Telemarketers beware ...

December 18, 2002 9:56 AM

FTC creates national ‘do not call’ listWhile there have been state lists for quite some time, and some organizations (like the DMA) maintain do-not-call lists requiring members to honor DNC requests, the FCC is now talking about a single, federal list that would require compliance from all telemarketers, and levy fines for non-compliance. Is this the end of telemarketing as we know it today?
posted by MidasMulligan (40 comments total)

Midas ~Pleasepleasepleaseplease let it be true!~ I'd like to be able to answer my phone without pre-screening.
posted by troutfishing at 9:59 AM on December 18, 2002

This makes no sense to me on two levels:

1.You'd think the telemarketing industry would have the most kick-ass lobbying group going, with the ability and funds to squash this like a grape.

2.This doesn't fit the pattern of the Bush administration at all. Rights of the individual over corporate monoliths? Huh?
posted by machaus at 10:02 AM on December 18, 2002

About time! New York, among other states, already has one in place. I use it, and it's da bomb.
posted by mkultra at 10:03 AM on December 18, 2002

Who thought it would last this long? Do you know anyone who actaully talks to telemarketers? How can this possibly still be a viable way to do business? There are companies I will never do business with because they have annoyed me so many times at home. I'm enjoying all the creative ways that people are coming up with to get back at these leeches.
posted by archimago at 10:04 AM on December 18, 2002

"2.This doesn't fit the pattern of the Bush administration at all. Rights of the individual over corporate monoliths? Huh?"

Yeah, but the paranoiac in me thinks 'national database, you say?'"

dunno, just sayin'...oh, well, back to my shed in the woods.
posted by chandy72 at 10:07 AM on December 18, 2002

This doesn't fit the pattern of the Bush administration at all. Rights of the individual over corporate monoliths? Huh?

Who knows, maybe even the White House get calls asking if they'd like aluminum siding.
posted by jonmc at 10:07 AM on December 18, 2002

The original article (in the Post) is here; the FTC's "Do not call" home page is here.

This is excellent.
posted by precipice at 10:08 AM on December 18, 2002

The registry will likely cost about $16 million in its first year and would be paid for with fees collected from telemarketers...

Oh man, I loves me the poetic justice.
posted by mathis23 at 10:11 AM on December 18, 2002

Is this the end of telemarketing as we know it today?

God I hope so!
But who will shut-in's talk to now?
posted by themikeb at 10:13 AM on December 18, 2002

A database of everyone's name and phone number? I don't mean to make you anxious chandy, but I think it already exists...

I am counting the moments until I can sign up for this. There's nothing more disheartening while looking for a job than coming home to 3 messages, and finding out they're all pre-recorded time-share pitches.
posted by JoanArkham at 10:16 AM on December 18, 2002

*dancingdancingdancing*
posted by frykitty at 10:21 AM on December 18, 2002

sheesh. wouldn't a 'DO - Call' list be a whole lot shorter? or why not say that everyone is automatically ON this do not call list and you can call up to get taken off it?

but I suppose this is pretty good news.
posted by darkpony at 10:21 AM on December 18, 2002

"A database of everyone's name and phone number? I don't mean to make you anxious chandy, but I think it already exists..."

"Oh, hehe, yeah," he says looking at his social security card and his listing in the local phonebook with an embarrassed look on his face...
See what paranoia can do? I, for one, now fully welcome our Database Comiling Overlords.
thanks and now that I have your attention, can I tell you about a great vacation you've won...
posted by chandy72 at 10:25 AM on December 18, 2002

my bet is that they will be able to save a lot of disk space and cpu time by making their database a list of people who *want* calls from telemarketers. i've told a lot of people about the DMA's list and few people want to take the time to do it. but that's junk mail. i think people are a lot more upset by junk phone calls. i'd bet something like 90% of people who know about this list will put themselves on it.

hell, once i'm on this list i'll *love* calls from telemarketers! at $11K per call, i can live for a year on just two telemarketing calls! woohoo!
posted by muppetboy at 10:28 AM on December 18, 2002

Pennsylvania just got this; spearheaded by Republican governor, by the way. I like it, I like it, I LIKE IT!

It has holes: politicians (of course) and charities are excepted. And I just got an (illegal) call from a telemarketer with a pronounced Chinese accent. Hrm. Will telemarketing, like spam, just move off-shore?

Still, it's a very good thing.
posted by Slithy_Tove at 10:34 AM on December 18, 2002

"2.This doesn't fit the pattern of the Bush administration at all. Rights of the individual over corporate monoliths? Huh?"

you've got it all wrong. they are about the rights of the rich and powerful over everyone else. i think telemarketers probably annoyed too many rich people (same thing as people with political connections since money == politics in this country)
posted by muppetboy at 10:34 AM on December 18, 2002

"Will telemarketing, like spam, just move off-shore?"

ok, good point. i predict an option on your phone bill to block international calls. *sigh*
posted by muppetboy at 10:35 AM on December 18, 2002

For an extra $10 a month, of course.
posted by tolkhan at 10:47 AM on December 18, 2002

that's what i meant.
posted by muppetboy at 11:02 AM on December 18, 2002

I think telemarketers probably annoyed too many rich people.

