LIVING off Grounds can pose many problems for students. It also can offer a real world living situation similar to that we will all face once we graduate. One such scenario inevitably rears its ugly head at least once in every household, at the least convenient time.
Telemarketers always seem to have a knack for calling just as the family sits down to dinner, or half an hour before your alarm is supposed to go off in the morning. Their calls generally are unwelcome in the first place, but the bad timing makes us loathe the men and women working as telephone solicitors. The Federal Trade Commission proposed a solution to this problem last week, and homeowners everywhere should encourage it as an act of protecting their right to privacy, despite the telemarketers' free speech arguments.
There is much criticism from industries that the commission's proposal to create a national "do-not-call" registry is an attempt to limit the telemarketing industry's right to free speech. In reality, the proposal aims to protect another substantial American right, the right to privacy.
This is not an issue of freedom of speech. Soliciting sales in no way advances the meaningful communication of ideas. More often than not, it creates aggravation and disrupts households. For those who do value market ploys offered to them at the convenient dinner hour, the calls remain unbarred.
At a Jan. 22 press conference, Howard Beales, director of one of the branches of the FTC said, "Privacy is an important substantial government interest ... Restrictions to enhance privacy and protect peoples' privacy can certainly withstand a constitutional challenge" ("FTC Defends Plan for 'Do Not Call' List," Jan. 22, washtech.com).
If the proposal is put into effect, consumers will be given an option to call a given registry and have their names removed from many telemarketing lists, and the telemarketers could face fines of up to $11,000 if they call a name on that list. The FTC also proposed that telemarketers should be barred from blocking identifying information from caller-ID equipment so that consumers would know who was calling. They also would be prohibited from exchanging, selling or buying any billing information about customers ("FTC Proposes New Rules To Restrict Telemarketers," washtech.com).
The proposal should be implemented as soon as possible to relieve homeowners' burden of unsolicited calls. However, there still are several rounds of criticism that the plan must go through before a possible implementation. The proposal must be open for public commentary before final rules are issued, late this year or early next year. Even then, it could take even more time to get the "do-not-call" list set up and implemented nationally. This process should be expedited, and this could be done through a show of public support.
All homeowners should be in support of this FTC proposal and should openly encourage its implementation. However, there could be some negative effects if the list is put in place.
Although the proposal was made with good intentions, it could jeopardize more than 6 million jobs and $668 billion in sales in the United States. For this reason, the FTC must weigh carefully the consequences of its decisions. The regulations also could push companies offshore in order to avoid the burdensome federal rules. Charities and political campaigns would be exempt from the rules prohibiting unsolicited calls. Many charitable organizations look to outside professionals to do their fundraising. These companies would be barred by the FTC's proposal and the burden thereby would fall solely on charities.
Regretfully, the FTC will not be able to stop all unsolicited calls to households, especially those coming from charities and political organizations. Although the amount of unwelcome calls would be minimized, some aggravations would persist.
Notwithstanding the disadvantages of the proposal, their implementation would be beneficial to the majority of U.S. citizens. People should have a choice to remain undisturbed in the privacy of their own home.
(Alex Roosenburg's column appears Mondays in The Cavalier Daily. She can be reached at aroosenburg@cavalierdaily.com.)
Read More
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | YesterdayThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | YesterdayAfter all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
YOUNIS: Why every U.Va. student should say yes to English
By Ayat Younis | 6 days agoEvery student at the University, regardless of their primary field of study, can professionally and academically benefit from engaging with the English department.
