|
|
THIS DOMAIN NAME IS FOR SALE! If you're interested in buying the domain
BadAds.org, please e-mail
The BadAds Weblog- - - - - - - - - - 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." - - - - - - - - - - To Call or Not To Call?Who wants to be free of
annoying telemarketing calls? Executives at the Direct Marketing Association
(DMA), according to the Hartford Courant, which reports that the home
telephone numbers of eleven DMA executives are among the 50 million numbers
on the FTC's "do-not-call" list. Unfortunately for those
executives, and the rest of us phone owners weary of telephonic come-ons, the
fate of the do-not-call list is uncertain since a judge ruled in late September
that the FTC exceeded its authority in establishing the list. In a separate
decision, U.S. District Judge Edward Nottingham ruled that the list violated
the commercial free speech rights of the corporations blocked from making
such calls because charities and select other groups were not so prohibited. Congress took care of the
first complaint by passing an emergency amendment, by margins of 412-8 in the
House and 98-0 in the Senate, in which it granted the FTC the right to
implement the do-not-call list. The FTC is appealing the second decision. Even President Bush
expressed rare support for the rights of the vox populi. While signing the
Congressional amendment into law, he said, "While many good people work
in the telemarketing industry, the public is understandably losing patience
with these unwanted phone calls, unwanted intrusions. And given a choice,
Americans prefer not to receive random sales pitches at all hours of the day.
And the American people should be free to restrict these calls." Bravo, Mr. Bush. Now
replace the words "phone calls" with "e-mail messages"
and sign a similar measure outlawing spam. While all that was
happening, a third federal court allowed the FCC to handle the do-not-call
registry itself, despite an emergency request by telemarketers to delay such
an action. On Sunday, September 28,
DMA President H. Robert Wientzen announced that the members of his
organization have agreed to voluntarily stop calling those on the list.
"We will honor the list the best we can," he said. "Although
we believe this is an inappropriate role for the government, we don't want to
catch the American consumer in our crossfire. We believe we should honor
their wishes." Oh, really, Mr. Wientzen,
that's so nice of you to say. How pleased we are that your members will
"honor the list the best [they] can" mere days after trying to kill
it, that you'll "honor [our] wishes" only after failing to have
them overruled by the courts. Your hypocrisy is astounding, your brazenness
awe-inspiring, and your sense of what's right illusory. Doubt what we say? Let's
examine parts of a keynote speech from October 2002 that Wientzen delivered
at the DMA's 85th Annual Conference & Exhibition: "In January, the
Federal Trade Commission proposed quite a few changes to the Telemarketing
Sales Rule. And while they were at it, the FTC proposed the creation of a
national do-not-call registry." "To top that off,
just a couple of weeks ago, the Federal Communications Commission announced
that it, too, was going to consider creating its own national no-call system,
probably because its jurisdictional reach over telemarketing is greater than
the FTC's...." "Folks, this all
looks like the government is saying, 'We've had it! This industry cannot
regulate itself!' And let me tell you, if they do regulate our industry, it
likely will mean that 30 to 50 million people will, very soon, be on a
national do-not-call list, and it will put us on a slippery slope headed
toward national do-not-mail and do-not-email lists." Good heavens, no! Not that,
anything but that! Before you know it, you'll be forced to get jobs that
don't rely upon bothering people in the privacy of their homes. More from
Wientzen: "A third issue
relates to privacy. This one's also been around for a long time. But the Web
has rocketed this issue into the stratosphere. As a result, there's been a
barrage of negative press for our industry. And where there's press, there's
politicians." "And so there are
legislative and regulatory proposals -- at every level of government - that look
to constrict our industry's access to -- and use of - marketing data. In
fact, at the state level, more than 1,500 privacy bills -- in all 50 states --
have been introduced over the past two-year legislative season." "Meanwhile on
Capitol Hill, dozens of bills and resolutions have been introduced. Some
would give consumers access to their data. And some would impose a disastrous
opt-in model, while others propose opt-out." "Fortunately, it
looks like Congress will adjourn without passing any privacy legislation." Can you just feel his
relief? Phew, no "disastrous opt-in model" passed this year! Better
keep those Congressional donations flowing, though, because who knows what
wacky laws they'll try to pass next year. Normally we like to give
contact information, but we as individuals have little swing in this fight.
Contacting the FCC, FTC or DMA will have little effect. What you can do,
though, is sign up for the FTC list to express your disgust with
telemarketers side-by-side with millions of other citizens. Call toll-free
888-382-1222 or visit the Web site at www.donotcall.gov.
