Still Looks Like Spam To Me

from the flooded-inbox dept

Mon, Jul 17th 2006 8:55am — Carlo Longino

A major marketing company has begun offering clients a way to supposedly make their email marketing messages more effective by tracking test viewers' eye movements to determine what parts of a message they spend the most time looking at. Newspaper publishers have used similar studies for some time, but this is apparently the first time it's been used for ~~spam~~ email marketing. The technology, which is being used by such big brands as IBM and Cisco, comes amid an uptick in interest among legitimate marketers in using email. It's always been cheap, fast and easily trackable, but the increase in spam -- which hasn't exactly abated -- caused many marketers to turn away from it. But legit advertisers are faced with many of the same problems as spammers: trying to raise low clickthrough rates, as well as trying to make sure their messages don't get caught in spam filters. That's probably the biggest issue for marketers: distinguishing their messages from all the spam recipients get. Despite what the ad agency is selling them, it's doubtful that this type of user study can really help them there. The efficacy of legitimate email marketing has undoubtedly been dented by spam, and its problems have less to do with the design of individual messages than with the way many companies implement their email marketing campaigns, bombarding users with too many messages, or ones that are simply irrelevant.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

42 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

jake buck, 17 Jul 2006 @ 9:06am

blarg
No more spam!

first
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
EasyJim, 17 Jul 2006 @ 9:12am

Isn't there a difference
...between emails for boner pills, and emails for Brand XYZ's new product? I dunno, perhaps the opt-in factor...? I would really appreciate less boner pill emails, but I don't mind email from companies I like, as long as they're pertinent and respectful.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jason, 17 Jul 2006 @ 9:13am

New Tactic for Fighting?
I've been wondering lately... we are spending who-knows-how-many-dollars on fighting spam. By the looks of things, its not entirely successful. (or at all, for that matter).

What I've been wondering is if we were to pool anti-spam resources and create a public awareness campaign. You know, teaching people to NEVER buy anything from an unsolicited email. NEVER click on a link in an unsolicited email. That sort of thing. If we were to take the profit out of spamming, maybe that would help.

Then again, I'm sure they reply rate is already so low, it only takes a very small percentage of recipients to respond in order to pay for itself, that we may never get to those people in the first place.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Daryl, 17 Jul 2006 @ 10:11am
  
  Re: New Tactic for Fighting?
  Your final assumption is correct. The return rate for ANY marketing campaign is, on average 1-3%. So let's do the math: I send 1 million emails. and just 1% click on the link. That's 10,000 buyers visiting my web site. Once they visit the site, the likelihood to buy is much much higher because they clicked on the link because it is a product that interests them. But for these discussions, let's say only 10% buy my $10 item. I just earned 1,000 new customers and grossed $10,000.
  
  E-mail campaigns typically cost less than $250 to send 1,000,000 emails. If you could invest $250 in the market and get $10,000 back, you would do that all day every day, wouldn't you?
  
  There is no way to educate every consumer against clicking links in unsolicited emails.
  
  So, the question remains whether legitimate companies should continue to use e-mail in their marketing efforts and the answer is yes. I get at least one email per week from Big Dog clothing company. Most days I just delete them. Howevr, because I like their brand, and opted in for their ads, I welcome their receipt and if I am in the market to buy new clothing, their ad may be timed perfectly that I buy from them rather than from Target or some other company with whom I do business but from whom I do not receive e-mail newsletters/ads.
  
  Brand awareness is a good thing to advertise generally via banner ads, billboards, magazines, etc. Sales and promotions are well suited for opt-in email campaigns.
  
  Side note: My Yahoo! email account has over 17,000 messages in the SPAM folder that I will never see. If I have not opted in for your e-mail newsletter, be certain I will report it as SPAM and never see it again. If I have opted in, you are on my safe sender's list and I will see your messages.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Jul 2006 @ 9:14am

They can follow my eyes right to the BALETED button.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Phil Peter, 17 Jul 2006 @ 9:19am

Mis-understood?
I don't think the service is understood correctly. It sounds like eye-tracking which is used in web usability testing to determine where user's eyes gravitate to when arriving on a web page.
It is well known now that user's eyes tend to look in the top -left and then work left-to-right top-to-bottom scanning the page for what they want.
This service sounds like it does exactly that - with e-mail. Testing different styles of e-mail to see which design/template/structure works best for converting the recipient.
It is intirely unrelated to the method or style of delivery, frequency of e-mails or whether or not it is spam. Indeed, spammers are unlikely to care about eye-tracking or conversion rate that much because most spam is utter garbage anyway (unless it's phishing, of course).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
M. Thompson, 17 Jul 2006 @ 9:21am

Spam?!
Recently been drilled with some unknown stock option spam email. No idea where it cam from, but I hate it.

