SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Federal Communications Commission announced today the Commission will release robocall and telemarketing consumer complaint data weekly to help developers build and improve "do-not-disturb" technologies that allow consumers to block or filter unwanted calls and texts. The data, including originating phone numbers of telemarketers and automated robocalls, will be released and available on the FCC's Consumer Help Center's website.
"Consumers want and deserve effective tools to empower them to choose the calls and texts they receive. This data will help improve do-not-disturb technologies so they can provide the best service for consumers," said Alison Kutler, chief of the FCC's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, which manages consumer complaints. "As we encourage providers to offer these services, and as the Commission recently made clear that there are no legal barriers to doing so, we continue to look for ways to help facilitate important consumer tools."
(Score: 1) by caffeine on Sunday October 25 2015, @06:49AM
Recently I was working as IT Manager for a solar company in Australia. Part of this job was preparing the data for the telemarketers to dial. In Australia we have a government run do not call registry (DNCR), that you can wash the data against, and large fines for telemarketing to people who are on the list.
The problem is that (a) you have to pay to wash the data, (b) the data needs washing again every 4 weeks, and (c) 70% of numbers are on the list. Analysing the data of the 30% left who were called, the majority were in 3 groups, disconnected numbers, fax machines and people too old to get themselves on the do not call list.
This is rather frustrating as it basically makes local telemarketing nonviable. Companies just offshore the telemarketing to to countries where they do not respect the Australian DNCR. Leading to more telemarketing calls from people with poor English skills and increased consumer frustration. Technically the local company is responsible for the actions of the offshore company but this is difficult to enforce.
A classic example of government good intentions backfiring leading to loses of jobs locally.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by tftp on Sunday October 25 2015, @07:10AM
A classic example of government good intentions backfiring leading to loses of jobs locally.
I wouldn't go that far and call what telemarketer does "a job." I'd rather call it "assault," or "theft," or "trespass."
If Australian telemarketers have nothing to do, why don't they call Iranian or Chinese or Zimbabwean phone numbers and try to sell what they are selling? The effect from their "work" would be about the same. Additionally, they will learn a few choice words in those languages.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 25 2015, @08:07AM
Many people do not call any role in marketing a job, or sales a job either. I'd say anyone in banking or finance does not have a real job either.
My experience is that a well trained telemarketer, who is paid real a base wage, and speaks English well will get more positive than negative feedback from customers. Of course, someone with poor English skills and commission only will be far more pushy with the customers. The Australian system was rushed out before an election, and has actually made it worse for the Australian public.
I do believe a DNCR can be made to work, but needs to done in a way that works with the industry.
(Score: 1) by tftp on Sunday October 25 2015, @07:01PM
My experience is that a well trained telemarketer, who is paid real a base wage, and speaks English well will get more positive than negative feedback from customers.
I'm not sure how any telemarketer can get positive feedback, considering that they are barging into people's lives when the people just came from work, tired, and had other plans - such as to eat dinner, play with children, or play with the spouse.
How many people do you know who ever bought anything that is telemarketed? I know no such people. It's probably easier to convert from a militant atheist to a religious fanatic by just walking by a church and getting a leaflet shoved into your hand.
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Sunday October 25 2015, @08:00PM
Actually, my experience is that it's easier to convert from a religious person to an atheist by walking into a church and listening to the sermon.
Actually reading the bible helps in the conversion.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 1) by caffeine on Sunday October 25 2015, @09:46PM
As part of my role I had to often work in the call centre and would hear their pitches and the customer responses. There was plenty of feedback from people that the telemarketers were easy to understand and polite. I'd also do the data analysis as to the results of the calling. The centre was averaging 3 sales per shift per agent with a low complaint rate.
My experience is that most frustration with telemarketers comes from the offshore overly pushy ones.
The bottom line is local firms who were regulated as to when they could call, what counted as saying no, not being allowed to call from a silent number etc are closing down. Being replaced by more calls from unregulated telemarketers who speak little English and badger the customers into saying yes. I don't see that as a good result.
Talking about militant atheists, the DNCR legislation exempts churches, charities, surveys and political parties. So. religious calls would be fine, atheist ones would be illegal.
(Score: 1) by tftp on Sunday October 25 2015, @10:25PM
My experience is that most frustration with telemarketers comes from the offshore overly pushy ones.
My experience is that most frustration with telemarketers comes from the fact that they called me. I wouldn't know if they are pushy or not, since I do not talk to them. If they want to be pushy into a disconnected line, it's certainly their right :-)
(Score: 1) by caffeine on Sunday October 25 2015, @11:11PM
From what they have told me they prefer someone who is not interested to just hang up. The problem is lots of people feel too polite to just hang up and try to say no thank you instead. A well paid and regulated telemarketer will take that as a no, thank them for their time and move onto the next call. A desperate commission only telemarketer will bully the customer.
The reason I commented on this article was that DNC systems have actually made things worse in Australia for the general public not better.
I understand many people do not like telemarketing, but we need to consider the whole problem when coming up with a solution to it. A DNCR can work but needs to focus on the real problem rather than just the easy to solve local component. While you are solving that, can you stop door knockers, charity muggers, online advertising and the intrusive commercials being inserted into the middle of a show I am watching on TV.
(Score: 1) by tftp on Monday October 26 2015, @12:07AM
I am indeed aware that by hanging up on them I give them more time to victimize someone else. But I am not willing to be a honeypot.
While you are solving that, can you stop door knockers, charity muggers, online advertising and the intrusive commercials being inserted into the middle of a show I am watching on TV.
I solved the TV show problem many years ago. But I won't tell you how, because my method causes irritation to some on /. and SN :-) I am largely free of unwanted offers these days.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 25 2015, @07:33AM
What the fuck did I just read?
YES THE POINT OF THIS LIST IS SO TELE-MARKETING DIES IN A FIRE. Thank you for letting us know it's working!
(Score: 2) by fido_dogstoyevsky on Sunday October 25 2015, @10:40AM
This [the cost of checking with the DNCR list] is rather frustrating as it basically makes local telemarketing nonviable.
Not for the person who would otherwise be bothered by the parasitic scumbags ^w ^w telemarketers.
Companies just offshore the telemarketing to to countries where they do not respect the Australian DNCR.
So the local telemarketeing firms are actually the ones who are responsible for "more telemarketing calls from people with poor English skills and increased consumer frustration" - they really are parasitic scumbags.
Technically the local company is responsible for the actions of the offshore company but this is difficult to enforce.
Maybe all telemarketers should be hit with their share of the fines they should really be paying (eg n reported DNCR violations would result in $AUN fines, there are x telemarketers registered* in Aus so every telemarketer gets fined $N/x. Overseas telemarketer calling off their own bat? Tough titty - the fines stand, better ten "innocent" scumbags punished than one guilty one go free.
The only way I could get away from those nuisance calls was to stop using my landline phone**
* If necessary consider all advertisers to be telemarketers.
** This was quite annoying and probably explains my negative attitude to the telemarketing industry.
It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
(Score: 1) by caffeine on Sunday October 25 2015, @09:37PM
It is not the telemarketing firms that are offshoring. It is the companies that were utilising their services that are now utilising the services of offshore firms. We already have fines for the local companies doing this but that are difficult to enforce and local firms know how to easily work around this.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by darkfeline on Sunday October 25 2015, @12:06PM
>This is rather frustrating as it basically makes local telemarketing nonviable.
That's the point. Telemarketing is unwanted. If you are doing telemarketing, you are doing something that society does not want. At all. The only thing you can telemarket in this day and age are pyramid schemes and scams to old folks with a lot of money.
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!