Derek Harding, ClickZ, May 14, 2009
More about permission here as Derek Harding discusses a previous article from Bill McCloske and their differeing views on the permission aspects missing from CAN-SPAM and how B2B senders will still exploit this to spam people...read on
- - -
It will always be a fine line between permission and explicit permission.
Exisiting as a business means that people who have services which/could would suit you must be able to inform you of their services. Publishing an email addres in the internet is still seen as permision.
Subsequently list owners and brokers exist with lists of email addresses to sell for this purpose.
The problem with some list owners is that they do not allow you to opt-out from them. You can only opt-out from the brand using the list.
The good ones will allow you to but they tend to have a 'carrot' to try and motivate you stay on. They will allow you to give tem more information about your self to esnure you only get marketing that applies to you and might give you an incentive like a competition entry etc.
Explicit permission is where the own of the email address has said yes marketing to me and the company sending the email has the date, time, web-site and IP address of sign up OR from telemarketing they should have all of the details of the campaign, the comapny who made the call and lots of detail about the person who gave the permission.
Many list owners wil advertise that they obey DMA guidelines and digital communication laws. While these are better than nothing, these have not been good enough for a long time and ISPs, spam filtering and blocking organisations and companies offer a much harder line and worse consequences. This is giving the recipients a lot of power over our deliverability and email marketeters.
Confirmed optin (COI) which is the prefered route of ISPs and is a way of getting and email address and then getting confirmation from the owner, like double opt-in. This way you can be sure that person who submitted the email owns the address.
I also like that fact that everyone who talks about this mentions that politicians appear to be excused from most of this. But that is whole-nother discussion!
More about permission here as Derek Harding discusses a previous article from Bill McCloske and their differeing views on the permission aspects missing from CAN-SPAM and how B2B senders will still exploit this to spam people...read on
- - -
It will always be a fine line between permission and explicit permission.
Exisiting as a business means that people who have services which/could would suit you must be able to inform you of their services. Publishing an email addres in the internet is still seen as permision.
Subsequently list owners and brokers exist with lists of email addresses to sell for this purpose.
The problem with some list owners is that they do not allow you to opt-out from them. You can only opt-out from the brand using the list.
The good ones will allow you to but they tend to have a 'carrot' to try and motivate you stay on. They will allow you to give tem more information about your self to esnure you only get marketing that applies to you and might give you an incentive like a competition entry etc.
Explicit permission is where the own of the email address has said yes marketing to me and the company sending the email has the date, time, web-site and IP address of sign up OR from telemarketing they should have all of the details of the campaign, the comapny who made the call and lots of detail about the person who gave the permission.
Many list owners wil advertise that they obey DMA guidelines and digital communication laws. While these are better than nothing, these have not been good enough for a long time and ISPs, spam filtering and blocking organisations and companies offer a much harder line and worse consequences. This is giving the recipients a lot of power over our deliverability and email marketeters.
Confirmed optin (COI) which is the prefered route of ISPs and is a way of getting and email address and then getting confirmation from the owner, like double opt-in. This way you can be sure that person who submitted the email owns the address.
I also like that fact that everyone who talks about this mentions that politicians appear to be excused from most of this. But that is whole-nother discussion!
