NONE: ONLINE-ADS>> SPAM Defined
ONLINE-ADS>> SPAM Defined
Keith Pieper (merle_at_specktrum.com)
Wed, 10 Sep 1997 16:04:57 +0000
Let me take a stab at this...
I've researched 'spam' quite thoroughly and believe a significant
portion of our problem is in its definition. "Spam" is a very
misunderstood term and is this industry"s result of vague
generalizations. Several people use any combination of the terms:
-Unsolicited - not explicitly requested
-Commercial - trying to sell something or create an exchange
-Targeted - trying to better meet the needs and interests of the
recipient
-Bulk - en mass, large quantities
-Junk - "of little or no value"
-Spam - slang for "junk email"
Consider these premises:
1. Defining Targeting:
Targeting at its essence is an attempt to personalize and customize the
message to the individual as much as possible - from personal sales
people (highly targeted message) to broadcast television (not highly
targeted). Between these two extremes resides a vague area.
2. Latent Needs: People have needs to be met before they know the need
exists. Good businesses know their markets better than the market knows
itself - and meets those latent needs.
3. 80/20 Rule: As in business, 80% of your sales come from 20% of your
customers. Consider that 80% of junk email is received by 20% of all
internet users. Why? Most people who are active on the internet in
online discussion lists and newsgroups have a significant problem with
junk email. However, those active internet users represent a small
percentage of the internet population, and as a small percentage that
are very active and entrenched in this daily, they open themselves up to
harvesters and spammers.
I hypothesize there are 3 classifications of 'email for commercial
purposes': call this the Specktrum Email Marketing Model, if you will.
Within each class resides sub-classes of 'solicited/requested' and
'unsolicited/not-requested'.
Class 1: Mass Commercial Email
Terms to describe this type of practice include 'broadcast', 'bulk',
'mass', "junk", "one to all". An example would be traditional spammers
who harvest mass quantities of addresses and mail one, non-custom
message to all on the list - just as if each of those people were the
same person. This practice typically focuses on numbers or ́quantities"
of recipients rather than ́quality" or value of the recipient.
Traditional spammers would be sub-classified as "unsolicited mass
commercial emailers". Because this practice is so intrusive, an
opt-in/opt-out policy is preferred, although rarely used.
Class 2: Segmented Commercial Email
Terms to describe this practice include "narrowcast", "niche",
"affinity", "one to many". This gray area is where we find most of
today"s responsible commercial emailers. This type of marketing
attempts to aggregate groups of individuals with similar interests -
such as people that like to fish, or have an interest in financial
stuff. The more targeting that is exercised, the less intrusive the
message becomes and the more interested a user is assumed to be. Just
like traditional direct mail, there are some downfalls to this type of
targeting, which is where much of the junk email confusion arises. This
type of targeting makes assumptions about an individual's interests. For
example, just because I was at a fishing web site and requested
information doesn"t necessarily imply that I am interested in fishing. I
could be doing it for a friend, or merely doing some research, or
searching for a gift. The problem arises when marketers assume too much
about a person"s interests. Then this person becomes annoyed and feels
as though the message is intrusive. So unlike Class 1 targeting which
involves primarily subjectivity, and unlike Class 3 targeting which
involves primarily objectivity, Class 2 targeting must exercise
subjective/objectivity. In other words, because technology can"t
factually tell us about an individual, we as marketers need to make a
judgment call. And sometimes that can be a wrong call (that"s when you
get called a spammer), which is why Class 2 targeting must allow for
opt-in/opt-out lists, in case your judgment call is wrong users can let
you know.
Class 3: Individualized Commercial Email
Terms that describe this are "personalized", "singlecast", "customized",
"individualized", "one-to-one". An analogy would be a 'personal sales
person". This type of targeting is so personalized and customized to my
needs that it meets those "latent needs" without me asking for it. This
type of targeting knows me as a unique individual, a friend (that sales
person or person I don"t know that knows me). For instance, some people
have successfully attempted personalized, targeted email where one
meticulously, manually searches the net for the exact individuals one
wants to target. This is close to the type of targeting I am talking
about. But to truly make the internet an effective medium that targets
messages this well, technology has a way to go. A type of targeting
where opt-in/opt-out/solicited/unsolicited are irrelevant - because
through sophisticated techniques and models, it would be
cost-inefficient to not customize and meet the unique personal needs of
the individual. And when the norm is to customize and target rather than
send en-mass in bulk, the individual has no need to opt-in or opt-out
because businesses are exercising discipline and respect to that
individual"s needs. This is where the "mass marketing" mindset requires
changing to the opposite norm. Marketers need to think "quality" instead
of "quantity" which, in a one-to-one world, will take discipline.
Now reflecting back on our controversy at hand...
> Should what Marketwave/Focalink did be perceived as spam?
I would consider it targeted email. However, I suspect there are some
ethical issues here, the start of many to come on the internet
> We have found that by saying upfront "You are getting this message
>because you joined XXXX list"
> minimizes any negative impression.
At this point in time, that probably works fine. But in an ideal
situation where you truly know your audience (other than they are
MarketMatch subscribers), this would be irrelevant - theoretically you
know thier needs and it should be appreciated.
> No matter what you do, though, you will always have a few people who
>don't like it.
I agree. You can't please everyone, and that's a risk you must be wiling
to take.
> If several hundred people complain, then you apologize and reexamine what
>you have done.
If this happens, you have made a grave judgement error, and should
reconsider your profession. ;)
Keith Pieper
Chief Idea Officer
Specktrum Idea Technologies
http://www.specktrum.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This week's Online Advertising Discussion List sponsors:
Get information on over 1700 interactive advertising opportunities,
search by content categories and preview sites using our new online
companion! ** http://www.srds.com/iashp.htm **
-------
Money Minded debuts Oct. 1 on http://homearts.com, the #1 Lifestyle
Site for Women. It's straight talk on personal finance and investing.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Online Advertising Discussion List To Unsubscribe send UNSUBSCRIBE
http://www.o-a.com/ to online-ads-request_at_o-a.com
