Do Not Call Registry Gets Glowing Reviews

coondoggie writes to tell us that in a recent report to Congress by the FTC, the National Do Not Call Registry got glowing reviews. They seem to be well established now with $21 million in fees in the bank, 22 successful court cases, and an almost 70% approval rating. "In 2007, a total of 6,242 entities paid fees totaling $21,602,003 for access to the National Registry. According to the FTC, telemarketers and sellers can access registered telephone numbers and pay the appropriate fee for that access, if any, through an Internet website dedicated to that purpose. The only information about consumers that companies receive from the National Registry is the registered telephone number. Since the Registry's inception, a total of 18,197 unique entities have paid fees for access to the National Registry. The total amount of fees paid by all entities since the inception of the National Registry through the end of 2007 is $80,629,778, the report stated."

Comments

Two problems still

[BadAnalogyGuy]

1) Still opt-out style. Unless you add yourself to the list, you are fair game for callers

2) Still ineffective against pollsters, politicians, and fundraisers

It's better than nothing, but there are certainly ways to make it better.

Re:Two problems still

[PlatyPaul]

Actually, I'm surprised that there hasn't been mention of anyone opt-bombing the system, as your number is only confirmed when registering by phone - they simply require an email confirmation if you do it online.

All you'd need to do is direct all incoming emails @yourdomainnamegoeshere.com to one account, set up an auto-opt system and an auto-respond system, run through all numbers in your area code.

Not the end state

[smittyoneeach]

If things move to the point where it is socially unacceptable to bother people at home, then this is a good transitional state.
No one bothers people on cell phones. Probably due to pricing. Interesting, how the flat rate for the home line makes spamming people somehow acceptable.

Re:Not the end state

[Anonymous Codger]

Illegal or not, over the past year I've gotten a huge number of telemarketing calls on my cell. Since putting it on the do-not-call list those calls have stopped.

Re:Not the end state

[Lord Apathy]

I've had my current cell for a number of years now. I really can't figure out how I did it but some how I rigged my phone not to ring if your not in my phonebook. I have no clue how I did it but it works. It is the main feature on my phone, nokia 6820, that is why I won't part with it.

One of the monkeys down the phone store tried to talk me into a new palm beast with a 300 price tag. I told him why I kept the old one and he called bullshit until I showed him. He still insists that it is impossible.

My saying is if my phone doesn't know you I don't want to talk to you.

Just a 70% approval rating?

[panaceaa]

Who are the 30% of people who don't approve of the Do Not Call list? The telemarketing industry is not that big. I don't think 30% of people are adamant enough to say that all telemarketing should be illegal, therefore they disapprove Do Not Call list: These people would probably be happy that there's something helping out. One statistic in the article showed that only 18% of respondents who placed themselves on the Do Not Call list now receive zero telemarketing calls, so maybe people don't feel the list is effective enough. But only 9% of respondents claimed no reduction in calls; 91% said the Do Not Call list reduced telemarketing calls. Yet these people still don't approve? I don't get it.

Sorry but the DNC list is bullshit

[the_macman]

My gf worked for a telemarketer for 1 week before she quit out of frustration. They used a computer system that had thousands of scripted responses for any reason imaginable a person would use to reject an offer. The phone numbers were automatically dialed by the computer and when a number popped up that was on the DNC list you got a warning message on your screen. Of course everyone was told to ignore the message and make the call anyways. We later reported them to the police.

Tele marketers can choose to ignore the DNC list.

Re:Don't get me wrong...

[sobachatina]

Wait... Are you trying to say that 911 is a vehicle of free speech? If the 911 operator didn't answer it would be a violation of my rights? That having a 911 operator proves that I have a right to an audience?

I don't get it. Was that a joke somehow?

Re:Still too many loopholes

[gnick]

You missed a loophole - My personal bane. I get calls regularly with a recorded message asking me if I'd like to save money on my credit card bills - Caller ID blocked & no identification on the line. The only options are to press '1' to indicate interest or hang up. I've pressed '1' twice. The first time, I asked repeatedly who I was talking to. At first, he told me that "I work for Mastercard and Visa". I pressed on because that's obviously BS. He eventually told me that he "worked for 250 different banks". When I asked who actually signed his checks, he hung up on me. The second time I clicked through, I pretended to have significant credit card debt that I wanted to finance but acted skeptical because of the Caller ID block and eventually got to a supervisor. After the "Visa and Mastercard" and "250 different banks" responses, he told me that he worked for American General Finance.

Here's the rub, though. If they'd have called me, it would obviously be illegal. And whoever did call me was violating the Do Not Call rules. But by the time I got through to American General Finance, I had (by pressing '1') expressed an interest in doing business with them and they were kind enough to hang up on me when I made it clear that that was not the case. They won't tell me who they're contracting with making the illegal calls and frankly, I don't know how to find out.

Very frustrating.