Direct Marketing

A New Take on Junk Mail

2005-03-16T20:48:00.000-08:00

A few months ago, I was asked by a reporter why more consumers didn’t use the one-stop opt out number for those pre-approved credit card offers.

(For those who don’t know, you can make a single phone call, 1-888-optout, and remove your name from the list of names sold to the companies who offer you pre-approved credit cards and some insurance products.)

The reporter and I talked about how the three main credit bureaus (Equifax, TransUnion and Experian) tasked with maintaining this toll free number had no motivation to make it widely known. We talked about how the FTC had (correctly) placed higher priority on creating consumer education campaigns around fraud and identity theft.

What we didn’t discuss was the fact that consumers may know about the number, but don’t opt-out because we actually LIKE getting these offers in the mail. A new study by an admittedly biased source (a company that sells direct mail services) has suggested that we like getting all kinds of offers in the mail.

53% of consumers reported that they became aware of the last credit card they applied for by getting an offer in the mail. When asked about direct mail from retailers, the only type not read by more than half the respondents was furniture store flyers.

The truth of the matter may just be that we like junk mail…as long as it isn’t junk. And what makes mail junk is an individual decision (of course, for an 'individual approach' to this issue, you can always read my book!)

Giving More Than Money To Charity

2005-02-07T11:52:00.000-08:00

Americans are notoriously generous. But sometimes giving money to one cause can also mean signing up for a stream of pleas from other needy groups. Why is this? A recent survey by Charity Navigator, found that of nearly 3,300 charities, as many as 75% sell or exchange the names of donors.

Bruce Mohl of The Boston Globe investigated further and found directors of charities like American Foundation for AIDS Research who said things like “Virtually all charities will exchange lists of donors.” Or “This is a pretty common practice. It’s how you identify new donors.” In other words, a lot of charities assume that when you make a donation, you are giving them more than money. You are giving them the right to share your name.

While most groups will honor a request not to have your name shared (the American Red Cross, the American Civil Liberties Union and Oxfam, to name but a few, all have opt-out policies), there are a few which don’t put the burden on you. These groups, like the Lance Armstrong Foundation, National Public Radio and the American Brain Tumor Association, should be applauded.

(also posted in Lists, Lists, Lists)

It's Official - The Do Not Call List is Legal

2004-10-04T11:59:00.000-07:00

The Supreme Court has just rejected an appeal to overturn a lower court ruling that the Do Not Call list is legal. In doing this, the Supreme Court has effectively ended arguments by The American Teleservices Association, Mainstream Marketing Services and TMG Marketing that the list infringed upon their free-speech right to call us if they felt like it.

So the list is here to stay. If your number isn't one of the 62 million already registered, it really is time to sign up.

A Good Law

2004-09-25T14:05:00.000-07:00

In the past few years, that has been an increasing number of laws proposed to "protect our privacy". Some are so horrible that even the most rabid privacy advocates are asking left leaning politicians not to pass them. Others like, the federal Do Not Call Implementation Act aren't horrible. In fact, the Do Not Call law is quite good.

Here is a law that wasn't even considered until industry was given a (really) fair chance to address a problem and failed. It's a law that has real teeth to prosecute violators. And it steps in to use government power in a situtation where individual consumers didn't have a whole lot themselves (marketing companies weren't too distressed about ruining a relationship with a customer who wouldn't give them business anyway).

The FTC has just announced a prosecution of a company thought to have made hundreds of thousands of calls illegally. Coming on the heels of a settlement with AT&T, the FTC appears to be getting into full swing on this front. Prosecution along with the threat of it seems to be having an effect. Studies suggest that unwanted telemarketing calls are dropping (see my earlier post).

Now, can we adopt the same level-headed approach to combatting other information abuses?

More on the Wireless Directory

2004-09-17T08:52:00.000-07:00

11% of cell phone users aren’t at all worried about privacy invasions from the proposed wireless directory. 52% say it’s okay with them as long as somebody promises some kind of privacy protection. So says a survey recently released by the Pierz Group.

The remaining 37% are presumably switching to Verizon or Qwest. Ain't capitalism great?

Signs That the Do Not Call List Is Working

2004-08-27T14:56:00.000-07:00

Good news on the "why do telemarketers keep calling me during dinner?" front.

Harris Interactive conducted a survey in which 92% of respondents who had signed up for the national Do Not Call List said they were getting fewer phone calls. Close to 25% weren't getting any at all anymore.

Amazingly, however, 43% of the respondents who took the survey hadn't yet signed up for the list. If you're one of those 43% and you want to find out what you're missing, go to the Do Not Call website.

Score One For the Consumer

2004-08-04T11:42:00.000-07:00

There has been a lot of talk lately about Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association's new directory for cell phone numbers. Privacy advocates are concerned that telemarketers will abuse it. Cell phone companies claim that numbers will only be included if the consumer agrees to it and that the numbers would never be printed in a directory.

In a somewhat stunning move, Verizon Wireless broke ranks and announced today that it would not offer up directory information on any of its 40 million customers. The company, which claims more than a quarter of all cell phone subscribers in the US, was responding to consumer pressure. It seems that customers have been sharing their fears that they would have to pay additional charges to be excluded from the listing (much like landlines have worked for years - being in the phone book is free. Staying out of it costs you.)

Good on Verizon – and Qwest which had earlier announced its intention not to participate in the directory – for listening!