It has many names: from "spam" to "junk e-mail" to the more formal and official "unsolicited commercial e-mail." This month we venture into the great spam debate.
First, why the term "spam"? We have the off-the-wall British comedy team Monty Python to thank. "The history of calling inappropriate postings in great numbers 'spam'," according to the Usenet FAQ (for "frequently asked questions") on the subject, "is from a Monty Python skit (yes, it is very silly...), where a couple go into a restaurant, and try to get something other than Spam. In the background are a bunch of Vikings that sing the praises of Spam. Pretty soon the only thing you can hear in the skit is the word 'Spam.' That same idea would happen to the Internet if large-scale inappropriate postings were allowed. You couldn't pick the real postings out from the spam."
The spectrum of opinion on spam is wide. There are those who find it an egregious abuse of the Internet (clogging its pipes, service providers' e-mail servers, and peoples' e-mail boxes; costing recipients money and time; and presenting offensive advertising or luring innocents to inappropriate Web sites). And there are others (the majority, right now) who find it a mere annoyance like junk mail - to be electronically deleted as fast as they circular-file their paper junk mail. According to a survey of Internet users - conducted by Alan Westin, Editor and Publisher, Privacy & American Business, with Louis Harris and Associates, Inc. - 55% of users who have received unsolicited e-mail said "it's a little bothersome, but we just delete the ones that don't interest us"; 42% said "it is getting to be a real pain, and we want to stop getting those messages"; and 3% said they like to receive the messages "because they interest us."
Wherever you stand in the spam spectrum - and several of you have kindly shared your thoughts on spam (keep reading!) - there's a subset of the subject of vital concern to us 14 million Internet parents: children's privacy. Dr. Westin conducted a survey on that, too, and you'll probably find what he discovered about us interesting. (Both of Alan Westin's surveys were presented at FTC hearings on online consumer privacy held in Washington last summer; you'll see many links below to comments made at the hearings from a variety of individuals and organizations.)
Here's our table of contents:
- What's being done about spam
- Concerns and guidelines from two of you
- Meaty links on spam
* * * *
Acronym heaven: AOL, FTC, and CDT
Two entities with very different missions are working especially hard on the spam issue right now: AOL and the FTC.
Doubtless, few companies have a bigger spam problem than America Online, because of its sheer size and proprietary nature. CEO Steve Case, speaking to members in a recent "Community Update," said, "For AOL, combating this growing problem is a top priority." He announced a new area called "Junk Mail," where members can ask questions, download anti-spam tools, and keep updated on AOL's anti-spam lawsuits and efforts to "help craft sensible government legislation," as Case put it. A December 1 New York Times piece about spam written by a parent and AOL user gives a detailed picture of what some AOL parents are having to deal with. From talking with our subscribers, and from our own experiences, it appears people who log onto the 'Net via national or local ISPs (e.g. earthlink.net or tiac.net) have fewer junk e-mail challenges than AOL members do.
The other spam workhorse is the FTC, very much in "listening mode" right now. The Federal Trade Commission is making a weighty contribution to the discourse, as a watchdog and consumer advocate and in providing a forum for the many perspectives on unsolicited e-mail. "We're the cop on the beach in that area," says Martha Landesberg, the FTC's counsel specializing in spam, referring to "the vast number of e-mails that contain marketing scams, chain letters, investment schemes, business opportunity schemes" and other practices, wherever they turn up - including on the Internet.
Last June the commission held a four-day workshop on spam in which several hundred comments and presentations - from individual e-mail users, corporations, industry associations, and research groups - were heard (a summary can be found in the FTC site, and see our "Meaty Links" below for the comments most pertinent to us). At the end of the workshop, an ad hoc group of "consumer advocates, privacy advocates, industry leaders, and technology experts" was created and charged with developing a self-regulatory solution, Martha said, adding that the group's report is expected to come out in February. We'll keep you posted in Sage Extra!.
When we asked Martha what the FTC's ultimate solutions are likely to be, she said, "There's a big push by the Clinton administration, the FTC, and other regulatory entities to try to arrive at self-regulatory solutions to spam." She added that "there may be some technological fixes out there. It may be a question of filtering, it may be a set of agreements by marketers on a group of accepted practices in this area." Certainly self-regulation is the first resort, since government regulation is such a touchy subject for Internet users; if that doesn't work, the next step will probably be a combination of the solutions Martha mentioned - self-regulation, government monitoring, software filtering tools - as well as the type of legislative solutions Steve Case alluded to: law suits and government enforcement of existing laws.
