One subscription should equal one unsubscription

One of the side effects of using tagged addresses to sign up for things is seeing exactly what companies do with your data once they get it.

For instance, 3 years ago I downloaded a white paper or something from an ESP. That white paper was apparently co-branded and the other company got my email address from the ESP. They’re now sending mail to that address. I unsubscribed from the ESP mail and haven’t gotten anything from them in the last 2 1/2 years.

There are multiple problems with this kind of sharing. The first is that recipients don’t know they’re giving permission for their data to be shared. Maybe it was in the fine print, but hiding permission in terms and condition isn’t real permission.

Compounding the spam is the fact that I only gave one group my email address, but I have to unsubscribe multiple times. To me, this is the same as unsubscribing from one email only to have a sender add me to a different list of theirs.

I’m becoming more and more convinced that the only fair way to handle subscriptions in a truly opt-in fashion is that the number of unsubscribes necessary to stop mail should equal the number of subscribes. In my case it’s easy. Every subscription gets a unique address. When I give my address in one place, then I should be able to stop all mail to that address through a single unsubscribe.

I’m not against preference centers. If you want to add me to multiple segments or lists, all you have to do is tell me and let me choose. If you can’t do that, then take an unsubscribe request as a request to remove me from all mail. If you’re in the US, you’re required to do that under CAN SPAM and other laws.

No recipient should have to chase down every company their addresses have been shared with just to opt-out. Companies that share opt-ins for addresses should also share opt-outs. If that’s too much work for you, then how is it any less work for the recipient? You know who you’ve given the address to, I don’t. I just get to unsubscribe any time someone decides to mail the address of mine you gave them.

Otherwise, it’s all just spam.

Related Posts

Yeah… don’t do that

Never add someone to a mailing list without giving them a heads up that you’re doing it. It’s just uncool and rude. For example, I have been contacting some vendors about some work we need done. One of them has yet to answer my inquiry, but has already added me to their newsletter. Even worse, I had no idea submitting a form asking about their services would get me on their mailing list.

Read More

Permission trumps good metrics

Most companies and senders will tell you they follow all the best practices. My experience says they follow the easy best practices. They’ll comply with technical best practices, they’ll tick all the boxes for content and formatting, they’ll make a nod to permission. Then they’re surprised that their mail delivery isn’t great.

Read More

July 2017: The month in email

August is here, and as usual, we’re discussing spam, permissions, bots, filters, delivery challenges, and best practices.

One of the things we see over and over again, both with marketers and with companies that send us email, is that permission is rarely binary — companies want a fair amount of wiggle room, or “implied permission” to send. There are plenty of examples of how companies try to dance around clear permissions, such as this opt form from a company we used to do business with. But there are lots of questions here: can you legitimately mail to addresses you haven’t interacted with in 5 years? 10 years? What’s the best way to re-engage, if at all?
We frequently get questions about how to address deliverability challenges, and I wrote up a post about some of the steps we take as we help our clients with this. These are short-term fixes; for long-term success, the most effective strategy is sending email that people want and expect. Engagement is always at the core of a sustainable email program.
We’ve also discussed the rise of B2B spam, and the ways in which marketing technologies contribute to the problem. B2B marketers struggle to use social and email channels appropriately to reach customers and prospects, but still need to be thoughtful about how they do it. I also wrote about some of the ways that marketing automation plugins facilitate spam and how companies should step up to address the problem. Here’s an example of what happens when the automation plugins go awry.
I wrote a few posts about domain management and the implications for security and fraud. The first was about how cousin domain names can set users up for phishing and fraud, and the second was a useful checklist for looking at your company’s domain management. We also looked at abuse across online communities, which is an increasing problem and one we’re very committed to fighting.
I also highlighted a few best practices this month: guidelines for choosing a new ESP and active buttons in the subject line for Gmail.
And finally, we celebrated the 80th birthday of the original SPAM. If you’re a regular reader of this blog, you probably already know why unwanted email is called SPAM, but just in case, here’s a refresher….

Read More