You Are the Ones We Despise
Aug 27 2008
Sure is was a funny sophmoric joke, but people that mess with email marketers data with false names, fake names, friends names, or my favorite asdf@asdf.com (look at your keyboard) make our jobs hard. Now to get some mileage out of you and your buddies getting emails from a brand or person that are dynamically loaded with the fake name you opted in with is fine in your inner circles. But placing your “joke” out there about how you loaded false data into an opt in form is crap.
When you do this do you realize how many hours a year the marketing and email marketing industry is spending to clean out crap like this? These data points go into our CRMs, our ecom sites, our lead capture systems and more. And to top this off data that is bogus can cause us deliverability issues as ISPs that we all try so hard to avoid. Do us a favor, if you want something, sign up for it with real info, if you want to streak the quad, do it on your own site.
Now Ken you are a persona in our space, and sure you got a joke out of this. Hell I do some pretty odd things myself, but data integrity is everything to our industry and to me this is insulting to us and not funny.
I think that as someone that covers the industry and espouses the things that make us strong, tear us down, threaten our industry, and lift us up… you of all people should be helping us out and not hurting us.
Here is the article from Frank the Tank Magill. Enjoy your weekend at Bed, Bath, Beyond.
Published in Deliverability, Email News, Lead Capture, Worst Of Email on Wednesday, August 27th, 2008
(3 votes, average: 5 out of 5) 
Loading ...
August 27th, 2008 at 10:18 am
The other side of the coin… people aren’t doing it to be funny, the trust in email registrations is pretty much non-existent. Not every place you sign up is going to sell your email… in fact, most places these days don’t. But the average person has no idea of who to trust and who not to.
As for the Obama prank, it’s pretty funny… I guess it will teach his marketers to use a double opt-in next time. =]
—-
One way to look at it I guess. I thikn that is why I want the EEC or DMA to drive a consumer marketing campaign this year to rebuild trust from brands and email opt in forms. But really, millions of forms are completed a day and of those 90% of legit. IT is just the 10% that really create Database havoc. I believe in the double opt in. I believe in the form. I HOPE for trust. eROI in 2008!
August 27th, 2008 at 11:19 am
Are you asking for their personal information to benefit them, or to benefit you?
What incentive do they have to give you the personal information you’re asking for?
——
Well if this is a personal question it goes both ways.
For our business, we ask once. That allows people to NOT need to continue to give me info every time they want a white paper or case study. It helps them save time AND if you take a look on eroi.com you will notice we ONLY ask what is needed from us or them based on the action and selects.
It benefits US and them. It feeds into emailROI, Salesforce, Trigger emails etc. It streamlines the frequency and relevancy of future emails. We do not assume that we can email everyone everything. We drink the punch.
Incentives are different on every site and for every action. Do you want to JOIN a community? Do you want to get some information? Do you want to buy something? Do you want to get in on a beta?
When was the last time you thought that the internet was free? Information was free and businesses were in business to give things away? You need to give to get in many cases. With things like this blog I give and give, but with things like my case studies and research it is a lead gen and measurement system.
JD… tell me how you would answer your own questions here?
August 27th, 2008 at 11:45 am
Dylan, I have to admit that I do this myself as well. I enter a fake name and email address in cases where I don’t really trust the website, I enter my phone number as 1234567890 to make sure I don’t get phone calls from annoying sales people, I enter my address as Street, City, 12345 when I don’t want to let them know where I live… We’re all consumers next to being email marketers, right?
I have a problem giving my real details when I just want to download the white paper and am not interested in purchasing anything or when I just want to sign up to your newsletter (I really don’t understand why they keep asking for my address when all I want to do is sign up for their newsletter)… and I always enter fake data when a webform asks me how big my company is, if I’m already using so or so software etc… you know, the lead qualification questions…
PLEASE don’t hit me now :-)
——
So as an email marketer, an agency leader, a speaker, a writer, a blogger, and a social community manager you still fill out forms with junk? I am disapointed. At least set up a gmail box or other account for forms that you will check but not want to engage with until you want to. I hear you on the sales person front (but i am one of them, and you are one for your agency clients whether you want to think about that or now) as they or WE reach out to many of them. Some are more bothersome than others.
