Put a Spammer in the Slammer by Phil
Agre
Part 2
Fraud and related consumer issues
Many spam messages make offers that seem too good to be true -- for example money-making
pyramid schemes, impossibly lucrative work-at- home deals, suspiciously low prices,
disingenuously described goods, questionable medical cures, free cable TV schemes,
and so forth. These messages might be fraudulent, or they might not. You needn't
judge for yourself which messages are legal. If you find a message suspicious then
you have a right, and perhaps even a moral duty to others less sophisticated than
yourself, to report the possible fraud or misrepresentation to the Federal Trade
Commission (FTC). The FTC doesn't settle particular disputes, but it is interested
in patterns, and a massive, potentially fraudulent spam is nothing if not a pattern.
Although the FTC has so far shown little inclination to do anything about potentially
fraudulent spam offers, nonetheless it's their job and we should encourage them to
do it. For their progress on related issues see:
http://www.ftc.gov/opa/9711/hlthsurf.htm
and
http://www.ftc.gov/opa/9711/cdi.htm
To report a suspicious spam message, simply print the message out, add a cover letter
that expresses your concerns, and mail it to:
Federal Trade Commission
6th Street and Pennsylvania Ave NW
Washington, DC 20580
Your cover letter can be very simple indeed. There's no need to quote chapter and
verse of the law. You might simply say:
I received the enclosed message over the Internet today, presumably as part of a
much larger "spam". I am concerned that it might be fraudulent, and I want
to ask you to investigate it. Thank you.
I encourage you to report potentially fraudulent spam messages to law enforcement
authorities using paper mail, because Internet messages seem to carry less weight
in Washington. You can, however, make a report to the FTC over the Internet using
the "scamspam" page:
http://www.junkemail.org/scamspam/
The FTC supposedly accepts electronic mail complaints about spam at uce@ftc.gov.
I would be interested to hear of any evidence that they take complaints to that address
seriously. (UCE means unsolicited commercial email, which is supposedly the polite
way of saying spam.)
The British equivalent of the FTC is the Trading Standards Officer:
http://www.xodesign.co.uk/tsnet/pages/lalist.htm
One way to raise awareness of these issues is to seek media coverage. In the United
States anyway, many regional television stations have excellent consumer affairs
reporting. These folks are always looking for good story ideas, and potentially fraudulent
junk mail on the Internet makes a clear story that's easy to explain. Pick up the
phone and call a local station that produces a nightly news program. Ask for the
name of the editor who handles consumer affairs and the mailing address of the station.
Write that person a letter concisely explaining the problem. Draw on your own experience
and use language that their viewers will understand.
A good consumer affairs story will ideally have a local angle -- for example, someone
in the community who got burned by a fraudulent offer that they received over the
Internet, or a questionable spammer who lists a mailing address in the area -- or
a news hook -- for example, a recent news article about somebody being indicted for
a consumer- related crime that involves the Internet. Even if those elements are
missing, potentially fraudulent spam messages can still make a good story if you
explain the following points:
- Spam is an urgent, day-to-day issue in the lives of ordinary people who use the
Internet. Most users receive at least a few messages every day, and many users receive
dozens.
- Spam is the Internet equivalent of junk mail, but much worse. Paper junk mail
costs about 50 cents per item to send; electronic junk mail, on the other hand, is
thousands of times cheaper, so that a spammer has virtually no incentive to target
an audience.
- Internet users must frequently pay to download each message they receive, whether
they solicited the message or not. Paper junk mailers pay almost all of the social
cost of their activities, but spammers create significant costs for Internet Service
Providers and message recipients.
- Junk mail on paper, furthermore, is strictly regulated by postal inspectors and
strong mail fraud laws, whereas spam has been almost unregulated. One part of the
problem is inadequate laws; another part is lack of understanding of the medium by
regulators and law enforcement people.
- Reputable businesses realize that spam violates the cultural norms of the Internet.
As a result, the contents of spam messages are often offensive, such as get-rich-quick
schemes and advertisements for pornography.
- Internet users can defend themselves against spam to some degree if they really
work at it. The ultimate solution, though, will be some combination of technical
improvements and appropriate legislation. Bad legislation can interact in unexpected
ways with the rapidly evolving Internet, but one solid principle is "opt-in":
- advertisers can easily use the Internet to provide consumers with opportunities
to solicit advertising on topics that interest them, so they should be required to
get permission from consumers before sending them any advertising.
Enclose some examples of spam from your own printer, and any news clippings on the
subject that you might have (USA Today and the New York Times have covered the issue,
or use the Spam Media Tracker -- see below) and perhaps a copy of this article. Some
people make a habit of printing out spam messages that they find particularly offensive,
just to have them ready for such purposes. The key, however, is your letter.
If you want to follow up with a phone call, wait about three days and then call in
the morning, when deadlines are less urgent. Never try to talk to an editor or reporter
on the phone without first asking if they are on deadline. Then simply ask if they've
received the letter and whether they'd like to follow up. Be polite, don't pressure
anyone, and be ready to accept a "no" gracefully.
Previous Section
_|_ Index _|_ Next Section
Publication Restrictions:
Nonprofit user group publications may reprint this article provided that you
print it in its entirety, verbatim, without any additions, deletions,
or modifications, and so long as you include the following copyright statement:
"(c) 1997 by Phil Agre. All rights reserved.
Phil Agre is an associate professor of communication at the University of California,
San Diego. He edits an Internet mailing list called the Red Rock Eater News Service,
on which this article was originally distributed. Details on the Web at http://communication.ucsd.edu/pagre/rre.html
. "
You'll also need to send Phil a hardcopy of the issue when it appears.
-
USER GROUP EDITORS: Articles posted in this area have been cleared for publication
in your newsletters. We do encourage you to contact the author for additional details
and/or updates. Please ALWAYS credit the original author!