Use Mozilla's Thunderbird for your email client. Adaptive controls allows you to select some stuff as junk, and it learns, took about 3 weeks for me to be spam free.

I get maybe 1 spam email in my inbox every 2 weeks or so now. I junk it and that type never comes back.

Best way I know of to destroy the jerks spamming me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- A Barys, 17 Jul 2006 @ 10:12am
  
  Re: Spam?!
  My primary email account has been hit with this unknown stock option spam email too and I have no idea where it came from. It just started arriving a few months ago. I use Outlook 2000 but I will try Thunderbird. It really pisses me off because I get this email almost daily, sometimes several times a day, all from different senders. That account has been my primary account for years and I never got spam there until this stock thing showed up. I'd love to know where it came from and who's responsible if you ever find out. Thanks for the advice on Thunderbird. I was thinking about trying it out last week.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jeff Quindlen, 17 Jul 2006 @ 9:51am

Spam?!
I hate spam too, that's why I was delighted to try Bungle Soft's new AntiSpaminator tool! It was amazing! Not only did it ward off spam, but it also comes at such an affordable price! It's only 3 easy payments of $29.95!!! In addition to that, Bungle Soft will also throw in a free bottle of Herbal Viagra*!!! SO WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR? BUY IT TODAY!

*Just add $9.95 S&H
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Lay Person, 17 Jul 2006 @ 3:55pm
  
  Re: Spam?!
  Mr. Quindlen:
  
  Gee, you found yet another method of selling!
  
  You don't need to buy anything to rid yourself of spam people. This guy is one of THEM!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Topher3105, 17 Jul 2006 @ 9:59am

Sorry
Using email for advertising should simply be outlawed, period. Even for "legitimate" reasons.

I see advertising on the Internet, on TV, in the movies, hear it on the radio, see it in magazines and newspapers, have it delivered to me through snail mail, see it on billboards, sides of buses, bus stands, sides of trains planes and automobiles, sides of buildings, in buildings . . . everywhere.

Ask me if I REMEMBER ANY ad I saw coming into work today!

Do companies honestly believe that email marketing is necessary to be added to this deluge of IGNORED content? Does email advertising offer some staying power over the slew of other methods we get advertising?

Do what I do, set my email inbox to only accept whitelisted addresses. I am tired of spam filters missing 50% of the spam, I am even tired of people sending me chain mail or joke lists. If your on the whitelist, I want to hear from you, if you're not, then either you send spam or send something I don't want to see. If you want to be on my list, then I need to talk to you in person first, or call you, or some other method of contact or opt to receive your newsletter or whatever.

Its time for people to grow up and realize that the reason why spam continues is that people are too afraid of missing that important email, or loosing contact with someone they haven't preconfigured to be included in their whitelist, and they have to get over it and make the switch. Instead of adding people to a trusted list of acceptable emails, we want to allow ALL emails through, and then sort out which ones are good and bad, and add the bad to a filtered list, and this method doesn't work. You will receive 100 bad emails for every good one you get, it is eaiser to filter on the good stuff.

I think ALL email needs to go through a handshake process, if your receive email from somone not on your whitelist, you are asked if you want to accept email from that person, is so, it adds it and every email sent then on from that address is accepted, if not, then it is blocked. Further to that, the blocked request is sent to the source ISP or your email server, and if the same address gets blocked some pre-defined amount of times, the email address is permanently blocks or suspended, period.

Anyways, marketers thinking email is a valid method for advertising need to be lined up and shot. It will NEVER be an acceptable source of advertising, and regardless of how cheap it is, valid marketing and spam will always be lumped together, and if you started only adding trusted addresses to a whitelist rather then accepting all email, then you will find that both spam and email advertising will end.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Drew, 17 Jul 2006 @ 10:20am
  
  Re: Sorry
  Actually as an online marketing person I DO see the results of successful email marketing. It is completely trackable and we see the effects. With over 55,000 people in one partition of our newsletters, I see a high open rate and click rate which in turn keeps our advertisers on. People who don't think that advertising works, especially online advertising, just do not know what they are talking about. You subconsciously see those advertisements regardless if you say you don't. Just look at the numerous case studies and open your mind to facts and not personal opinions.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Drew, 17 Jul 2006 @ 10:20am
  