But stop the madness here and start trusting, unsubbing and not making our jobs harder than they need to be. This impacts you and your team… and your clients… as well.
Watch out for the Bat I swing.
August 27th, 2008 at 12:43 pm
I have a coupla thoughts on this.
Why did Ken sign up as Stupid if he resents being called stupid? Oh, to test the non-confirmation sign-up form that the Obama campaign has been using. Still, his point gets lost in a long rambly post about being called stupid.
What’s more important is why Biden is getting Obama’s list- they should ask for another opt-in.
As for the non-confirmation registration, that is about what I expect from political campaigns, as I’ve been reviewing them!
@Tamara- use alternate name addressing on webmail accoutns (gmail- add a “+” and a word to track registrations)
@John- I don’t think double-opt-in is the way, I think a simple confirmation email would suffice.
@Dylan- the dirty data test Ken did is pretty silly. He could have tested it without registering as “stupid.”
Also, the spammers aren’t the marketers at the campaign that didn’t implement a registration form with confirmations, it’s the users that put in other people’s email addresses! Anti-spammers are quick to blame the wrong people.
—–
You ROCK. Thanks for your thoughts and participating in the conversation.
August 27th, 2008 at 1:27 pm
Why are you not taking steps to protect yourself from the people you despise?
The issue here is that there is no incentive, and a lot of disincentive, for recipients to provide fake information. Marketers, as a group, have not been very respectful of recipients in the past.
As I see it, the problem is not that people are putting fake data into forms, but that marketers are not protecting themselves.
If Ken can input a false name into your form, what’s to stop one of your competitors from inputting spamtrap addresses into your form to get you blacklisted. Yes, there are vandals on the internet. Yes, some of them don’t like you. Protecting yourself from vandalism and theft, whether online or in a brick and mortar store, is a cost of doing business.
Why do you think you should get a pass? And what makes you think you deserve people’s personal information?
—–
all good points. I think we all feel the same but no one has the answer. Do we?
I know in our ESP system emailROI we have the ability to block domains from ever being sent to period. We can block domain by domain emails by each account AS well as on a global level. I COULD share a story about a certain someone that did use his spam cop marshall email address who worked for a certain ESP, and then had one of our double opt in customers blacklisted (this is a run on but stick with me), and then had to turn around and retract it once we tracked them down.
And in the end, locks just keep honest people honest. So what does that say about those who pick the locks?
August 27th, 2008 at 1:32 pm
I’m with Tamara. Require me to enter data I want to give, and all bets are off. And I am absolutely certain that our view is the prevalent one.
What’s being forgotten here is that our jobs is to respect consumers, not to lambaste them bitterly for defeating our imperfect processes.
I don’t spend hours cleaning crap data out of CRMs. I spend hours training marketers that they need to make information collection optional, and that they need to validate and verify.
Oh, the stories I could tell you about past lessons learned about profanity in personalization, and the the wrong way paths of requiring information before handing over freebies.
Consumers don’t cause crap delivery; crap SENDER practices do. I’m surprised you see it differently.
————
I think we can all see it with different lenses and views Al. So with information collection you see it as optional? So how do you grow an email marketing program? And when do we all move to an OpenID structure where we can have multiple profiles and choose what and which information to share?
I might be one of those idealists or purists, but I deal with brands and companies that I trust, and with that I surrender or GIVE a lot of faith in the control and messaging in our relationship. IF if goes bad, I unsub. If it grows, I smile.
I believe that there are more good marketers out there than lazy marketers. But I also have met many of them and at times I am shocked. Should there be an email marketing and database marketing certification program for all of us? Not a flimsy one at a trade show, but a real one run by a third party for accreditation?
August 27th, 2008 at 1:59 pm
@Dylan, thanks, and I did a follow-up on my definitions of optin, optin w/ confirmation and double-optin
http://www.banane.com/workblog/?p=367
“Double Opt-In”
August 27th, 2008 at 9:25 pm
*trying to dodge the bat*
Yes, Dylan, as an email marketer, an agency leader, a speaker, a writer, a blogger, a social community manager AND a consumer I still fill out forms with junk. And I’ll tell you why.