We asked a more disinterested (but just as involved) party, Deirdre Mulligan - the Center for Democracy and Technology's specialist on spam and consumer privacy: "Just how big a problem is spam, anyway?" Her laundry list of interested players was telling: "Spam is probably the issue that generates the most complaints from users of the Internet. If you look at the number of sites focused on spam, if you talk to the commercial online services or smaller ISPs, that's what you hear. The FTC held a workshop on spam, which heard from multiple organizations, as well as individual users; at least one coalition of Internet users has been generated...; the Internet Engineering Task Force, an Internet standards-setting organization, is looking to see if there are technical tools, standards, or technical fixes they might deploy; there are quite a few major e-mail products offering filters and other ways to sort mail."
For Internet parents? "There's one rather alarming thing," Deirdre said, "which is the use of e-mail to send pointers or links to Web sites that contain material parents feel is inappropriate for their children. It's really going to be a hot-button issue." In Alan Westin's survey of parents of online kids, he makes the point that, where kids are involved, Internet parents have almost no tolerance for marketing practices on the Internet that are commonly used with kids in other, conventional, media (e.g., collection of children's data for statistical purposes, product improvement, or internal company use). Deirdre points out that the children's privacy issue is so touchy that marketers "using the Internet to send e-mail that might be inappropriate for children are really asking for a major problem for e-mail in general." In other words, watch out, marketers, this could be the tail that wags the dog!
* * * *
What are "we, the people" doing about spam? Well, the Sage community may not be a particularly representative group of Internet parents - we tend to have been connected longer than the 14 million online parents as a whole. Alan Westin made an interesting point about that, too, in his survey of 'Net users: The longer they've been online, the less concerned they tend to be about consumer privacy, and the less interested they are in government regulation of the Internet. Our two volunteer interviewees are not a "scientific sampling" of Internet parents, but they certainly confirm Alan's point. We heard thoughts on spam from Janet Cook, a 6th-grade teacher and mother of online kids under 10, and Carol Morrison, a grandmother of online kids and a retired librarian.
Janet Cook, Parker, CO
Janet is a 6th-grade teacher and mother of five- and eight-year-old girls. She uses the 'Net "mostly for finding classroom ideas, doing online projects, and networking with other teachers." Her experience with spam: "I've had a few experiences with spamming, only one which was annoying. Most junk mailers will remove your name if requested. One time, though, someone got on an unsupervised listserv, removed the address of the servers and sent the rest of us all sorts of ads. I finally forwarded the messages to the servers and that put an end to it. Not too significant, but it does happen. So far, my kids haven't done anything foolish on-line, so we haven't had too much unsolicited mail."
We asked Janet if her children have had any experiences with spam: "So far, they haven't tried to use the Web on their own. They've been instructed to never give out any info or to go to chat rooms unless I'm in the room with them. They've played at the VirtualDog site and some kids' sites, but just when I'm around. The day is coming, but these are kids who don't even answer the phone or turn on the TV themselves.... I've heard of kids getting stuff after being in chats, but haven't really
thought about what to do. I guess report it to the chat server. We mainly use MSN moderated [forums], so hopefully [MSN will] be responsive."
We also asked her: For general Web use, do you use any filtering software like Net Nanny or Surf Watch? Are you interested in other safety measures, such as rating systems, software that tracks children's usage, more government regulation, or more law enforcement in this medium? Her answer: "Not yet. I figure when the kids start to use the Internet, I might have to turn on MSN's [filtering] service, but haven't bothered to yet. I don't believe in lots of regulation, but feel the law enforcement of sexual-related stuff should be similar to the postal service regs."
And her tips for fellow parents: "I would just be really watchful," Janet said, "until I know how kids are going to behave online, then do occasional checks as things progress."
Carol Morrison, St. Charles, IL
Background: "I began using Internet about 3-4 years ago in my capacity as a librarian. Now I'm retired, so I use it for my personal research and interests (I love the Amazon Bookstore and I've found some neat knitting patterns) and for e-mail." She also subscribes to e-mail lists of people who share her interests - "primarily library-related and intellectual-freedom lists."
Kids: "I have no kids at home, but one granddaughter is here at least once a week (age 13) and uses Internet almost every time she visits. Rules are - no real names, addresses, or phone numbers. She has to ask to go on and I don't allow her to stay on more than about 45 minutes at a time. I check every so often and talk to her about what she's doing - what she's finding, etc...."
Experience with Spam: "So far, I've received a fair amount of unsolicited e-mail. It dropped off when I changed e-mail (from my work address), but it's climbing back up again. I don't let my granddaughter check my e-mail, so it doesn't affect her use. What I do is delete - just like I throw away junk that comes by snail mail."
