The BadAds Weblog: November 2003

The Law That Wouldn't Shoot Straight

We need you to write to your representatives about the new spam bill.

Consider these contrasting headlines, the first from The New York Times and the second from The Spamhaus Project:

"Congress Set to Pass Bill That Restrains Spam"

"United States Set to Legalize Spamming on 1 January 2004"

Seems we've a slight difference of opinion here – but the difference disappears once you look closer at the bill in question. The CAN-SPAM Act, as negotiated by House and Senate leaders, has several provisions which will supposedly limit the amount of spam, such as a civil fine of up to $250 if a spammer forges his identity or makes his spam impossible to trace by using open relays owned by others. The Act also allows ISPs (Internet service providers) to continue blocking e-mail from whoever and wherever they want, meaning spammers can't sue them and force them to forward their intrusive ads.

Unfortunately, all these tiny steps forward are undone by other measures, such as disallowing individuals from suing companies that inundate them with spam. In a move that Times' writers Edmund Andrews and Saul Hansell describe as "deferring to [marketing] industry pressure," lawmakers declined to require spammers to include an identifying marker like ADV in their spam, something that would have made it painfully easy – God forbid – to filter out junk e-mail.

Worst of all, the bill takes an opt-out approach in which a spammer can continue to fill your in-box with junk until you write and tell him to stop. So each of the millions of businesses in the U.S. now have federal permission to badger you electronically until you cry "Uncle" and tell them to knock it off. And this bill takes precedence over more restrictive state laws, such as California's beautifully designed opt-in law which prohibited all spam to state residents unless they had specifically requested it.

Said Scott Richter, the president of OptInRealBig, an e-mail marketing firm in Westminster, CO, to the Times, "We are very excited.... All of our clients had been worried about the California law. In the last two hours we have been booking a lot of orders for January."

When spammers rejoice, it's clear that the CAN-SPAM Act will do anything but "restrain" spam. Thanks to the willingness of our Congresspeople to favor businesses over the voters who put them in office, our in-boxes will continue to be flooded with spam well into the new year.

Don't let this act of cowardice go unanswered. Write your representatives and tell them what a strong anti-spam bill would really look like. Tell them that only opt-in measures would provide true relief from the spam assault. Tell them that they have failed with this bill.

Then forward all your spam to them, from now unto eternity.

Lazy? here's a sample letter. Fill out the form here, then copy and paste the letter into the resulting form. It will be automatically sent to your representatives, the vice president, and the president.

I'm writing in opposition to the CAN-SPAM Act.

The CAN-SPAM Act, as negotiated by House and Senate leaders, has several provisions which will supposedly limit the amount of spam, such as a civil fine of up to $250 if a spammer forges his identity or makes his spam impossible to trace by using open relays owned by others.

However, the bill takes an opt-out approach in which a spammer can continue to fill your in-box with junk until you write and tell him to stop. So each of the millions of businesses in the U.S. now have federal permission to badger you electronically until you cry "Uncle" and tell them to knock it off. And this bill takes precedence over more restrictive state laws, such as California's beautifully designed opt-in law which prohibited all spam to state residents unless they had specifically requested it.

This bill basically legalizes spam; in fact, in a New York Times article, spammers expressed their pleasure at the CAN-SPAM Act. If spammers like the bill, you can be sure that it's no good for consumers.

I pay for my Internet connection, and it is not meant for advertisers to use to badger me. Not only that, but two to five dollars out of every ISP bill go towards filtering out the unwanted deluge of spam; that means that spam actually costs us money, much like a piece of junk mail sent postage due. This is not a Free Speech issue; speech isn't free when it comes postage due.

I hope that you will "can" the CAN-SPAM Act and instead support an opt-in law or a law where e-mail advertisers must use the prefix ADV: in the subject line of their e-mails for easy filtering by those who don't wish to receive ads via e-mail.

Thanks, and I look forward to your reply.

November 25, 2003

A New Reason to Dislike Washington

Washington D.C. already has a bad reputation, what with it being one of the most violent cities in the nation and the home of countless politicians and their "dam gummint." Now, our nation's capital is creating a new reason to stay outside its boundaries.

The Washington Metro, the second-busiest rail transit system in the United States and one that's been largely free of advertising and sales pitches throughout its 27-year existence, will likely become the most polluted, ad-ridden dump in the fifty states.