In the good old days, you could pay a little extra money to keep your name out of the phone book and that was enough to keep the riff-raff from calling you.

These days, with automated dialing that doesn't depend on any published book of numbers, we suffer from telemarketers just as much as "the little people."
posted by Slothrup at 11:08 AM on December 18, 2002

btw, this registry isn't quite as good as one would hope. it only blocks *out of state* calls! plus you have to renew every 5 years.

"The national do-not call registry, first proposed in January, would allow people to stop sales calls made from outside their state. Consumers who register on the Internet or with one call to a toll-free government number would remain on the list for five years before having to renew, FTC officials said."
posted by muppetboy at 11:14 AM on December 18, 2002

I'm already signed up with Oregon's no call list, and it's amazing what $3 a year will bring you when you don't want the phone to ring during the dinner hour. The telemarketers stopped calling my place within a month of getting on the list. The thing that kills me is that Qwest offers a "No Solicitation" feature for $6.95/month that you need to program with the phone numbers of loved ones who are allowed to call you during the dinner hour. The no call list is much more effective, takes much less effort, and costs a whole lot less.

Hopefully the national "No Call List" will work just as well for all you folks who don't live in a state with a No Call program. I have friends who have been waiting patiently for it to go into effect.
posted by illusionaire at 11:15 AM on December 18, 2002

Unfortunately Canada doesn't have a don't call list or law, but for the edification of Canadian MeFiers, I offer the next best thing - the Canadian Marketing Association's Do Not Contact Registration.

From the CMA web site:

The Do Not Contact Service enables individuals to reduce the number of marketing offers they receive by mail and telephone. Consumers register to have their names removed from marketing lists held by members of the Canadian Marketing Association. CMA members, who account for about 80 percent of direct response sales in Canada, want to present offers only to those consumers interested in their products and services and are happy to comply with requests for name removal.

Although the CMA does not have or maintain marketing lists, four times a year the names of individuals who have registered for the Do Not Contact Service are distributed to Association members, who are obligated to delete these names from their new-contact marketing lists. Consumers who request removal of their names and addresses should see a reduction in addressed advertising mail and telephone solicitations within three months.
posted by orange swan at 11:19 AM on December 18, 2002

If it is anything like my state's do-not-call list, it'll be a recipie for fun. Why? Well, politicians, of course, are very quick to point out that they can't limit 'free speech'. As a result, their do-not-call list addressed commercial telemarketing.

However, they were nice enough to leave it wide open for themselves and non-profit organizations to do all the telemarketing they want. But it gets even better. Since you are adding your name to a list, a list that is really a no-commercial-telemarketing list', you're also adding your name onto a list of people TO BE TELEMARKETED TO for political groups and non-profits.

Enjoy having your name and telephone number on that do-not-call list. Your politicians will make sure they and other non-commercial entities can call whoever they want. And will use that list to cultivate active good phone numbers.
posted by jmccorm at 11:34 AM on December 18, 2002

2.This doesn't fit the pattern of the Bush administration at all. Rights of the individual over corporate monoliths? Huh?

..And of course, when the facts don't accord with your bigoted preconceptions, it must be the facts that are in error!

sound of illusions splintering
posted by IshmaelGraves at 11:35 AM on December 18, 2002

it's an intrusive and annoying "industry" which should simply be banned flat out. unfortunately, one of the excesses of our current economic thinking is that anything which generates income for someone is "innovative" and "entrepreneurial". cowslop. telemarketing and spamming should be outlawed. and don't waggle that first amendment at me either. you have the right to stand on a corner and speak, you don't have the right to litter the entire street with flyers, running up and sticking them in the pockets of those who don't want them. and since i made the analogy, lets take care of those parking lot flyer-under-the-wiper bandits too, and of course, the grand rapids press, which thinks it's perfectly ok to hire some kid to litter the porch of my rented apartment on a weekly basis with an unsolicited "home and garden" supplement.
posted by quonsar at 11:38 AM on December 18, 2002

We here in Wisconsin have a no-call list that goes in to effect Jan 1, 2003. I signed up for it months ago!
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 11:41 AM on December 18, 2002

how to stop telemarketing calls in 2 easy steps:

1. cancel landline service
optional: 1a. call up your former telco and say, "fsck you, vampires."

2. buy cell phone
idea: get prepaid service, no nasty SSN "requirements" for signing up

//

as muppetboy said, it would make much more sense to have an opt-in list instead of an opt-out list. especially when you have to re-opt-out every 5 years. hmmmmm.
posted by dorian at 11:58 AM on December 18, 2002

also, this crap about "frea speach" is ridiculous. 1st amendment is to protect us from the government, not to allow any loser* with an agenda access to our private property.

oops, quonsar said it already.

*be they charity, non-profit, politician, spammer, whatever...it does not matter: it's about consent, not content.
posted by dorian at 12:03 PM on December 18, 2002

Telemarketing companies have to check the list every three months.

