Slashdot Mirror


Republicans Want To Leave You Voicemail -- Without Ever Ringing Your Cellphone (recode.net)

bricko quotes a report from Recode: The GOP's leading campaign and fundraising arm, the Republican National Committee, has quietly thrown its support behind a proposal at the Federal Communications Commission that would pave the way for marketers to auto-dial consumers' cellphones and leave them prerecorded voicemail messages -- all without ever causing their devices to ring. Under current federal law, telemarketers and others, like political groups, aren't allowed to launch robocall campaigns targeting cellphones unless they first obtain a consumer's written consent. But businesses stress that it's a different story when it comes to "ringless voicemail" -- because it technically doesn't qualify as a phone call in the first place. In their eyes, that means they shouldn't need a customer or voter's permission if they want to auto-dial mobile voicemail inboxes in bulk pre-made messages about a political candidate, product or cause. And they want the FCC to rule, once and for all, that they're in the clear. Their argument, however, has drawn immense opposition from consumer advocates.

43 of 443 comments (clear)

  1. Counter-argument by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 5, Informative

    People want to leave politicians and marketers a big turd on their front door - without ever ringing their doorbell.

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
    1. Re:Counter-argument by DivineKnight · · Score: 5, Funny

      In this case, I believe the 3 AM Vuvuzela Orchestra in D-minor outside their bedroom window is more appropriate.

    2. Re:Counter-argument by mjwx · · Score: 4, Interesting

      In this case, I believe the 3 AM Vuvuzela Orchestra in D-minor outside their bedroom window is more appropriate.

      Surely A-major would be better. Politicians being older have poorer hearing in the higher frequencies.

      Personally I'd prefer the 1812 Overture be played outside their homes... preferably with a full cannon fusillade of live ammo.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    3. Re:Counter-argument by troon · · Score: 2

      The most common vuvuzuelas â" those heard at the World Cup, for example â" sound a Bb. That'd work in D-minor but not A-major.

      --
      Ydco co ,df C erb-y go. a Ekrpat t.fxrapev
  2. New Revenue Stream! by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...and AT&T can charge $20/month to automatically remove it!

    1. Re:New Revenue Stream! by Salgak1 · · Score: 2

      Actually, to go all Stephen Colbert. . . . they're being cock-holsters. . . (evil grin)

    2. Re: New Revenue Stream! by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 2

      Have you tried sharpening the top first? If not, don't. Just push harder next time.

      Is that you, Vlad?

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  3. I'm starting a web site by taustin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    to document every politician who does this, how often, and about what. It will offer no commentary on whether it is good or bad, whether the politician should be thrown out of office or given a medal. Just that they did it, how often, and about what.

    Who is willing to help me post bail when I'm arrested for it?

    1. Re: I'm starting a web site by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Try http://800notes.com/
      They have been collecting data for over six years.

    2. Re: I'm starting a web site by taustin · · Score: 2

      And they'll only censor the entries about politicians they agree with. You know, like they do now.

  4. Let them by Jrono · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Let them.

    The backlash to ghost Republican voicemail spam will be so severe Reagan, Nixon, and Lincoln will all posthumously switch to the Democratic Party.

    1. Re:Let them by kenwd0elq · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Reagan at least was a Democrat for quite a while. Back in the early 1970's, he said that he didn't leave the Democrat party; the Democrat party left him. And if you read the party platforms and public statements of most Dems in the 1950s through the mid-70's, they sound VERY Republican.

      Today's Democrats used to be called "Communists", and today's Republicans used to be solidly Democrat. Last century's Republicans are now Libertarians, or Anarchists.

    2. Re:Let them by Pfhorrest · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Today's Democrats used to be called "Communists"

      Completely the opposite. Eisenhower was further to the left of any politician in recent memory. Reagan and Nixon were further to the left than most Democrats today. The whole spectrum has moved to the right in absolute terms -- but both left and right have moved further from their common center, so from a parochial point of view ignorant of history and the wider world, it looks like the left has moved left, relative to the current center, which is far right of where it used to be.

      See the many sourced answers here for more details:
      https://www.quora.com/The-Left...

      --
      -Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
      "I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
    3. Re:Let them by Opportunist · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Please. From over here in Europe, what your political system looks like is one religious nutjob party that hates everything non-white and one non-religious nutjob party that hates everything white.

