Turkey and Ham

[JohnG]

Turkey and Ham

by John Glube, © 2004, all rights reserved of the Journal

A simple question. Why is unsolicited bulk email such a big
problem?

My answer. Because it is socially acceptable within the
marketing community to send unsolicited bulk commercial email
(UBCE).

Let me explain.

In October, 2003 the American Association of Advertising
Agencies, the Association of National Advertisers, and the
Direct Marketing Association (the three largest marketing trade
associations in the US and by default the globe) issued there 9
Guidelines Guidelines That Establish Standards for Legitimate
E-mail Marketing Practices.

The objective being to "distinguish and eradicate 'spam' from
the legitimate and growing E-Marketplace."

And how is 'spam' defined? Unsolicited bulk commercial email
with false headers, deceptive subject lines and opt-out links
which do not work.

What about harvesting of email addresses? That is ok as long as
consumers are given "notice and choice," meaning giving
consumers the option of opting out.

As long as the major trade associations tell marketers it is ok
to send this kind of unsolicited bulk commercial email, (aka
"good" spam), I suggest spam will continue to be a major problem.

But wait, is not this kind of "good" spam just a drop in the
bucket compared to "bad" spam.

Yes, statistics tell us the vast majority of UBCE is
non-compliant with the CAN SPAM Act of 2003.

Is it not true, "bad" spam is illegal? Yes. Can't you go to
jail? Yes. Do not the FTC and FBI have ongoing investigations
concerning spammers? Yes. Can't service providers block any kind
of spam? Yes.

Did not the big mail box providers just come out with guidelines
for bulk mailers, saying don't send "bad" spam? Yes.

Don't most service providers prohibit using their networks to
transmit unsolicited bulk email? Yes, although in many cases
this simply involves lip service.

The stance taken by the big mail box providers more accurately
reflects the true situation. Some service providers say and mean
no unsolicited bulk email, while others don't care if you send
"good" spam, as long as the user pays for the bandwidth and does
not cause any problems.

Is not the IETF presently working on a protocol for sender
authentication? Yes.

Are we not seeing accreditation services pop up to facilitate
delivery of solicited commercial email? Yes.

However, as long as it is socially acceptable within the
marketing community to send "good" spam, as a business person,
whether as a service provider, mail box provider or marketer, is
not the attitude "I will do what I have to do to make a dollar
from this part of online marketing" going to prevail?

Don't take this the wrong way. I am not saying this is the
correct stance. In fact I firmly believe it is the wrong
position.

True, if folks sent just "good" spam, the problem would be easy
to control. However this is not the case. Which is why we are
seeing all these steps being taken to control "bad" spam.

But, let's stop being hypocritical about the situation and as
business people confront the real problem. Whom you ask?
Ourselves.

The reality? Many in the marketing community continue to
support, condone and applaud the sending of UBCE as a legitimate
marketing practice. The justification? People buy from UBCE. But
this is a negative game. Why? The costs to deal with UBCE
greatly outweigh the corporate financial gain.

Until, the whole business community changes its tune, despite
all the measures being taken or proposed to control "bad" spam,
we will continue to have a major problem.

Want to help solve the problem? Don't send or advertise using
unsolicited bulk commercial email.

John Glube, Publisher and Editor of Head's Up, A Copywriter's
Journal. Not yet subscribed to the Journal? To get the details,
plus your Free Course "Discover How Anyone Can Get More Buyers"
as your reward use this: http://www.learnsteps4profit.com

[ccarte2]

serenity