Don't delay; the privacy you save could be your own. October 1, 2003 Rated "G" for Grotesque
Saturday morning cartoons
have always been little more than ads for products or brands: the Smurfs,
Transformers, Care Bears. Surrounding these animated advertisements are, of
course, more ads for other products that kids learn to love. Unfortunately for the
owners of these Saturday morning offerings -- not to mention the toy
manufacturers -- the rise of the Cartoon Channel and the Nickelodeon
powerhouse that is Spongebob Squarepants has dropped the floor out of their
audience. But r ather than admit defeat, the toy manufacturers are leaving
behind the televised field of battle to take their products straight to the
big screen. As Evelyn Nussenbaum
reported in The New
York Times on September 21, 2003 (use "badads" for username and
password), movie versions of Hot Wheels, G.I. JOE, Lego's Bionicle products,
Transformers, My Little Pony, and Super Soaker squirt guns (!!) are all being
developed. Such features follow in the wake of "Pirates of the
Caribbean" and "Haunted Mansion," both of which are based on
Disney-owned amusement park rides. "It's part of our
core-brand expansion strategy," said Jane Ritson-Parsons, president of
Hasbro Properties Group, in a press release about the My Little Pony and
Super Soaker movies. "What we're looking to do is really expand our
brands within the world of the consumer, within every part of their
lives." Said Ritson-Parsons in a
separate press release for the live-action G.I. JOE movie, "The depth of
the G.I. JOE brand provides incredible opportunities to integrate the
property into many lifestyle areas. From a highly successful publishing
program to a wide variety of relevant consumer product categories, we are
able to involve fans of all ages into the adventurous world of G.I.
JOE." Nussenbaum explains that
while companies like Mattel and Hasbro are looking for new advertising
venues, movie makers aim to use familiar brands to lure audiences back from
the Internet and video games and into theaters. "Think of it as prefab
housing,'' says Bill Mechanic, who oversaw "Titanic,"
"Braveheart," "Fight Club" and "Boys Don't Cry"
when he was chairman and chief executive of 20th Century Fox Films.
"It's a way of getting through the marketing clutter." Mr. Mechanic, that's one
of the most retarded statements we've ever heard, but it's one we've grown
used to hearing from marketers eager to foist more ads upon us. They somehow
believe that their particular promotion is unique, that it rises above the
dross and filth of common advertisements, that it will be embraced by the
public as the artistic beacon they've waited their entire lives for. Mr. Mechanic, Ms.
Ritson-Parsons, please spare us your marketing babble. We've heard it all
before and it's getting old. In fact, let us tell you how old it has gotten: Bill Mechanic Jane Ritson-Parsons September 23, 2003 Snapple Puts New York City on the Map
September 11th might have
been a day for remembrance in New York City, but the day before was all
business with the announcement of a $166 million deal with Snapple that makes
the beverage company's products the city's official iced tea and water. As David Herszenhorn reported
in The New York Times (registration required), the five-year deal gives
Snapple "exclusive r ights to place vending machines in the city's 1,200
public schools." Snapple gains pouring rights in police stations,
sanitation depots, and other city-owned properties starting in 2004. In exchange for access to
New York's children and public workers, Snapple will pay a minimum of $8
million per year to the schools and another $13 million to the city. It also
promises to spend $12 million annually on advertising that promotes both the
city and its products. While talking about the
deal, Joseph Perello, New York City's chief marketing officer offered this
threat: "This is the start of a select number of really high-quality
partnerships." Mayor Michael Bloomberg
announced the deal on the athletic field of the Bronx's John F. Kennedy High
School with a Snapple vending machine and the high school's football team
standing behind him, saying, "It is my pleasure today to announce the
first official corporate-marketing partnership the city has established.
Given the global popularity of Snapple products, this will present the city
with countless new opportunities to make positive impressions on people
around the world." Are we mistaken, or is
Bloomberg suggesting that Snapple has wider name recognition than New York
City? That the city must rely upon the kindness of strangers with big wallets
to make a positive impression on world citizens? Please write Mr.
Bloomberg and let him know how backwards his priorities are, how in the world
that most of us inhabit New York City holds far more stature than some random
sugar water manufacturer, how that stature could easily vanish thanks to
deals such as this. Peter Madonia, chief of
staff for Mayor Bloomberg P.S. Thanks to Brad
Sagarin for passing along the NYT link. Says Brad, "As a native New
Yorker, I can't tell you how proud I am that the city has sold out to
Snapple." September 14, 2003 Ad Defacement as Free Expression?
