Comments on: Do-Not-Contact Registries Proliferating?

By: Eric

Eric — Tue, 28 Mar 2006 11:43:52 +0000

Kevin, you’re correct that the increasing sending costs gives marketers more incentives to target. However, I’ve tried to model a marketing regulatory scheme based on the degree of annoying-ness of the medium, and that doesn’t work. Focusing just on the level of annoyance misses some important dynamics and thereby distorts the regulatory decision-making. I’ll lay this case out in more detail shortly. Eric.

By: Eric

Eric — Tue, 28 Mar 2006 11:41:34 +0000

Thanks Paul. It’s interesting how people have divergent attitudes towards unsolicited marketing depending on the medium used to deliver it. I have a lot more to say about this shortly. Eric.

By: Paul McNamara

Paul McNamara — Fri, 17 Mar 2006 22:36:57 +0000

I’ve often heard it claimed that some people actually like getting spam. Never believed it. I do, however, *know* that some people like getting junk mail … because I’m married to such a person. My wife treats her pile of junk mail like I treat the sports page … and she won’t cotton to any politician who tries to take it from her.

By: Kevin Sours

Kevin Sours — Tue, 14 Mar 2006 00:48:06 +0000

Unlike telemarketing, junk mail does not interupt and distract the recipient at inconvenient times. Unlike email marketing, junk mail is expensive enough that marketers put some thought into whether or not to send something — meaning that the volume tends to remain managable and the content is more likely to be at least minimally relevant. All in all its much less intrusive than the others. The more annoying something is, the more incentive there is to craft regulations to make it stop.