Nice opportunity to reach new homeowners with pitches for home improvement and refinancing, because they just got on the list, but we don't check it again until March.

Still, after the 3-month window, this list sounds very good. With the recent victories against spammers, there's actually been some good news on the privacy/don't hassle me front.

Now if they could criminalize the leaflets on our windshields, little baggies with 3 stones and a gardening ad in the driveway, or pizza coupons hanging from the doorknob...

If you want to advertise, you should either buy space or time, or use your own property ... not public property, and not our homes and cars.
posted by kurumi at 12:57 PM on December 18, 2002

the decrease in ability for telemarketers to do their telemarketing will just increase their desire to send e-mail SPAM, since having e-mail is slowly but surely becoming as ubiquitous as having a phone number ...

cover your inboxes, kids... it's gonna be a rough ride... i don't think the FTC will be able to create a "do not email" list...
posted by twiggy at 1:00 PM on December 18, 2002

muppetboy and jmccorn make good points -- if you read the whole article, you'll find that there are loopholes galore in this proposed service. The telemarketers will easily route around it, I'm sure, so the shouts of joy are a little premature.
posted by macrone at 1:30 PM on December 18, 2002

1. cancel landline service
buy cell phone - idea: get prepaid service

dorian, i just did both last week!
posted by quonsar at 1:42 PM on December 18, 2002

Quonsar says:

and of course, the grand rapids press, which thinks it's perfectly ok to hire some kid to litter the porch of my rented apartment on a weekly basis

Is that all they do? It took me 3 years to get the GR Press to stop calling me at home, usually fairly late at night. It tended to run in cycles; I once got three calls in one week, all trying to tell me about the wonders of what is probably the worst larger-market daily paper in the country.
posted by deadcowdan at 1:48 PM on December 18, 2002

In the good old days, you could pay a little extra money to keep your name out of the phone book and that was enough to keep the riff-raff from calling you.

This still works. I've received only a handful of telemarketing calls on my unlisted numbers, either here in Seattle or back in Detroit.

These days, with automated dialing that doesn't depend on any published book of numbers, we suffer from telemarketers just as much as "the little people."

Dialing at random or sequentially is generally not allowed (it may vary by state or telco, I'm not sure, and it may just be a "terms of service" thing with the telephone company). Hardly any telemarketers actually do it, from what I can tell, or I'd get a lot more phone spam.
posted by kindall at 1:50 PM on December 18, 2002

I'm actually going to be unhappy about this, because as originally proposed it would have preempted Indiana's much tougher no-call statue. Fortunately, this problem has been addressed.

Now, if only they could do this to spam ...
posted by moonbiter at 2:11 PM on December 18, 2002

deadcowdan: oh, without a doubt! i've had no calls however, since i went absolutely ballistic on the last caller about a year ago. i started calmly explaining how may years i had been requesting the calls stop, with a gradual crescendo until i was literally screaming into the phone: XXXING STOP XXXXING CALLING YOU XXXXING XXXXSUCKING XXXXHEADED MOTHERXXXXING XXXXXXXXXX!!!!! WHAT XXXXING PART OF XXXXING DO NOT XXXXING CALL DID YOU XXXXING NOT XXXXING UNDER-XXXXING-STAND? give it a shot hey, can't hurt.
posted by quonsar at 3:35 PM on December 18, 2002

quonsar I dnno if I could manage that level of profanity, but crom! it would sure be fun to give it a try sometime.

right now I actually have no phone of any kind. it's inconvenient at times, but very peaceful. what do you call a technogeek whose privacy activism drives him or her to being a luddite in certain areas?

repeat every week or two:

$company: so do you have a cell number yet, that we can list for you?
me: hell, no.
$company: well are you planning on getting one?
me: that depends. are you planning on buying one for me?
$company: um.
me: thought so.

actually I was thinking about seeing what good deals there were on prepaid phones after the holidays, but even if I do get a phone there is no way that I'm giving that number to my employer, heh.

my next hurdle is getting miss HK to give up her wired phone. so far I've convinced her on all the purely functional/technical potential issues (e.g. fax can be replaced with a service like callwave) -- her final hangup: the phone number is too "cute and perfect and easy to remember". hee.
posted by dorian at 4:17 PM on December 18, 2002

STOP THE MADNESS! I can not believe that this is an issue...who gives a rat's ass if telemarketers are calling people? To use a familiar phrase - don't make a federal case of it! If you don't like telemarketers, then either (a) don't answer the phone, or (b) HANG UP on them. Jeez, people...you want the Feds to do EVERYthing for you?
posted by davidmsc at 8:08 PM on December 18, 2002

why should i listen to the xxxxxxx ring endlessly, to preserve your xxxxxxx idea of a free market? xxxxxxx! it is my telephone, in my home (you know, a man's castle and all that good xxxx), i PAY for the xxxxxx phone, and advertising is not the purpose for which i do so. i'll be xxxxxxxxx if i'll continue to act the puppet, bouncing out of my chair at the behest of some trinket-peddling con artist who i cannot even see. xxxxxx! davidmsc must own stock in telemarketers.
posted by quonsar at 4:21 AM on December 19, 2002