  Re: Sorry
  Actually as an online marketing person I DO see the results of successful email marketing. It is completely trackable and we see the effects. With over 55,000 people in one partition of our newsletters, I see a high open rate and click rate which in turn keeps our advertisers on. People who don't think that advertising works, especially online advertising, just do not know what they are talking about. You subconsciously see those advertisements regardless if you say you don't. Just look at the numerous case studies and open your mind to facts and not personal opinions.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - ebrke, 17 Jul 2006 @ 11:38am
    
    Re: Re: Sorry
    As an "online marketing person", you'd be a fool to admit that it didn't work, wouldn't you? Personally, I immediately delete all advertising email, no matter who it's from. I may be in a minority, but I'm sure I'm not unique.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 17 Jul 2006 @ 12:12pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Sorry
      Personally I swear never to buy anything I see advertised in spam, which is probably irrelevant since no reputable company I would consider buying anything from anyway uses spam.
      
      Maybe i should do the same for billboards. Visual spam, they are.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Franssu, 17 Jul 2006 @ 10:31am
  
  Re: Sorry
  "marketers thinking email is a valid method for advertising need to be lined up and shot"
  
  I prefer tortured live on TV. As we're turning back to the middle ages, let's try some middle age justice to set some examples. Then they will think twice before sending unsolicited email :D
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
tora1188, 17 Jul 2006 @ 10:04am

Spam?
I thought I ordered Spam, Eggs, Bacon, Sausage, and Spam?

(Gotta throw in Monty Python somewhere.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Eric the Half a Bee, 17 Jul 2006 @ 11:06am
  
  Re: Spam?
  I'll just have the spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam and spam.
  
  Monthy Python rules!
  
  Every Spam is Sacred... oh no, it wasn't Spam they sang about in that one ;-)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ajax 4Hire, 17 Jul 2006 @ 10:13am

Best response to email advertising is no response
Do not respond to email advertising.

The opt-in criteria is you have an email address; an email address will opts you in; you must want this advertising since you have an email address.

There must be huge profit in email advertising (aka SPAM) judging by the huge amount of SPAM I filter daily. I want to smack friends, family and co-workers who tell me they respond to SPAM but it would not do any good.

The fact that SPAM is profitable is proof that people are stupid.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
james, 17 Jul 2006 @ 10:13am

spam will always exist
Spam... ahhh the beloved spam. It's like illigeal drugs. Only the stupid people fall for that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Toaster, 17 Jul 2006 @ 10:24am

other ways?
I'm using Gmail and I get no spam whatsoever. I think part of the reason might be because I have a dot in my e-mail address. If anyone would like to try it and tell me if that's it, go ahead!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 17 Jul 2006 @ 12:51pm
  
  Re: other ways?
  I had a dot in my Hotmail email address but that didn't stop me from getting spam. I eventually had to switch to another email address.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- shane, 17 Jul 2006 @ 1:45pm
  
  Re: other ways?
  i have an email account with gmail too... i like it more for it's organization, but i don't get junk mail either.
  most of my mail is from fellow gmailers.
  my account has a" . "in it too. i doubt that helps any.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- CyberCop, 17 Jul 2006 @ 2:03pm
  
  Re: other ways?
  I have GMAIL as well, but I get 10-20 SPAM messages in the spam folder everyday. I also have Yahoo, Comcast, Hotmail, some have DOTs in the name others do not, and the SPAM ratio is about tthe same. The dot has nothing to do with. My wife also has a Gmail account with no DOT in her address and she only gets 5-10 SPAM mesages a week. Both my wife and I have fairly simple E-Mail addresses, my son, however, has an address that requires a Chemestry degree to understand and he get 20-30 SPAM messages in a day. So I do not think that complexity has anything to do with it, but more testing could prove me wrong.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
kitobot, 17 Jul 2006 @ 11:25am

It might have been said before but I would consider adverts from IBM or Cisco spam anyway...