The Los Angeles Times ran
an interesting editorial on August 25, 2003 in which the author advocates
defacing billboards as a means of self-expression. Crispin Sartwell's "Graffiti
Gets Philosophical" focuses on the work of artist Ron English, who
repaints billboards with subversive messages ("Jesus drove an SUV,
Mohammed pumped his gas. Hummer: Not Your Daddy's War Wagon."). < font
face="Arial" size="3">While not endorsing English's
politics, Sartwell does suggest the rest of us common folk pick up a paint
brush and fight back against corporate speech: "Advertising is the
public expression of wealthy people and organizations. Graffiti is the public
expression of people who are more or less broke._ [W]hat I do endorse is the
art of graffiti and the concept of culture jamming. If advertisers feel free
to monopolize public space _ from highways to the airwaves to the Internet _
with their commercial messages, we ought to feel free to deface these
messages, critique them and replace them with our own." You must log in to the
LATimes.com site to read the editorial, but thanks to an anonymous online
subverter, you can use "BadAds" as the username and
"badads" as the password. (If these don't work, you'll have to slap
in your credentials, or reasonable approximations thereof, and create your
own username.) We look forward to seeing both you and your paintbrush on the
streets. August 28, 2003 Sneakier and SneakierWhat's worse than finding
an ad in unwanted places? Having a marketer tell you that the ad isn't
intrusive because you asked to see it. Unfortunately, businesses
do this all the time, making it the customer's responsibility to avoid
becoming an ad magnet. Subscribe to a magazine, and the publisher will sell
your name and address to another; fill out a warranty card, and the
manufacturer will send you "valuable" coupons for other
merchandise; shop at stores like Toys R Us and Linens 'n' Things, where the
cashiers ask for your phone number as if they have a right to it, and your
mailbox will fill with catalogs and notices of special sales events. Alert BadAds readers have
submitted two new instances of sneaky marketers who have found ways of
hitting us with ads after receiving our "permission" to do so.
First, Mike C. forwarded the following message from a co-worker: "This is to all of
you that signed up for the 'do not call' law. This week I received a card in
the mail that said, 'Vote for your favorite cola -- Pepsi or Coke -- and
receive a complementary 12 pack.' At the bottom of the card there is a VERY
small statement that says, 'By completing this form, you agree that sponsors
and cosponsors of this offer may telephone you , even if your number is found
on a do not call registry or list.' "This REALLY upset
me and I just wanted all my friends to be aware of this way to get around the
'do not call' la w!! Just think how many people will send this in and their
'do not call' registry will be NO GOOD!! The company's name is MARKET
SOLUTION. I think this is just one sample of what we will get in the future,
so READ EVERYTHING before you SIGN AND SEND." Even after you join the
"do not call" registry, any company that has a "prior business
relationship" with you can still phone for up to 18 months, unless you
specifically tell them to stop, and this loosely-defined relationship can be
established by nearly anything you do to contact the company. According to Snopes.com,
other companies are trying this sneaky tactic. For example, if you register
for the Liquid Soap Company's Ecology First Sweepstakes, the rules state,
"By completing this form, you agree that sponsors and co-sponsors of
this Sweepstakes may telephone you, even if your number is found on a do not call
registry or list." You can send your complaint to lsp@liquidsoapproducts.com. As another example of
sneaky advertising, BadAds reader K.L. offers this story of marketing woe: "You know those cool
new car radios that display song titles and artist information on the LCD
display with particular radio stations that provide the 'information'
service? Clear Channel Communications radio stations (among others) have been
selling advertising to the car radio's LCD display!! I saw scrolling ads and
phone numbers for a local florist, and a couple other businesses. "Clear Channel made
it extremely difficult to find someone to complain to. They of course blew me
off. When Toyota called to ask how I liked my new car, I told them about it,
but of course they never called back as they had promised to do. I asked them
to tell me how to disable the transmitted text display, but they have not
responded." Ouch -- where you see a
cool use of technology that provides useful information, marketers see only
another tool to subject you to the "information" they find
important. Please contact Clear
Channel's radio PR person, Lisa Dollinger, at lisadollinger@clearchannel.com.
To complain to Toyota about their use of advertising radio displays, fill
out their contact form. Anyone who can help out
K.L. -- or who has intrusive advertising stories of their own -- is welcome
to e-mail us. We'll post these on our feedback page
so that others can learn from your sob stories. August 18, 2003 |
|
|
||||||||||||
|
You
are the Feel
free to reprint
- - - - - - - - -
|
|
|
|
|
