As reported in DM News, Fox Business, and others, San Francisco became the first American lawmaker to pass a "do not mail" resolution. Although non-binding, the measure that passed by a 9-2 veto-proof majority in the San Francisco Board of Supervisors calls for the creation of a do not mail program.
The Forest Ethics Council was "unbelieveably pumped" about the decision. Meanwhile, the Direct Marketing Association and its Mail Moves America coalition was "disappointed that the committee would endorse an action that would hurt small businesses and destroy jobs."
I've got to believe there's some middle ground here. It's not that people want "no mail." They just want better control over the mail they get. They call it "junk mail" because they don't want it and feel powerless to stop it. But they want to continue getting catalogs and other mail that is relevant and interesting.
A "do not mail" program is a blunt instrument that serves nobody well. Can't we put some bright minds together to give people control over their mailbox without further destroying the economy?
Can anything good come out of san francisco?
As you said what people really want is to not get mail they don't want to read. Everybody likes mail they are interested in.
The goal here is impossible to acheive. As a direct mailer,if I could acheivethis level of targeting I would do it in a heartbeat.
But any anti-advertising laws would be very bad not just for business but for the consumer/citizen. Advertising is actually an essential expression of free speech. Limiting a presons right to present the case for their business product or service is just as serious as limiting their right to political speech.
Posted by: Craig Scott | April 13, 2009 at 12:37 PM