I want my e-mail so I can contact my friends and family - not to be deluged with even more commercial crap.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Jul 2006 @ 11:50am

OK Carlo, what's the difference between "egitimate email marketing" and spamming?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- are you serious, 17 Jul 2006 @ 1:03pm
  
  Re:
  While we may not like to receive useless emails every day, there is a huge difference between spam and legitimate email marketing. Spam is either opt-out or unsolicited email. Whereas, legitimate email marketing is opt-in email, meaning you subscribe to a company's mailing list. They also honor there opt opt policies as they don't wish to be listed or be categorized as a spammer. Maybe you should read policies and checkboxes before you submit forms if you can't tell the difference between the two types of emails.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 17 Jul 2006 @ 1:42pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Are you Carlo?
    Maybe you should read policies and checkboxes before you submit forms if you can't tell the difference between the two types of emails.
    Are you a lawyer? If not, then don't forget to have a lawyer check it out for you and explain all the implications since it was probably written by another lawyer with his own client's best interest in mind. Of course marketers know that isn't practical and take full advantage.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Tom O'Leary, 17 Jul 2006 @ 2:35pm
  
  Re: Letitimate Email Marketing vs. spam
  Legitimate (permission-based) Email Marketing:
  I came across a website about tennis that I really liked. They had a newsletter. So I filled out the form on their site to recieve it (opted-in). They sent me an email requesting that I reply to confirm my subscription to their newsletter (double opt-in). They specified the frequency and content of the email that I would receive. I really enjoy getting that newsletter each month. In each edition, they have an opt-out link in case that I want to stop receiving the newsletter. They also clearly identify themselves in the header of the email and signature. There is a reply to address and it works.
  spam (non-permission based):
  Some spammer found my email address on an online forum (they harvested my email) or from a disreputible email list provider. They send me email about penis enlargement, viagra or anything else that they want to push regularly. The reply-to address doesn't work. I'm not really sure who it is sending me this mail. There is no way to opt-out and I didn't sign up for it.
  I think that should clarify the difference between legitimate (permission) email marketing and spam.
  It's not really too complicated.
  All the best
  Tom
  Tom O'Leary
  Editor, The Messaging Times
  blog: http://www.messagingtimes.com
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 17 Jul 2006 @ 3:05pm
    
    Re: Re: Letitimate Email Marketing vs. spam
    Well, I don't that legitimate (permission) email marketing should be limited to that sent form tennis sites. But anyway, I pose this question: If that tennis site now sends you e-mail about penis enlargement or viagra, is that spam?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Tom O'Leary, 17 Jul 2006 @ 6:50pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Letitimate Email Marketing vs. spam
      IT SURE WOULD BE. When you opt-in to an email publication, be it a newsletter or service update notification...whatever, you are signing up to a specific item that is specified by the marketer. They should specify the content of the mailing and the frequency that it will arrive in your inbox. Any good email marketer will do this. If they start using your email address as a dumping ground for ads or sell/rent your email address to others, then they are not reputible email marketers - they are spammers.
      There are any number of legitimate marketers out there using email as a platform to communicate and build relationships with their customers. I am subscribed to quite a few. WebProWorld.com, Amazon.com and other reputible businesses send you what you sign up for - nothing more, nothing less. They may ask you if you're intersted in something else, but won't force any of it on you. And they will always provide an opt-out link so that you can stop receiving the mailing when you want to.
      It's not disimilar to blog spam these days. Does the fact that some Internet users spam blog comments mean that the Internet, as a platform, is a spam utility? Of course not. There will always be a number of people who misuse a distribution channel - be it a forum, a blog or email.
      Nobody likes spam, and we didn't like junk mail in our mailboxes either when the postman delivered it. And as an veteran mail carrier, believe me, we didn't like carrying it to you either! I used to rip that up, now I just have to hit the delete button. I think anti-spam funds would be better used fighting fraud and phishing, where the consequences are more serious - more than just an annoyance.
      