      I can't really see anything resembling a political platform in either of them. Mostly because they have pretty much identical stances on everything but religion and whether or not white males are the devil.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    4. Re:Let them by DigiShaman · · Score: 2

      If we're talking about the political spectrum.There's two axis. From left to right, is based on economics. Top to bottom is either authoritarian or libertarian. Based on that, The Democrats to more center-left on economics, but way WAY up the top on being authoritarian (zero question about that!). The Republicans however are about halfway on the right side (not center) of economics, but lean center-authoritarian. But FWIW, the Tea Part faction is far-right economic and lean heavily libertarian. So, it's still an identity struggle for the Republican party at the moment.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    5. Re:Let them by dunkelfalke · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How can you call a party that is "hard on crime" and has created a "department of homeland security", that clearly wants to decide what people do in private anything less than hard-authoritarian? Fanboy much?

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    6. Re:Let them by Imrik · · Score: 2

      It's still harassment, but if you blame the wrong people for the harassment and as a result vote for the people they really want you to vote for, the campaign is a success.

  5. HLR codes on any Standard GSM network by psergiu · · Score: 4, Informative

    *#61# (call) - Shows if Voice Mail (voice forwarding) is enabled and your Voice Mail number.
    #004# (call) - Disable all Voice Mail forwards.

    If your network is non-standard (or your network operator is a prick) those don't work, call customer support and ask them to disable Voice Mail completely and remove your Voice Mail mailbox from the HLR.

    VoiceMail is useless anyways. If someone really needs to get hold of you, they will call again.

    --
    1% APY, No fees, Online Bank https://captl1.co/2uIErYq Don't let your $$$ sit in a no-interest acct.
    1. Re:HLR codes on any Standard GSM network by Pfhorrest · · Score: 4, Interesting

      VoiceMail is useless anyways. If someone really needs to get hold of you, they will call again.

      While probably true, it's also true that if someone really needs to get hold of you, they will leave a voicemail. This makes ignoring all calls and only checking voicemail a good way to screen out pointless time-wasting calls. If it's important there will be a voicemail, if there's no voicemail it obviously wasn't that important (or they messages you another way instead).

      --
      -Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
      "I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
    2. Re:HLR codes on any Standard GSM network by Pfhorrest · · Score: 3, Interesting

      And I find it degrading to be expected to drop everything else I'm juggling and give my undivided attention to a task I don't yet know warrants that treatment. So please go ahead and send a text or email, or leave a short voicemail, saying what it is you want to talk about -- you don't have to talk at length to the machine, just give me an informative subject line basically -- and I will try to find the time to give you that undivided attention at the appropriate level priority. But I can't afford to let just everyone force their conversation to the top of my never-empty queue of things I'm always having to spend my time on. It's my precious limited time and I'll decide how much to spend on what and when... and mystery conversations about I-know-not-what-yet can stay perpetually at the bottom of that list.

      --
      -Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
      "I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
  6. New Record by Fire_Wraith · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I have to hand it to the Republicans - I thought they couldn't come up with any measures that would be any lower or more despised than they already have. I clearly underestimated them, because who would have thought they'd side with telemarketers, of all people?

    1. Re: New Record by gweilo8888 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yep. It's nice when the game is carefully rigged and gerrymandered in your favor so you can win even when you're the unpopular party, isn't it?

      /sarcasm, in case it isn't obvious

    2. Re:New Record by Fire_Wraith · · Score: 3, Informative

      I suppose it wouldn't do any good to point out that I said measures, now? If the Democrats tried pulling something like this - and I mean changing the FCC rules to allow someone to pull this sort of shit - I'd be pissed off at them too.

      And if a Democratic candidate did it regardless of the rules? I'd expect them to get slapped and fined for it.

      But let's be brutally honest, the two parties are NOT equally bad right now. That's not to give the Dems a pass, it's just that the Republicans have gone totally unhinged. Go look at what their agenda is, and tell me that they give two sh*ts about anyone but the tiny fraction of billionaire donors. They're not even pretending anymore. Go tell me that Ajit Pai really does mean to help us all by sticking a shiv in Net Neutrality and letting Comcast/Verizon/etc free to do whatever they want. Go tell me that the GOP majority really is going to act as a check on Trump's attempt at doing a speedrun of the Nixon presidency.

      And I think it sucks, because we need two sane, reasonable, yet generally opposing parties to make our current system of government work. That's not the case though, at present, and I say that as someone who was once Republican.

  7. Re:We're going to get this sooner or later by quantaman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    We haven't reached critical mass yet, but once enough people only use cell phones for communication the floodgates will be opened.

    Cellphones were on par with landlines in 2014. I'm sure they're a healthy majority now.