Ultimately it’s all about trust. If I trust you enough I’ll share my data with you because I know you will not abuse it, if I don’t trust you enough, I won’t share my data with you. Period. The company itself is to blame if I enter fake data… they just didn’t make me trust them enough… and seriously, if you’re asking me a ton of questions like my physical address, my phone number, and a bunch of lead qualification questions, when all I want is to download and read that white paper, then I KNOW that you are going to use that data to start harassing me.
There’s a time and a place for everything. First gain my trust by asking only the minimum, if I like the contents of the white paper, I’ll come back for more, if I don’t I won’t. It’s like in a relationship: give before you take. And when you take, treat what you take with love and consideration.
Sometimes it’s good to put yourself in the shoes of the other party… if consumers fill out our forms with junk, it’s because we have taught them to do so in the first place. We’ll need to do more than run a consumer trust campaign to set this right. Companies will have to rethink their approach to lead generation. As long as they continue to ask more than I’m willing to give (and make the information required instead of optional), I will continue to fill out their forms with junk.
*ducking for that swinging bat again*
—————
I love your response. Thank you for sharing. I agree with you about Trust. Everything we do is about building trust. I personally do not fill in fake data, as I believe in karma. Just me I guess.
Here is another response to my post that I wanted to share. I am glad that this dialogue is happening as I think that we have a bigger issue to address, of trust. Does the fault lie with the site and marketer?
I HATE forms that ask too much data. No one ever uses ALL of it. Most of the time they just ask for it with no plan of what they are going to do with it. This is why I love progressive profiling and the building of trust.
WE often tell our customers that they need to stop asking for so much data. What do they need it for? What are they going to do with it? Do they need it all now? Why not build a relationship and ask later. I know that when I meet someone I do not ask for so much data on them. I get to know them, find out what I need to know, provide value, and evaluate each relationship.
The dialogue is continuing in other blogs. This is good as it grows this conversation.
http://blog.wordtothewise.com/2008/08/who-is-responsible-for-data-integrity/
I posted my response to this post on the above blog. I might be a purist in my belief in people, but then that is my fault and cross to carry.
September 2nd, 2008 at 2:17 pm
Come on Dylan! You should know better than to get into a factual debate about email or any other direct marketing channel best practices with Ken Magill. He’s been direct marketing and leading permission marketing tactics since you were in short pants.
—–
Really Tricia? But poking Ken with a sharp stick is fun. And what would you put the age and experience difference between Ken and myself? Maybe a few years if that? It might be deceiving to you my age and my over 12 years of online experience. I was born in this era of digital communications, not in the era of Mad Men and post cards. I love the fact that you use the term “short pants”, such a throw back to the 1960s. What a great time that was … I hear.
Also how much email campaign creation, management, and execution experience does Ken have in the past 3 years? He did not even know in his article if his own publisher uses a double opt in or not. It is not hard to test it to find out, or even look at the code to see how it is set up. That bides well to write on a practice you condemn people for when you are not sure if you use it yourself. What is that old saying that has something to do with glass houses and stones?
Here was the passage if you read it today:
“And there’s a lesson here for marketers: They should stop kidding themselves and use so-called double opt-in—or fully verified opt-in, or closed-loop opt-in, or whatever you want to call it—in their e-mail list-building efforts, or they shouldn’t be surprised when they end up with a lot of crap addresses.
Double opt-in—I am purposely using this term rather than the others because it’s the one marketers use most and, more importantly, it drives anti-spammers nuts—is the one foolproof way to make sure e-mail addresses people use to sign up for a list are real and accurate.
Under double opt-in, the marketer sends a confirmation message to new registrants to which they must respond in order to be added to the file. Forged subscription? Bad or mistyped address? No problem. There will be no response to the confirmation message, and as a result, no garbage data entered into the file.
As I write this, I am not sure whether Magilla Marketing’s publisher Penton Media uses double opt-in or not. Alas, if only I were in charge of everything, all would be perfect, no? We’d at least drink a lot more.”
In hindsight I stand behind my opinions and thoughts. I have answered over, oops I mean the few people that have blogged about it. I drink the Kool Aid of double opt in, confirmed opt in, etc, Ken seems to mix his with a little bit of seltzer and spirits. Which I don’t blame him for needing. I could use a good cold one myself.
