May 30, 2004

Telemarketers and Spammers

Several months ago, I was laying in bed reading a book and the phone rang. I glanced at the clock, knowing full well that it was after 9pm, which is the time my home stops taking phone calls. Most of my family members and friends know that we do not appriciate calls after this time, unless it's an emergency, so I was a bit worried. My mother beat me to the phone and as I listened to her angry voice, I discovered it was a telemarketer. She firmly told them not to call us again, especially after 9pm. A couple days later, it happened again. This time it was after 9:30 pm. The same company. My mom answered the phone again and told them once again not to call us. Two days later, it's several minutes after 10pm and I'm in bed reading when the phone rings. I hear my mom get up, but I storm out of my room snatch the phone. I answered with an irritated "Hello", refraining from my inital response to start yelling, in case it was indeed a family member needing something. I knew it wasn't and I was greeted by a cheerful young lady, who didn't even bother with a hello as she jumped into her spiel. I cut her off with a "Do you know what the hell time it is here?" She stammered a bit but I kept going, "It's after fucking 10pm!" I yelled at her. She started to stutter, but I was just too pissed to let her apologize. "This is the third time you assholes have called us in a week! We told you not to call us! And do you realized, that in my state, it is ILLEGAL to call after 9pm?!" She managed to spit out a weak "I'm sorry," to which I replied, "Sure you are. DO NOT...EVER...call us again. Got it?" Then I hung up on her. I was BEYOND pissed off...

Before people start pointing out that I probably just made some poor college student cry, just because she was doing her job, I want to point out I have no sympathy for her. First of all, I work for one of the largest service providers in the US. A Fortune 500 company. Where does our buisness come from? Our aggressive telemarketing program, that's where. I am fully aware of the rules, regulations, and edict that is involved in telemarketing. I seriously question the integrity of a company and it's employees that cannot even comply with laws and regulations, let alone communicate with each other enough to remove a family's name from their dailer after being told TWO times not to call us. It's simple folks...all it takes is a push of a button, paper filed with a sales manager or data entry person who updates those who have been soliciated and refused service.

Of course, until the recent "Do Not Call List", if a customer refused service, companies only had to remove the name from their dialers and recycle it to be called in three to six months. However, with the strict rules behind this list, companies are being force to eliminate names completely and SFDU's (lists telemarketers call from) are quickly becoming obsolete. My company has felt the crunch, our sales department has taken a major hit, not being able to solicate via phone the numerous people they had access to before. Policies were created inside out office to protect us from the harsh $11,000 fine that is slapped to companies that do not remove a customer from their list. We follow a very stringent protocol now, and have been forced to find other means to market our service.

Do I hate the "Do Not Call List?"

Hell no! I've never been to keen on our marketing strategy, which, under the old laws, allowed us to call potential customers as many times as we liked, to the point where we actually have people who refuse our service just because we call them so much. Now that doesn't happen. Personally, that makes me happy, but business-wise, it makes the job a bit more difficult. Well, not for me so much, since I've never been and never will be, a telemarketer. However, for the company as a whole, it hurts to lose that potential revenue which was so easily and cheaply attained. Now we are forced to spend money on other means, which, in result affects pay raises, hiring, and operations (which is the part that affects me).

Still, I believe telemarketing to be wholly evil, regardless of what company I work for. I find it to be disrespectful and incredibly rude, to call someone's home unsolicated and not even show them to courtesy as to say hello, before leaping into some sales pitch. If I want a service, I'll go looking for it. I DO NOT want someone invading my home, disturbing me with irritating pleas to buy their product. Of course, there are people who do like this kind of service, but I'm not sure why or when companies all across the US decided they are the majority. And for them to assume this, just pisses me off.

Obviously they aren't. Everyday, we update the list, and everyday, there are several thousand new people. Several thousand...each day...My name is on it...Home is suppose to be a sanctuary, a place where you kick off your shoes and enjoy yourself. There is NO REASON why companies should be allowed to phone a residence and disturb the people living there.

This brings me to the newest from of privacy invasion. Internet spam. It's in your e-mail, it's loaded onto you computer with out you even knowing it...This is the newest insult to consumers and homeowners everywhere. Even businesses are effected by it. If you read a few of my later posts from this month, you'll see my computer was damaged by spam a couple weeks ago.