    Either way, I can think of few things more obnoxious than prerecorded voicemails. It's bad enough I don't even know why marketers would want to do so in the first place, I'm not sure what marketing course teaches to you associate your client with feelings of incandescent rage.

    --
    I stole this Sig
  8. They do this in Australia by MrKaos · · Score: 4, Informative

    And they send you SMS messages. The best way to describe it is *FUCKING ANNOYING*. You listen to you messages and then you hear some shit "Did you know that such and such is a dick and therefore has no business in politics: Vote Asshole - We're full of shit".

    I did the best I could to familiarize myself with the VM controls so I could delete those messages immediately without listening to them. The worst this is you can't leave a message for them telling them to fuck off.

    Yeah, it's *that* annoying.

    --
    My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    1. Re:They do this in Australia by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Is it also commercial advertising, or just political ads?

      There's a difference nowadays?

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    2. Re:They do this in Australia by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      In the UK you can get a premium rate number that redirects to your phone. You can then give that to everyone except your trusted friends, so that at least if they do spam you they have to pay you for the privilege.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  9. What the Hell, I got karma to burn by rsilvergun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    so I'm gonna say this: Why is it whenever something awful comes up it's always the Republicans front and center. Yeah, yeah, there's some blue dog Dems that'll vote for it, but none of them woulda had the gall (and the balls) to actually put a bill on the floor.

    What I'm saying is this: both sides aren't the same. One is objectively worse. And every year we fail to call them on it they get a little bit worse as they realize they can get away with everything while people shout: "But both sides are bad!".

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:What the Hell, I got karma to burn by CaseCrash · · Score: 4, Interesting

      yeah, I'm all over the conservative/liberal spectrum depending on the issue, but I am getting tired of the GOP's "no matter what happens, party first, everything our guys do is great and we all support it" and the weird adherence they have to lower taxes will lead to more jobs and then higher tax revenues and you don't really need privacy and by that we mean everything you do should be tracked and monetized.

      --
      No, that link you posted to a web comic we've all seen a hundred times is not "obligatory."
  10. Look at the flip side by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This would allow anyone to flood Congresscritter's voicemails silently as well; all you need is to get their number and be on the same provider. No hangups, just long missives they would have to go through until they block your number. They would no doubt spoof, use various numbers, or use unavailable as their number Seriously though, how is this a free speech first amendment issue? I have no obligation to provide them with a platform for their speech, and my phone is private property where the first doesn't apply. What is needed is an app that can read VM and auto delete robo calls. Fight stupidity with technology, because fixing stupid is a no win battle.

    --
    I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
  11. No, what they really want by TheOuterLinux · · Score: 2

    is to be able to have your phone answer its own calls. If voice mail can be reached without dialing a phone, I can assure you their Muslim Soviet witch hunt (which is just an excuse) team is working on a way to also answer calls for you too via a similar protocol. It can already be done, but I mean in a legal and easier way. To give you an example, they only made it legal for ISP's to sell your web data so that they can buy it off them rather than go through a court system.

  12. Re:How? by Jonathan+C.+Patschke · · Score: 4, Informative

    The typical way companies do this is to issue two call simultaneously, and disconnect whichever call connects to the switch first (under a second). The telco will roue the remaining call to voicemail, and this usually happens before the call notification worms its way through the cellular network to the handset.

    The student loan scammers are already doing this. One company was calling-not-calling my phone five times an hour? Not a distraction? It certainly is! My phone still goes vrrt-vrrt, and I still look up from what I'm doing.

    It's an utter waste of the recipient's time and fails the "What if some large number of people did this?" test.

    --
    Pining for the days when The Glorious MEEPT!!! graced SlapDash with his wisdom.
  13. Re:We're going to get this sooner or later by meerling · · Score: 2

    There's a reason I'm on the do not call list, to get rid of that kind of B.S. in the first place.
    As to landlines, I only know 4 people that have one, everyone else just has cellphones.

  14. Politicians are minimally responsive by Beeftopia · · Score: 2

    Politicians are minimally responsive to the general concerns of the population. Seems counterintuitive. But they're able to do this because of:
    1) Gerrymandered districts.
    2) Heavy special interest dollars.

    I mean, even when times are rough, incumbency rates are very high.

    What we also need are term limits. Yes, they have costs and benefits. But they approved term limits for the president, one of 537 federal politicians (100 senators + 435 representatives + president + vice president). The reason was to prevent an imperial presidency. We should implement the same thing for the other 535 federal politicians for the same reason - to prevent an imperial Congress.

    I don't see how politicians would ever be persuaded to limit their power however. The 535 limiting the power of the one (president) - certainly. The 535 limiting their own power - I don't see how it could be done voluntarily.

