By Bart S. Foreman, president and co-managing partner, Group 3 Marketing

In its February, 2003 issue, Reader's Digest reproduced a wonderful article by David Plotz (originally in GQ) entitled "Privacy is Overrated." He exposes a good portion of his demographics for readers to see and observes, "they're watching your every move. Big deal." He builds a very logical argument that while we Americans are concerned about our individual privacy, we are eager to know if our baby-sitter has ever been convicted of child abuse, if our business partner has ever declared bankruptcy or if our boyfriend is still married. We may not want the Feds to know what we bought at the hardware store last weekend, but we want them to know if our neighbor stockpiles fertilizer and vacations in Iraq.

The issue today is not privacy. The issue is the invasion of privacy. Businesses, not the Feds, have invaded our privacy to such a degree that consumer groups and the government have no choice but to strike back, and if marketers do not rethink their strategies and tactics, the burden will fall on consumers, the government and even ISPs. Welcome to a new era of marketing challenges.

The dreaded four, five and six o'clock calls

Nothing seems sacred to telemarketers any more. For the last four weeks, I have tracked the number of "Out of Area" calls that have appeared on our Caller ID. With a teenage daughter, I expect many calls. However, 75% of the incoming calls during this period were from telemarketers. The ringing begins as early as 9am and can go on until 8:30pm. Saturday morning-the one day I can sleep in- seldom arrives without a wake-up call from a telemarketer.

Is it any wonder that states are creating laws to stop this invasion? Again, the issue isn't privacy, it's invasion. Most of us don't care if a company knows our demographics and buying habits. Plotz pointed this out in his article. "One wonderful, terrible thing about modern capitalism is that companies don't care. You are not a person. You are a wallet." This is true for telemarketers. They've used information about you, often from a purchased list, to invade your privacy to sell you something. And, they invade the one place where we hate invasion the most-our castles, where we just want to be left alone.

Netiquette or lack thereof-spam is here-and it's another invasion

Spam: The invasion of our email boxes! How many times have you seen the following in your inbox "Shocking news-how to grow your…"? After repeatedly unsubscribing and reporting the address (or addresses), you are livid. And, you aren't alone-spam plagues us all.

ISPs have sought to become the white knights in the spam battle. However, a recent report by Assurance Systems (www.assurancesystems.com) concluded that 15% of legitimate email is not getting delivered. Their report notes that ISPs, on average, treat one out of six opt-in emails as spam. As a marketing company that heavily relies heavily on broadcast email as an important (and cost-effective) touchpoint, Group 3 Marketing is very concerned that ISP policing is not the answer.

Quoting Dave Lewis of Digital Impact, "over 75% of e-mail tagged as spam is legitimate e-mail. Although the ISPs are well-intentioned, the filtering is based on guesswork." (DIRECT, Jan 22, 2003) Before we demanded our ISP to stop tagging our e-mails as "possible spam," they had identified e-mails from CBS Marketwatch, Gourmet International, and Marriott Rewards (I have over 100,000 Marriott points and a Marriott timeshare) as spam.

The February 24, 2003 DIRECT Newsline posted an on-line article "ISP Arch-Rivals Join Forces Against Spam" and reported that Microsoft and America Online have become allies against spam. They plan to step up lobbying efforts to strengthen laws that will prohibit spam. The problem will be to define spam. An AOL spokesperson said "For every spam message that goes inappropriately to an ISP member, the spammer gets penalized in monetary and criminal terms." Defining what is inappropriate is easy in some cases, but most distinctions are subjective. What one reader views as inappropriate may be just what another was looking for.

We don't see the USPO stamping "possible junk" on all the STD Class A mail that passes through its portals. We don't see the telecomm alerting us to a "possible telemarketer". What gives ISPs the right to interfere with the flow of information? Nothing, but they are doing it anyway because they believe if they don't, their customers will move.

Spam is annoying but it is no different from the flood of unwanted email that we receive from friends, such as the pesky FWs: that we may even delete without opening. And, maybe, just maybe, one or two of the many spam-classified messages may be something that I actually want. In this situation, my mouse and I control the editing process. (Even though I still have not figured out how to get rid of the email that continues to come in Chinese characters. It might be something I want, but I can't read it.)

There isn't a significant public outcry to get rid of unsolicited postal mail, nor should there be because there are legal mechanisms that protect Americans from illegal and immoral mail. The same rules should apply to spam. The bottom line is that each customer should determine what constitutes his/her own spam and legal and technical mechanisms should be put in place to deal with the issue. Software should allow the user to block e-mails that contain unwanted words, terms, etc. regardless of the source. And, the user should be able to define those words, not an ISP.

Back to the basics of marketing

Marketers have to set their priorities. Two basic marketing elements are at play: acquiring new customers and retaining existing customers.

Most marketers agree that in this electronic age, it is the consumer who holds the power. As a consumer, I can be gone with the click of a mouse and I am in control. Plotz was wrong when he noted, "companies don't care." Many companies do care and understand that building and establishing relationships (or loyalty) with customers is critical. Many do understand that it's not about data mining but applying data mining principles to cluster customers and to then deliver targeted communications that focus on what is important to each customer.

The role of telemarketing needs to be redefined in the quest to acquire new customers and promote services to current customers. Is telemarketing as invasive as spam? It depends who you ask. Just don't ask during the dinner hour because you may be interrupted. We believe that current telemarketing tactics hurt all marketing efforts - and the consumer's perception of spam is fueled by such tactics.

Even with new software initiatives, spam needs to be controlled through national legislation so consumers are not repeatedly battered with upsetting illegal and immoral solicitations. ISPs and self proclaimed Spam Blockers are not the appropriate agents to take on this initiative. When left to ISPs and others who claim high-tech monitoring, 15% of legitimate emails aren't getting delivered. That's a crime.

The latest idea of "white lists" that identify legitimate marketers may enhance the flow of electronic communications and should be carefully evaluated. If new laws will protect legitimate marketers, they should be debated. Online communications will lose potency if they aren't protected. That protection must begin with marketers leading the challenge and not allowing service providers to carry the anti-spam banner on their masthead.

It's the new world order. The Internet is a low cost touchpoint and is a critical medium that delivers targeted messages quickly and affordably. Marketers need to get involved and should not abdicate their leadership role in managing the flow of marketing communications to ISP service providers.

[Return to Articles ]