Filtering: "I do not use a filter, and I'm dubious about their value, but I think parents should be able to use them if they feel better about it. I'm definitely opposed to software that tracks usage and even more opposed to any kind of government regulation or law enforcement on this subject. As for rating systems, it depends on who is rating and for what purpose. I much prefer recommended lists that educational groups, individual teachers, ALA [American Library Association], or others might put together."
Advice: "I urge parents to warn kids not to use real names, addresses, or phone numbers - or to arrange to meet anyone contacted via e-mail. Otherwise, I think it's a matter of working together, discussing things the kids see and hear (including TV, other kids, etc.), and making sure they know how you feel. It's impossible to keep kids away from everything "inappropriate." It was impossible even before the Internet."
Other: Carol says she finds junk e-mail annoying, "but I don't want anyone 'official' to do anything about it. I know where my delete key is, and I can use it.... Inappropriate e-mail there, of course, but I don't want to see the great unregulated, free-wheeling, democratic Internet destroyed by those who think they can control what others see and do. Self-control is the answer - and children have to learn that too."
* * * *
Meaty links
You'll find a full spectrum of perspectives on junk e-mail (if not on Internet culture itself!) in the Federal Trade Commission's Consumer Information Privacy Workshop page. The FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection held a public workshop on the subject last June, part of the bureau's "ongoing effort to bring consumers and businesses together to address consumer privacy issues posed by the online marketplace."
On the page are links to several hundred comments by individuals, corporations, and industry associations that were made last June in sessions on "Consumer Online Privacy" and "Children's Online Privacy."
You'll find a fund of information in these comments, about everything from childhood development to consumer online habits. We've bookmarked a useful cross-section:
- Abuse.net: Data representing abuse.net's experience with spam and a clear explanation of how spam works, who assumes the costs, and how it differs from paper junk mail. Abuse.net is "an informal service that helps Internet users forward their complaints about abusive activities on the Internet."
- America Online: AOL's response to concerns about its members' privacy (the subject of negative media reports about spam) - scroll down to just past the middle for AOL's specific comments on children's privacy and its newly sensitized policy for the "Kids Only" area.
- Child psychiatrist: Michael Brody's comments on how and when children develop intellectual judgment.
- Firefly Network: The software maker's presentation of an online consumer privacy study by the Boston Consulting Group, as well as its own policy statements on the subject (Firefly's software enables companies to develop and maintain online relationships with consumers.
- Individual user: A strongly worded complaint to the FTC about spam - with a clear explanation of how people's e-mail addresses are collected, en masse, on Usenet - by Robert Mass, a long-time Usenet user (representing those for whom spam is particularly egregious).
- Texas Telecommunications Policy Institute: Information from a survey of 84 Web sites targeting children by the institute (at the University of Texas) and the results of its focus groups - of parents of online kids - about parents' concerns, guidance for their kids, and observations about their children's online activities.
- Time Warner Inc.: The huge media company's explanation of how it gathers information from kids and grownups via its 190 Web sites, and what it does with that data.
For excellent survey data on spam, see Alan Westin's surveys on online consumer privacy issues and children's privacy online, courtesy of The Consumer Information Organization's Consumer.net.
The Usenet FAQ on spam (offering a lot more than the word's Monty Python origins, including a list of spammers and information on spam-blocking software), written by Ken Hollis, a rocket scientist (literally) at Kennedy Space Center. When found in Usenet newsgroups, FAQs are considered fairly authoritative pieces on a particular discussion topic. They're like cream rising to the top of a bottle of milk. They're written by self-selected authorities, but they stand the test of being "out there" in front of countless interested parties discussing the topic all over the world.
Some good reportage on the subject from Larry Magid of the LA Times and larrysworld.com. Larry's piece includes some good links, including a primer on spam entitled "The Dirt on Junk E-Mail and How to Help Stop It".
More than you'll ever want to know about spam, including proposed legislation concerning it, can be found at Junkemail.Org, created by the very productive Center for Democracy and Technology (see the links in our December issue, Part 1) and the Voters Telecommunications Watch. Another watcher of spam-related legislation is the Center for Information Technology and Privacy Law at the John Marshall Law School in Chicago, providing a complete list of Congress's efforts thereto.
* * * *
We always appreciate getting your feedback on these newsletters - or any information or views you have on the subjects we've chosen. We'll be happy, with your permission, to publish your views in a future issue or in Sage Extra! E-mail us at feedback@sageway.com.
Next month: The upside of e-mail - the best of the e-mail newsletters. Do you have one or two newsletters that you find indispensable to you and your family? Please send us the URLs or copies of your favorites (we'd be interested in favorite listservs, too).