    Once you give politicians more power, it is extraordinarily difficult to take it away.

    We need politicians that are less development officers (fundraisers) and more focused on policy and governing.

    1. Re:Politicians are minimally responsive by Beeftopia · · Score: 2

      Term limits don't solve the problem though. If anything, they empower the lobbyists, because lobbyists don't get term-limited, and they wind up knowing the issues far better than your 2-3 term congresscritter.

      I strongly suspect most lobbyists know the the details of their pet issues better than any congresscritter. Lobbyists are professional persuaders. If they have to persuade someone new every few years, they would have a more difficult job, which is good.

      What you're missing is that long term incumbency isn't the problem itself, it's WHY there's so many long term incumbents. Someone who gets reelected 10 times because they do a great job representing the wishes of their constituents, are responsive to the needs of actual citizens and not moneyed special interests? Sure, we could use more of them - a lot more of them.

      Same could be said of the president. But there is blowback from having a president serving 30 or 40 years. He and the government are likely to warp the system so he can become El Presidente for life. This is one of the reasons we have gerrymandering in the first place. It's the Congressional level of declaring oneself El Presidente For Life.

      And if you just term limit them, then I have some bad news, because there's a long line of asshats waiting to take the place of the gerrymander/money protected incumbent that will vote exactly the same way that the lobbyists/moneyed interests want them to.

      The lobbyists will have to persuade the next politician. That's what lobbyists do. The politicians are the decision makers. If the lobbyist has to convince multiple people every few years, his case will have to be stronger.

      Also, if the service in political office was a limited tour of duty, it seems to me to be more likely that the politician could focus on the job details, not primarily on maintaining the career.

  15. Re:Is there even one Republican by Opportunist · · Score: 2

    If the price is right, they'll even swallow. Like any whore.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  16. Re:Kill them by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

    But I do have one quick question: Is it illegal futt-buck a duly elected representative or appointed official until their eyeballs bleed?

    Depends mostly on the size of your campaign contribution.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  17. What confuses me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What I don't get is... why the fuck they think somehow I'd listen to such a voicemail.

    "Huh. I have a voicemail... that's odd, I don't have any missed calls..."

    "You have THREE new messages. First message. Hi, this is Ted Cruz, and I'm runni BEEEEP... message deleted. Next message." (moody, scary, minor-key music) "The President is taking Amer BEEEP... message deleted. Next message." (Soaring, upbeat music begi) "BEEEEP. message deleted. You have no more messages."

    Politicians... you're wasting your fucking time.

    1. Re:What confuses me... by Maritz · · Score: 4, Informative

      Politicians... you're wasting your fucking time.

      They're betting that enough bored idiots will listen to enough of them to make it worth while, and they're probably right.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    2. Re:What confuses me... by JohnFen · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Politicians... you're wasting your fucking time.

      No, they're wasting your time.

  18. Re: And I'm sure dems are 10000% against the rule. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 2

    I'm very happy with the outcome of the election too. I predicted that it would result in the Republicans self-destructing. Just look at how far they've gone so quickly. Trump has had a worse first 100 days than even the 9th president - and that guy died after a month. This fiasco will force both parties to change.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  19. Aftermath of the 1964 Civil Rights Act by sjbe · · Score: 4, Informative

    Reagan at least was a Democrat for quite a while. Back in the early 1970's, he said that he didn't leave the Democrat party; the Democrat party left him.

    Yes Reagan claimed that exact quote but it was bullshit then as it is now. Basically his brand of politics was more conservative than the bulk of the democrats. Reagan's politics drifted right long before he ever switched parties. His claim is exactly backwards for the most part.

    And if you read the party platforms and public statements of most Dems in the 1950s through the mid-70's, they sound VERY Republican.

    That's because many of them were what we think of republicans to be today. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 caused a huge number of democrats (particularly in the south) to switch party affiliations over the next decade. The south used to vote solidly democrat up until 1964. It was Nixon in 1968 that appealed to scared white voters in the south and started the transition to the solidly republican south we see today.

    Today's Democrats used to be called "Communists", and today's Republicans used to be solidly Democrat.

    SOME of today's republicans used to be democrats. Most democrats were politically to the left of those individuals long before they switched parties, largely over what is clearly racial bias after 1964.

  20. Re:Tired meme by Opportunist · · Score: 2

    Greece is as similar to Germany as Hawaii is to Texas.

    They're both broke but Texas is staying afloat by leeching Hawaii dry while pretending to "save" them?

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.