AOL and Yahoo have begun offering corporations "preferential delivery" of their marketing e-mails to users for prices ranging from .25-1 cent per message.
The scam is being run by Goodmail Systems, whose home page advertises "if it's certified, it's safe." (The illustration, from the Goodmail Web site, is an animated .gif of the company's "partners.")
The claim is that this is "opt-in" only and "not spam." But the incoming lists aren't audited. This is, in fact, a pay-off to let "spam that is not spam" through the company's spam filters.
Here's the real Clue to what is going on, from the New York Times piece found on the International Herald Tribune:
The two companies also stand to earn millions of dollars a year from the system if it is widely adopted.
Get it? They want to charge protection to spammers.
For outfits which have been part of the Internet for a decade and more, Yahoo and AOL don't know much about the Internet, do they?
I run a mailing list which may be subject to the charges, and I can tell you right away it's no sale. No operator of a free e-mail newsletter service is going to pay protection on what is legal opt-in traffic.
Who will? Marketers .
Goodmail's standards for accepting customers include a version of opt-in which allows opt-out when "an existing business relationship" exists (a standard that is ripe for abuse.) They want $200 to process applications from companies, and plan to doublt that charge in mid-year.
AOL and Yahoo can claim all they want this is "opt-in," but the basic contradiction remains. People don't opt-out because that's what spammers look for. Unless you can prove through an audit that something is "opt-in" then it's not, not really. There are no audits on this plan.
The problem remains U.S. law. U.S. law does not mandate opt-in. Its spam law is even called CAN-SPAM, because it requires opt-out and legalizes most spam e-mails. The only way to start solving the spam problem is to mandate opt-in lists for any e-mail sent to a list sized beyond a certain threshold. Then require audits of commercial lists to prove out-in status. (Goodmail would make out like a bandit in this system, by the way.)
Given the lack of effective law making spam a crime, it's no surprise that some would resort to protection rackets.
Dana Blankenhorn has been a business journalist for over 25 years and has covered the online world professionally since 1985. He founded the "Interactive Age Daily" for CMP Media, and has written for the Chicago Tribune, Advertising Age, and dozens of other publications over the years.
1. J. Barrett Wolf on February 5, 2006 11:56 AM writes...
As a small web hosting company, and one which has already been
subject to AOL's capricious policy of shutting off mail with little or no justification,
the prospect of 'paid' preferential service appears to be a sham that will allow junk
mailers who can afford the fees direct access to AOL (and Yahoo) clients while
interfering with personal contact and the free exchange of ideas.
I will not pay them to do the job they're charging customers for - delivering the mail.
AOL and Yahoo can suck my click.
J. Barett Wolf
Permalink to CommentBearPaws WebWorks
bearpaws.com
2. J. Barrett Wolf on February 5, 2006 11:56 AM writes...
As a small web hosting company, and one which has already been
subject to AOL's capricious policy of shutting off mail with little or no justification,
the prospect of 'paid' preferential service appears to be a sham that will allow junk
mailers who can afford the fees direct access to AOL (and Yahoo) clients while
interfering with personal contact and the free exchange of ideas.
I will not pay them to do the job they're charging customers for - delivering the mail.
AOL and Yahoo can suck my click.
J. Barett Wolf
Permalink to CommentBearPaws WebWorks
bearpaws.com
3. patrick on February 5, 2006 02:44 PM writes...
Spam is one of the biggest problems out there
AOL, Yahoo and others have done a lot of work to cut down on it. Including hitting the spammers where it hurts in their pockets.
When it comes down to it, the bayes filters employed are often effected by user feed back. Users sign up to a web store, don't unclick the "subscribe to newsletter" box (ugly small print matters)... recieve their e-mail and hit the alert as spam button rather than following the unsubscribe details.
This often results in other users finding mail they have subscribed to ending up in Junk Mailboxes.
As long as it is purely opt-in, without the opt-in by default. e.g. must find the obscure small print box to unpick. Then this could be ok.
Permalink to CommentAs far as charging companies for this, maybe the 0.25 - 1 c, isn't enough. Electronic advertising have little to no charges applied, which unrestricts even the most basic spammer. Make it harder to occur, make it less cost efficient, and you make it more amenable to proper companies.
4. Jane C. on February 5, 2006 10:36 PM writes...
This analysis is so stupid it hurts. Filters make mistakes. I get mail I don't want and I miss mail that I do. This system that AOL and Yahoo! are deploying will guarantee I won't miss my bank statement and that when I do get it I'll know it's not a phishing attempt because AOL will put a "Certified" icon next to it. As a consumer: I love it!
Permalink to Comment5. Dan C on February 5, 2006 11:28 PM writes...
Jane C., that's extremely naive thinking.
AOL can't stop phishing attempts now, neither can Goodmail. Some always manage to slip through the filters. Goodmail, AOL and Yahoo are selling a load of horseshit to the unsuspecting user communities they prey on.
If you're stupid enough to fall for a phishing scheme in the first place, let's hope you've made no contributions to the current gene pool.
Permalink to Comment6. Tom Mariner on February 17, 2006 09:01 AM writes...
As always, Dana is right on the solution of a cut-off count for distinguishing a bowling league announcement from someone promising to do amazing things to me.
Why on earth would anyone trust either Yahoo or AOL to give any results other than paid advertisements disguised as information? It would be like turning on network television and sitting through hours of SUV's romping through the snow and thinking we learned something. Wait a minute that IS what I see on network television.
Permalink to Comment