said in her open letter to NBC, "Sudden removal from their parents and placement with strangers for long periods of time is from a baby's point of view no different than a kidnapping." She continues, "It has been well-established that babies who suddenly lose their primary caregiver can quickly go into mourning and emotional depression." Causing a tiny child, who is just beginning to learn whether adults can be trusted, to grieve the loss of his families does hurt the child. I am sure the parents of the children on the show believed their children would not be harmed, but I am also sure that they are mistaken. I have seen for myself how a baby (my adopted son) grieves the loss of his primary caregivers. There are few things more heart-wrenching than a baby who won't eat because he is too sad.

It is tragic to me that it is too late to prevent the filming of the series. But I take hope in the possibility that viewer response -- or lack thereof (it's all about ratings) -- will prevent another season from being recorded.

Don't watch "The Baby Borrowers"!

Visit Sir Linksalot for more on "The Baby Borrowers."

This post was originally published on Leave the lights on.

~ ~ ~

Here is the list of sponsors of The Baby Borrowers as of May 22. Let us see how many of these companies we can harry into dropping their sponsorship. Contact as many as you can, as many ways as you can, as often as you can to express your disapproval. Be firm, but please remain calm, detached, and polite. Rational voices are far more effective than hysterical ones.

COMPANY	PHONE	WEBSITE
Ace Hardware Corp.	630-990-6600	www.acehardware.com
Area	212-924-7084	www.areahome.com
Barbara Cosgrove Lamps	816-221-3461	www.barbaracosgrovelamps.com
Benjamin Moore & Co.	201-573-9600	www.benjaminmoore.com
Born Free, LLC	561-347-8112	www.newbornfree.com
Borup Construction	208-884-1092	www.borupconstruction.com
buybuy Baby	516-507-3410	www.buybuybaby.com
Chicago Cutlery®	800-999-3437	www.chicagocutlery.com
ClubFurniture.com (One Source Plus, Inc.)	888-378-8383	www.ClubFurniture.com
Corelle® Dinnerware	800-999-3436	www.corelle.com
CorningWare® French White®	800-999-3438	www.corningware.com
Finer Frames	208-888-9898	www.finerframes.com
GE ProfileTM Appliances	800-626-2005	www.geappliances.com
Green Dot Corporation	626-775-3400	www.greendotonline.com
Hello Kitty	818-526-0111	www.upp.net
Krups	800-526-5377	www.krups.com
Lamp Works	847-295-7600	www.lampworks.com
Larson Juhl & Artaissance	800-886-6126	www.larsonjuhl.com
Levitz Furniture	212-634-2200	www.levitz.com
Mazda North America	949-341-6195	www.mazdausa.com
MysticMaid®	877-468-0888	www.mysticmaid.com
Playcore-Swing n' Slide	877-888-1232	www.swing-n-slide.com
Pyrex® Glassware	800-999-3440	www.pyrexware.com
Quaker	818-526-0111	www.upp.net
Realityworks, Inc.	715-830-2040	www.Realityworks.com
Revere® Cookware	800-999-3441	www.revereware.com
Rowenta®	781-396-0600	www.rowentausa.com
Simmons Bedding Co.	877-399-9397	www.simmons.com
Smith & Noble	800-248-8888	www.smithandnoble.com/sn/home.jsp
Southwest Airlines	214-792-4000	www.southwest.com
Spinmaster Toys	818-526-0111	www.upp.net
The Stylish Stork	208-336-5655	www.thestylishstork.com
Thumprints	501-225-1542	www.thumprints.com

I will keep track of which companies discontinue their support. And let me reiterate, please, use a rational voice. And it should go without saying that you should not break any laws and should cease communications with a company if they ask you to do so (i.e. no harrassment).

Subscribe to this blog if you would like to keep up with companies dropping their sponsorship.

Visit Sir Linksalot for more on "The Baby Borrowers."

This post was originally published on Leave the lights on.

~ ~ ~

There are some television programs that are evil.

Most of these skulk at the fringes of the mainstream, available only on subscription channels, sometimes not available at all except on DVD or the Internet. In general, this blog ignores truly evil shows.

There is one evil show that I cannot ignore. On first impression, its cutely alliterative title, The Baby Borrowers, made me blink and say, "No, they didn't."

They did.

When I first heard about the show a few months ago, I tried to put it out of my mind because it hits very close to my emotional life as an adoptive mother. But I cannot put it out of my mind. As a member of the adoption community, I have a stark perspective on this program, for it recreates the most tragic parts of the complexity that is adoption.

The book The Primal Wound by Nancy Verrier helped open eyes on the fact that separation of a child from her mother is always a tragedy. The parts of Verrier's position as it relates to The Baby Borrowers are devastating:

Every child who is separated from his or her biological mother will experience abandonment and loss.... There will be a difference between the environment of security and safety of being with the mother with whom an infant was prenatally bonded, and the anxiety and uncertainty of being with biological strangers (who [the child perceives] may also leave at any time).... The experience was real. That he does not consciously remember the event should not detract us from this truth. It wasn't a concept to be learned or a theory to be understood; it was a traumatizing experience....

In her writing, Verrier emphasizes the point that the separation of a baby from her biological mother is a traumatic experience. A later reunion, whether years later (as with some adoptees) or just days or weeks later (as with The Baby Borrowers), does not erase the experience. History cannot be undone, and babies remember with their emotions even if they are not conscious of it.

Jan Hunt of The Natural Child Project uses similarly forceful language in her open letter to NBC producers:

Sudden removal from their parents and placement with strangers for long periods of time is from a baby's point of view no different than a kidnapping.... Babies do not have the mental capacity to anticipate the return of a mother who has gone.... As traumatic as this experience will surely be for these babies and children, the effects will not end when they return home.

The choice of adoption is merely the least of several evils in a situation that a mother in crisis finds impossible. The Baby Borrowers performs this evil with two very different purposes: to draw revenue through entertainment, and to promote an agenda born of the culture of death (consider the promotional slogan: "It's not TV, it's birth control.")

Most evil television programs exist on the fringes because our society will not suffer them to enter the mainstream. I am utterly dumbfounded that The Baby Borrowers will air on a major network at prime time.