Slashdot Mirror
Is the Do Not Call System Working?
BrentRJones writes "I signed up for the Do Not Call registry the first day I heard of it, and I have to say that I have gotten very few telemarketers calling over the past couple of years. However, there now seems to be more calls that start, 'This is a survey...' or some other such excuse. I do not mind getting a few charity appeals or calls from those I have done business with in the past, but I do wish that I could avoid the political phone calls. I am curious what other Slashdot folks are experiencing, and I am also wondering if I say, 'Please remove from any list that you have.' when I am called, will this do any good?"
From the submission: I am curious what other Slashdot folks are experiencing, and I am also wondering if I say, 'Please remove from any list that you have.' when I am called, will this do any good?"
From the parent post: Also note that once you say one of those two phrases, they are required to give the three pieces of information they need for every call if they have not yet mentioned them, and then terminate the call immediately...Again, this is if they're following the rules.
That phrase right there sums it all up. I heard this exact same explanation from a student of mine at school who worked for a legit telemarketer. If you say the magic words, "Add me to your do not call list," they are required to follow the rules and do follow the rules. If they do not follow the rules, they will be fined big time by the FCC. However, the US is powerless against some calling agency operating out of Costa Rica, who doesn't give a rip about telecommunication laws. These people will war-dial phone numbers at unscrupulous hours of the evening, varying their tactics anywhere from constant nagging to actually demanding that you buy from them, even sometimes claiming that you've already established an "oral agreement" to make a purchase that you cannot back down from without penalty. (I've heard stories of telemarketers saying anything from, "We already have your name and address, and we will file suit if you break your oral agreement," to, "We have your banking account information, have this conversation recorded for proof of transaction, and we will proceed with making an electronic withdrawl from your checking account whether you like it or not.")
The national do-not-call list will help keep the legit soliciters at bay. But the bad guys...well...international law is a bitch.
One that should be exempted: I often get calls from policeman or fireman funds. They talk like they're going to do all these wonderful things for those groups. Then I ask them how much of my donation goes to the group. I get puzzled responses. I explain and say, "If I give you $100, how much of it goes to the charity you're supporting?" That always leaves the caller puzzled. Finally some explain that they promise to donate at least $100,000 to the fund. Then I ask if it's local or nationwide. They don't know. They don't even know where I am. I ask if $100,000 for a fund that's nationwide for injured police sounds like much, since that comes to $2,000 per state. They're still puzzled.
If they're still on, wasting all that time with me, I know they're in trouble because that call is driving their average call time way up and the boss doesn't like it. So, in the interest of educating them about charities and to make sure their boss educates them about call time, I keep going. I explain that good charities will give most of what they get to the work they're doing. I deal with some that give something between 75-80% of all they raise to the work they're doing. I explain that true charities, when doing fundraisers, tell people how much of each dollar goes to the charity and how much goes to other costs (like ads or admin). Then I point out that they say they're giving $100,000 to a nationwide fund, but what if they raise over half a million -- who gets the other $400,000? That's a lot of money for someone to make when they imply it's all going to charity.
By then they've either hung up or they're so amazed by what I've said that you can already hear the tone in their voice indicating they just don't believe in their job anymore.
Political speech is vital free speech, and always legal.
Well, it's legal in this case, but it has nothing to do with our constitutional notion of free speech or the intellectual foundations of liberal democracy. Free speech does not establish an obligation for anyone to listen. IMNSHO, the proper intellectual and (arguably) constitutional framework here should be the right of privacy. All calls should be banned (for anyone registering). Different categories of registration would satisfy my objections, too, but might be too complicated and create even more loopholes.