The Metro board has already approved wrapping 100 buses and 20 subway trains with vinyl ads by Spring 2004 and installing up to five subway tunnel ads – ads that appear to move like a flipbook as a train moves past a series of images on the wall – by summer.

That's just the beginning of what Washington's 1.1 million daily transit users will have to endure. Board members also plan on allowing advertising on the side of parking garages, commercial banners inside the busiest Metro stations, and signs on light poles in parking lots and on bus shelters. "We want to leave no stone unturned," said Leona Agouridis, Metro's assistant general manager for communications, in a Washington Post article.

Most horrifying of all, the board likes the idea of hanging video monitors that display commercials on buses, on trains, and inside rail stations. The only spike they haven't driven into riders yet is whether or not the monitors will also have audio.

"We don't have any choice," said Carlton Sickles, a member of the Metro board who was described by the Post as a "steadfast guardian of the transit system's cathedral-like appearance for three decades." Continued Sickles, "I've been prophylactically opposed to advertising. But I have to recognize we need money. It's a thing we have to do."

Stop right there, Mr. Sickles. You and the rest of the Metro board have to do no such thing. To meet a previous shortfall, you raised fares and cut costs. In the current situation, however, you plan to overturn more than a quarter-century of asceticism and calm environments and plaster intrusive advertisements on nearly every available surface, all to raise a mere $15 million with a $45 million still outstanding.

You will still have to raise fares and cut costs, but in the meantime you will have permanently destroyed the transit experience of more than a million riders each day.

Blanketing the atmosphere with intrusive, unwanted advertising is no long-term solution to budget difficulties, only a long-term blight on your city, your lifestyle, and your tenure on the board.

You still have a choice.

Readers are encouraged to call, write or visit the Metro board and convince them that there's still time to avoid this travesty.

Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
600 Fifth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001
Phone: 202-962-1234
E-mail: csvc@wmata.com
Online Contact Form

November 19, 2003

You Work All Week for This?

Didn't get that raise you asked for? Tough break, sport, but perhaps your employer will take pity on you and instead offer what's surely the next best thing: discount coupons and ads inside your paycheck envelope.

Yes, AdChek of Ventura, California, and its Priceless Perks program gives employers nationwide the opportunity to print advertisements on the back of employee paycheck stubs and direct deposit drafts.

In the twisted minds of AdChek executives, this "perk program helps to retain and motivate employees while showing appreciation for their hard work." Even more offensive than this airy nonsense is AdChek's appeal to employers that Priceless Perks provides them with an additional source of revenue.

To draw advertisers to this intrusive form of marketing, AdChek promises that it "provides you the opportunity to affiliate your message with a trusted document – the paycheck." What's more, claims AdChek, "every payday, 135 million working Americans spend 2-3 minutes reviewing their payroll stub or direct deposit draft and 83% keep it for one year."

Those few minutes you normally spend looking at your check and daydreaming about where to go for vacation or which student loan to pay off have now been co-opted by advertisers – and they're darn excited about it. AdChek quotes an Earthlink senior manager of business development on its site as saying, "Using AdChek is a good way for someone to see what I want them to see."

Don't let Earthlink and the companies below get away with stealing your ad-free time and space. Write and complain – even better, promise that they'll never see one cent of your money as long as their ads pollute your checks.

Sears Home Improvement, Sears Optical, American Express, DreamWorks Earthlink, Geico Direct, Peoplefirst.com , University of Phoenix Online, Chadwicks of Boston, Custom Direct, Advance America, PayDay Loan Corporation, Cosmetique Beauty Club, Petz Enterprises. (Use Hoovers.com or business.com to search for contact information for each company.)

Be sure to drop a note to AdChek and thank them for destroying one more blank space in the world.

Larry Wolf
Executive Vice President of Sales and Marketing
2225 Sperry Avenue, Suite 1050
Ventura, CA 93003
Phone: 805-639-0006
Fax:805-639-0051
E-mail: comments@adchek.com

November 13, 2003

Back to the Main Page

Get the BadAds Weblog updates via e-mail! We'll keep you up-to-date on news in intrusive advertising, changes to BadAds.org, and new ways you can fight "ad creep."

You are the
[an error occurred while processing this directive] visitor
to draw the line on
intrusive advertising.

sunny-clams knoll Feel free to reprint
any of the text on
this site - just
include a link to
www.BadAds.org.

- - - - - - - - -
Web design
by NewsJobs.Net
Perl CGI & HTML Code
by LServ