IT SEEMS like a perfect idea. Put your name on a list and telemarketers can't call your home anymore. However, in an already struggling economy, the Federal Trade Commission's "Do-Not-Call List" jeopardizes the jobs of thousands and endangers a successful means of advertising for businesses. An undeniable truth: Sitting at a dinner table and receiving a call from a telemarketer is annoying. Yet, as part of a capitalist, commercial society, we should tolerate a minor nuisance here and there for the sake of the economy.
Recently, the FTC signed up 50 million phone numbers for the list which excludes households from telemarketing calls. The do-not-call list is supposed to take effect on Oct. 1. Yet, two federal judges have ruled the bill unconstitutional, despite President Bush's and Congress' almost unanimous support. The list is still on hold as the FTC tries to appeal the federal courts and the telemarketing agencies keep filing suits. The FTC still pledges to enforce the list on Oct.1 and some telemarketers will voluntarily adhere.
In order to understand the courts' and telemarketing agencies' concerns, we must first look at the sheer size of the industry. According to the Direct Marketing Association, the teleservices industry generated six percent of the U.S. GDP in 2001 and accounted for 27.3 percent of all consumer direct marketing sales. In a fragile economy, taking away this business from companies will only increase unemployment and recessionary momentum. According to Dial America Marketing, small businesses will suffer the most due to increased fines for telemarketing and the costs of keeping compliance with the list.
Those who work for telemarketing agencies are typically young adults without a college education looking for their first job opportunity. Telemarketing is an excellent chance for people to gain skills in customer service and earn advancement to management positions without a college degree. Without this industry, our peers will face difficulty in finding employment alternatives, and therefore, more unemployment will plague the economy.
Proponents of the do-not-call list cite privacy in the household as their primary concern. Yet, why is a telephone call more annoying than a pop-up ad on the Internet, junk e-mails, television commercials, solicited mail, inserts in newspapers and magazines or door-to-door marketing? Is this the first step in censuring all modes of advertising? In order to live in this prosperous capitalist society, advertising is a necessity, and it's our duty as citizens to accept this notion. The telephone is no more sacred than your television or e-mail account. By reducing the telemarketing industry, other advertising modes will just become more prevalent. Should we just rid ourselves of all advertising? Move to Cuba, I hear they have nice beaches.
Further, it is easy to explain Congress' overwhelming approval of the do-not-call list since FTC excludes political telemarketing from their proposed plan. Both charities and political organizations will still be allowed to solicit households on the list. Although both support beneficial causes, constitutionality comes into play when the FTC is picking and choosing who can use the telephone to advertise. If you are at the dinner table and receive a call, is it any less annoying when a recording comes on asking you to vote for a political candidate in the upcoming election?
The FTC's proposal deserves approval in its attempt to curb unwanted telemarketing practices. For instance, in the do-not-call bill, abandoned calls (when a telemarketer does not get on the line within two seconds of calling a customer) and unauthorized charges on customer accounts are outlawed. Both of these practices are unfair to consumers and should not be allowed in the industry. Yet, FTC's push for fairness in telemarketing practices is linked to their big ticket item -- the do-not-call list, which is not only unconstitutional, but also a threat to the economy.
In order to help the economy and do our part as citizens of a capitalist society, we should all oppose the do-not-call list by not signing up. Instead of diverting advertising to other annoying means, we should save the jobs of thousands of our peers and hold on to one of the largest advertising industries in America.
(Michael Behr is a Cavalier Daily viewpoint writer.)
Read More
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | 2 days agoThe 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 | 3 days agoAfter 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 | January 9, 2025Every student at the University, regardless of their primary field of study, can professionally and academically benefit from engaging with the English department.