Unlike the telemarketing ploy, spam has knows no bounds. Content isn't an issue, and it's not uncommon for for in-boxes to be loaded with everything from medical perscriptions and debt reducers to penis enlargement and beastiality. It doesn't matter if you've never even seen a sex site or ever needed debt reduction. The spam comes anyway. Sometimes in drove. A few years ago, my hotmail account was shut down three times as my inbox was bombarded with over 400 emails in ONE DAY over a period of a week or so. To make it even more irritating, it wasn't even the same company...

With the help of filters and specific programs, there is a little bit of relief. Some people set up "dummy accounts", using a free mail service somewhere on the net to avoid spam bots clogging up their personal accounts. I too have one of these, and my regular e-mail addy is protected with several filters. However, it's still an annoyance and once again we are back to the question "Where do my rights start and buisness's begin?"

Firstly, I'd like to say that no pornography site or company should be solicating random consumers. This just irks me. I'm hardly a prude, and I consider myself to be pretty open minded, but I honestly do not want my e-mail clogged with messages trying to enlarge my penis or sell me viagra. I don't have a penis! And I don't want one! Nor do I want to see hot chicks getting it on with goats. This stuff just pisses me off. Secondly, no company, regardless of what they're selling, should be allowed to bulk mail your email with a bazillion solicitations...this is almost as irritating as the sex spam...

There may be some relief on the way, however. People have started to complain and are fed up with all the spam and spy ware. As part of the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003, on May 19th the "SEXUALLY EXPLICIT" tag must be added to all emails containing pornographic images and messages. I've already seen a vast reduction of the porn in my junk folder, and nearly all of them contain the tag. A few have slipped through, but they are deleted at the end of the day with the rest of the trash.

Of course, it's still yet to be seen how these so called "spam laws" will play out. It sounds great on paper, but with out strict enforcement, the new regulations are nothing but mouth service. Perhaps, however, it is a step in the right direction. We can only hope. Until then, I'll continue to hit the delete button with a vengence...

Posted by Zoso at May 30, 2004 10:05 AM
Comments

This is a topic I am very, very, very familiar with. I'm on the front lines of this particular war, so to speak.

> Of course, it's still yet to be seen how these so called "spam
> laws" will play out.

Sadly, CAN-SPAM has actually caused a lot of trouble in this area, as it's relatively toothless as far as spam legislation goes, and it pre-empts more effective spam legislation by the states (including particularly good bills passed in WA and CA). In my opinion, it was a major step backward.

Why? Because it doesn't really make spam illegal at all, it just provides penalties for some of the more nefarious means that spammers use - ie. header forgery. It doesn't actually address the practice of sending unsolicited bulk email at all, and by essentially overruling the laws passed by the states, it makes it less and less likely that anyone will be able to do anything. In my opinion, it "legitimizes" an illegitimate act by not banning it outright.

...

Legislation isn't going to do any good in the long run anyhow, though, as most spammers these days are sending through overseas providers (mostly in China, Russia, etc) and are nearly untraceable. To some degree this can be worked around by going after the sellers of the goods themselves, but even that proves difficult to do on a large scale.

In the long run, the solution to the problem will be a mixture of technical solutions (ie. better and better spam filters - already you see spammers having to make their messages nearly unreadable just to get them through), social solutions (educating the dumbest of the dumb consumers not to EVER buy from spammers), and possibly even a complete re-architecting of email standards to fit post-1970 realities.

Posted by: Jeff at May 30, 2004 02:32 PM

Hey cous! Just got back from Grandma's! :-) Hope you guys have a great Memorial Day!

Anyway, I was wondering about that, the international aspect of it, that is. It would be almost impossible to track down spammers overseas, let alone prosecute them. I can see something like this costing lots of money. Though I'm just speculating, because on the spam end of things, I don't know too much about it,just what I read.

What is the law over there? I did hear something about your state having strict spam laws and that the Fedral Law superceeds it. Which to me is odd, because normally, if a State Law is more strict than a Fedral Law, the State Law takes precident...Or at least that's how it works with Ag. Laws anyway...LOL

At anyrate, I imagine it will be a very long time until the internet becomes a bit less unruly, if you know what I mean. Until then, I suppose all us honest, law abiding people will just have to keep our gaurd up, right?

Take care!

Posted by: Zoso at May 30, 2004 03:25 PM