I’ve recently had two rather odd things happen on this subject. The first was when I emailed Prime TV to ask about the cow they feature as a break between programmes. She’s a Jersey cow, and I was interested. I wrote to them thus – “Prime TV shows a jersey cow on the change between programmes. I’d like to know about the cow. Where did you get her? Who is she? How old was she when you did this? And was the clip genuine or CGI’d? Perfectly reasonable questions I thought. Note that I was asking about the COW. Was she borrowed, rented, or bought for the purpose? What is her name? How old was she at time of filming? Or is the entire clip merely clever CGI? I was NOT asking about her owners’ names or location, her handlers’ names or location, or her closest human friend’s name and location. I merely wanted to know about the the COW, the actual cow and nothing BUT the cow!
In reply SKYTV – whom I feel, must have either completely misunderstood my request, or be in need of an elevator that goes all the way to their penthouse responded – Unfortunately, due to privacy reasons, we will not be able to provide you with this information. I gaped at that. Huh? They can’t tell me the cow’s name or if she’s real for PRIVACY REASONS? They’re what? Worried that I’ll become a mad stalker of the cow? (Abusive emails perhaps? Sending her gifts of hay and asking to meet her? Turning up to skulk around her cowbail?) All I wanted was something along the lines of “Yes, that’s Daisy, she was eight when we filmed her, and we borrowed her, afterwards she went home to her herd quite happily.” Or “Nope, the cow is clever CGI, but we’re pleased you found it so interesting.” They added that I could respond via return email and we will endeavour to reply within 24 hours. They couldn’t get that right either. I did respond June 19th and to date their 24 hours response is just a little slow – as in nothing yet weeks later.
Then a friend who lives nearby dropped in to tell me that she has a chest infection, that half her work is down with it, but that the medical centre she attends had said it wasn’t contagious. That sounded a bit odd, and as I can have respiratory problems I phoned the same centre (where I’ve also been a client for the past 24 years and counting) and asked about this chest infection?’ I explained that a friend had it, had been told it wasn’t contagious, but that she also said many at her place of employment were ill with this and I’d like to know about the problem. Was it about that much? What causes it? Should I be taking any sort of specific precautions against this and was it really not contagious? The response to that was to ask me the friend’s name, and my relationship to her. Then to inform me I was unable to be given information BECAUSE I WASN’T A RELATIVE and there were privacy issues! Huh again? I wasn’t asking for any information about the friend, I know all I need to know about her. I was asking about the claimed-to-be-prevalent chest infection, and I really doubt that it’s owed privacy under any law I can think of! I said so and apparently ticked off the person, so that the conversation was all downhill from there. I was fobbed off with a string of brusque generalities and left as much in the dark about this possible chest infection epidemic as I had been when I first heard about it.
But what I’d like to know is, have people stopped reading what you actually wrote, or listening to what you actually ask? Or are they all so terrified about breaching privacy laws that they’re going completely overboard in an effort not to find themselves in court for breaching said laws? Because I’ve been left with the recent impression that cows and chest infections have more rights under those laws that I may have and it bothers me. What’s next? My house sues GoogleEarth for breach of privacy? Thunder, my Ocicat is provided with a court-appointed lawyer and I have to take his photo off my website? Something’s crazy around here and for once I’m not all all sure that it’s me!