You should also know that we (Ken and I) have traded emails on this topic that neither of us are posting in our articles or blogs. I am personally happy that it has people thinking and talking about it openly, instead of reading the lurking. Conversation is king.
Thanks for your comment as I do appreciate them. And I just signed up for your list as Mr. Shortpants. Can you find it and validate it before your next campaign gets out?
September 3rd, 2008 at 11:40 am
Dylan, I take issue with you “poking Ken with a sharp stick” not because the debate about unnecessary data collection and cleansing habits isn’t valuable, but because there’s no need to be mean. Frank the Tank? Really? Questioning whether Ken is qualified to do his job because he doesn’t run the Penton marketing department? Really? Exclaiming your “disappointment” in Tamara for not agreeing with you? Really?
You should get your point across without these inflammatory comments including the insinuation that I didn’t even read the article in question (which by the way, has driven free publicity to this blog). There’s no need to attack any honest person in the email space who’s on the side of permission email and supporting best practices. Lighten up! Or redirect this meanness at some of the real problem-makers in the email industry.
——–
Tricia:
There is a difference in being mean and being snarky. I think that you will find that Ken and I both are clear not to be mean. Maybe that is just my view on it. There are always many ways to read and look at all things.
And I believe that just as he has the right to share his thoughts on matters, as does the community and individuals. We all have different views and those shape a conversation. Which is good for ALL of us. Whether you are Laura or Al or Tamara we are engaged and passionate.
We all believe in permission and double/confirmed, closed loop, best practices email marketing. His article was used to prove his point. Done and clearly understood. My response was that I felt it was done in the wrong way. There are many other ways to prove that point with any site.
As per the link, Thanks Ken. I thought that was nice of you. I have been sure to link to other blogs that are trying to take me for task for having an opinion and caring about email marketing as a whole.
I am taking this whole conversation seriously but I won’t lie when I tell you I have the Cheshire Cats grin on my face as I read and respond to all of these comments here and at other blogs. Please take my insinuations and inflammatory comments as good fun. We all have a sense of humor, even Mr. Poopypants.
September 3rd, 2008 at 1:49 pm
This was emailed to me for the sake of privacy and asked me to post it on their behalf. Guess some people are not able to speak as freely as the Magill Four (as I think I should refer to them know, like a gang. Ken did you arrange for a flash mob?) Here is what I was sent. There are some others, but they asked not to be posted. And out of respect and trust I have kept them private.
Hi Dylan,
I have read some of the things floating around the internet (have you heard of it?) about your post last week regarding Big Ken’s move to “test” Obama’s data integrity. It seems that you have taken your fair share of heat over this and it has created quite a debate.
Here are my thoughts, if you’re interested (Man, I really need an incognito blog).
Whether this was truly a test, a window into Ken’s political views, or views on his own self perception are debatable.
He does point out a flaw in the data collection process, but there could have been another way around it. I believe his article yesterday suggested that the Obama staff should be eyeballing the list and looking for flagrant data that doesn’t belong. I’m assuming that there are millions of subscribers on the list, and it could be a full time job for someone to look at these addresses and still something might be missed.
Sure, Double Opt-In would eliminate the need for the staff to spot-check the list, but that still wouldn’t prevent someone like Ken from entering First Name Stupid, last Name Poopyhead. Are we to believe that Ken would not have confirmed his subscription given the chance to? I have a feeling he would have. In the name of testing, of course.
I am a fan of double-opt in. The end result is a much cleaner and well engaged list. However, I also know that sometimes, it’s not the best way to operate an email marketing campaign.
What were Obama’s objectives? Based on the emails we received, he was looking for donations. By casting a wide net, I’m sure there were spam complaints and staunch republicans who thought it was a hoot to sign up their staunch republican friends for Obama’s emails, but the benefit of reaching as many people as possible, in this case, outweigh the risk.
I can guarantee you the marketers on this team were expecting a degree of tomfoolery because there was no confirmation. I think your point, which has been lost along the way was - That’s fine, it’s going to happen, but email marketers should abstain. And if they chose to enter bogus information, then for God’s Sake, don’t write about!
I still think you’re right.