Comments on: DMA Launches Mail and Email Opt Out Site?

By: rex

rex — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 18:15:26 +0000

Why would anyone trust this group to accept personal information like SSN, home address, our name and not expect to recieve more crap, nobody signs up for this, nobody wants junk mail. Spammers and people seeking to do harm to someones life are seeking the very information DMA requests as a strandard to opt out for life, how can anyone trust the site, and why is the US Govt not involved just like they are with the do not call registry. We did not have to go in to such detail for that service, why should anyone trust DMA, tro do the right thing with personal data???

By: pawseries

pawseries — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 16:16:29 +0000

This is an exciting idea, no doubt. It is correct to recognize the importance of links and aggregations of links.

—–

Can you clarify?

By: Cindy King

Cindy King — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 11:18:37 +0000

I think this is a great idea, but wonder how well it will work. A person who wants to send spam will make the effort to hide their origin, so it may not be as easy to do something against true spammers. Honest organizations, the Microsoft types of the world, will respect it.

Included in my weekly Marketing Review and stumbled.

Thanks

By: John Engler

John Engler — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 04:34:49 +0000

Yes, this is really stupid. The DMA should really talk to it’s members before doing things sometimes.

By: Michael Clark

Michael Clark — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 00:05:04 +0000

Why in the world would anyone need to sign up for this for email spam? A marketer is supposed to only be junk-emailing their existing customers that have given permission to have the stuff sent to them.

It seems that a better option would be to have the DMA require their 2,800 members all keep excellent records of how and when the customer gave them permission to email.
——-
You hit the nail on the head Michael. The idea has been floated around for years, even by the FTC and many of us have weighed in on it. The fact that they feel that this is still a viable way to clean up their lists is foolish and not truly solving the problem of education of their members to follow best practices.

If we started with the best practices side of the question we would not be still trying this.

Here is actually some data from my good old buddy Al Iverson:

“What, you mean, eMPS? That thing that has been around since at least 2005? Actually, since 2000. This is just the same old thing in a shiny new wrapper.

Not only is this thing not brand new, it’s not worth the pixels it’s printed on.

Think about it. If you only send email to people who explicitly ask for it, then why do you need to work with an opt-out registry? Track who have opted-in to your own list, track (and remove) those who choose to unsubscribe, and that’s pretty much all you need to do.

Also, you need to ask yourself, what does compliance with this opt-out registry get you? It’s not mandated by law, nor could it have any observable impact on your ability to send email.

What does Spamhaus say about eMPS? “[We know] of no U.S. firm using the DMA’s eMPS service that isn’t automaticallly by definition a firm sending spam, since the sole reason for users to need to opt-out of bulk email advertising they did not opt-in to is because the sender is sending without consent, i.e: any DMA member that is using eMPS is using it because he is sending Unsolicited Bulk Email, i.e: Spam.”

Thank Al. I hope to see you around one of these days so we can share a drink. Think we both need one.

By: Tim

Tim — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 23:52:30 +0000

I see this being about as helpful as the do-not-call registry. Honestly, how is it going to help anyone? I don’t foresee spammers getting on board with it. How will I integrate it with my clients’ own preference centers, what happens when they contradict each other? Now if they could guarantee 100% deliverability to those who do use it, they may be on to something. Otherwise, it’s just more false hope on our ability to control what arrives to our inboxes!

—–

I agree. Thanks Tim

By: Janet Johnson

Janet Johnson — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 21:26:21 +0000

Okay, so it was only a matter of time, wasn’t it?

At this point, this will really force separation of the wheat from the chaff, and I believe should strengthen great agencies’ positions. I suspect your services will be in heightened demand as a result, friends.

You ask the right questions, though… the last time I was at a DMA event (four years ago?) I was stricken at how old fashioned their perspectives were about the online world. Perhaps they’ve got the firepower to manage opt-outs in a timely manner… but I’m skeptical.

Will look forward to updates!

—-
Right but you would have thought as we are part of the Email Experience Council and in charge of the email side of the DMA that they might have asked us about it. I mean 10K email marketers at some major corps might have some questions.

The bad part of this thing is that they just acted and did not know how to connect it all together. I fear that this is going to be worse from the consumer side of things as they are EXPECTING that this will remove them from everything, when in fact it will not. AND I can see a backlash of spam complaints from consumers THINKING that they have suppressed email addresss from EVER getting emails when in fact it is a program that one you must be a member of the DMA and you MUST know about it.

FAIL