      All the best
      Tom O'Leary
      Editor, The Messaging Times
      blog: www.messagingtimes.com
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 17 Jul 2006 @ 10:33pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Letitimate Email Marketing vs. spa
        IT SURE WOULD BE. When you opt-in to an email publication, be it a newsletter or service update notification...whatever, you are signing up to a specific item that is specified by the marketer. They should specify the content of the mailing and the frequency that it will arrive in your inbox.
        Now here's the problem: The tennis site claims that small flaccid penises are a problem for some tennis players and so the ads for viagra and penis enlargement are perfectly legitimate and not spam at all.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Phil Peter, 18 Jul 2006 @ 3:12am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Letitimate Email Marketing vs.
        I'd say that mentioning viagra etc would be perfectly legitimate if the newsletter was talking about the player's "small and flacid penises" but displaying ads would border on the irresponsible, depending on whether the tennis site usually displays relevant ads in it's newsletter or not.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Tom O'Leary, 18 Jul 2006 @ 2:27pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Letitimate Email Marketing
        UNFORTUNATELY, your hypothetical scenarios aren't necessarily ridiculous. The Can-Spam Act can be interpreted in different ways - leaving room for spammers to find loopholes. As a result, it adversely affects legitimate marketers more so than it does spammers.
        But listen, most online marketers using email aren't trying to spam you. A small tennis club that has an email list of 200 subscribers for their monthly newsletter aren't likely to start sending Viagra spam just because they can. They just want to get their own information out to you, build a trusting relationship over time and hopefully be your choice when you want to do business with that industry. Any good marketer doesn't want to piss you off or be underhanded about their strategy.
        Good businesses build brands. And good brands are trusted.
        All the best
        Tom O'Leary
        Editor, The Messaging Times
        blog: www.messagingtimes.com
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ryan, 17 Jul 2006 @ 12:20pm

spam
whenever i see spam i usually just find the link to unsubscribe but lately ive been getting ones advertising stock and ones for random watches
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- A Barys, 17 Jul 2006 @ 12:37pm
  
  Re: spam
  I've been told that when you unsubscribe from unsolicited email you have just confirmed a legitimate email address and you will get even more spam. You may be better off just deleting it. I guess it depends on the ethics of the spammer too (if that exists). The annoying stock spam going around doesn't even have an unsubscribe option.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
James, 17 Jul 2006 @ 1:17pm

Spammers Should be Shot
....then tortured.... then the punishment for ruining email will begin.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
xsnoopyx, 17 Jul 2006 @ 1:25pm

Ugh. All the money!
They waste all that bandwidth!!!!
If anyone wants REAL spam protection get GMail. Ive never even had one so far!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
BrokeAsAJoke, 17 Jul 2006 @ 2:36pm

Re: Re: New Tactic for Fighting?
$250 for 1,000,000 emails? damn... guess what, i'll let you hire me and I'll send 1,000,000 e-mails 3 days a week... c'mon... if you're willing to dish out even $100 for 1,000,000 e-mails that I have a bot sending out, I'd be more than happy to do nothing and get paid...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lay Person, 17 Jul 2006 @ 3:49pm

Looks, tastes, and smells like...SPAM!
Look advertisers, I have a great idea for all of you people who think people are even remotely inetersted in being sold something when they're simply not interested.

Create your own internet! That way when people want to be sold something while checking messages from people that matter to them, they will have a choice. The way things are now you have to lie, cheat, and steal to advertise and no one would ever buy from you due to that fact, yet you still think people are interested in your shit.

I am amazed how much money is spent on this advertising and clicking crap.

Want to know some real statistics? I never, ever, EVER respond to any ads on the internet, if I do, I was duped into looking but as soon as I discover I was duped, look out! You won't dupe me a second time in the same manner.

Most marketers and salespeople never really went to school or if they did they majored in liberal arts, history, business, or some other meaningful degree. They have no idea what theyt're doing really, They are masters in the art of deception. Not only do they deceive any potential buyers but they deceive the customers they sell for as well. No one ever looks into the effectiveness of advertising except by the advertisers themselves.

- No honor among thieves.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Elie Ashery, 19 Jul 2006 @ 6:15pm

Higher Energy Prices = More Commercial Email
Carlo, You are absolutely correct that more legitimate marketers are turning to email. Unfortunately, skyrocketing energy prices are forcing postal rate increases making email a very tasty medium. As far as the study goes, there is some legitimacy. I am aware that Wharton did some similar studies with print advertising years ago. Elie Ashery Gold Lasso, LLC http://www.goldlasso.com
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Jim McGowan, 4 Dec 2006 @ 9:42am
  
  Re: Higher Energy Prices = More Commercial Email
  Elie,
  
  I just started receiving a slew of unsolicited email from your company. I have unsubscribed once and will see if that stops the flow. After searching the web I see that a number of folks on various forums and blogs are mentioning your company in the same breath as some well-known spam houses, and I have seen several responses by you protesting such characterizations. If your company is not sending unsolicited email, how do you explain the sudden spate of people complaining about receiving unsolicited messages from your company? Your company's emails to me are saying that I am some sort of "Senior Estate Advisor", which is about as far from reality as you can get. So either you have a legitimate company that happens to get a fairly large number of people's email addresses purely by mistake, or you are doing exactly what it appears to be.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]