Jessica Bell
Composition II
Dr. Zhang
Fall 2006
P.598, # 6
Do-not-call List
One time or another we have all received that call regarding free estimates on windows, siding, or mortgage quotes. Although we say “No thank you”, we get a call two days later. Our homes are not local malls where we go to buy something because we want to; our homes are a place for us to relax, enjoy our family, and to take care of what we need to. Yet, we have people of all backgrounds who work as telemarketers. The average wages can be ten dollars or more. These wages provide for families all around the country. The Do-Not-Call registry or list that was introduced in 2003 may have alleviated some of these calls that are so disliked by some; but not all of them. The issue of telemarketers and other companies who wish you to donate or purchase through their company are invading the privacy of people who wish to be left alone. Yet, telemarketing businesses are exercising their freedom of speech; to sell products and services. Freedom of speech is everyone’s right. So then, who is right? They both are.
The Do-Not-Call registry put into place has made a way for citizens to try to protect access to their private home or cell phone number. Since introduced, over 50 million have signed up for the registry (Waldmeir, p. 592). The rules and regulations surrounding the Do-Not-Call registry come with strict call times to fines that can lead up to 11,000 dollars for those companies who do not comply with this registry (Stein, 2004). Rules included in the Do-Not-Call registry include requiring telemarketers to disclose of specific information and prohibit misrepresentations limit when telemarketers may call consumers. The list also requires transmission of Caller ID information and it prohibits abandoned outbound calls, subject to a safe harbor, as well as prohibiting unauthorized billing. This list also requires a set payment restriction for the sale of certain goods and services, and that specific business records are kept for two years (Federal Trade Commission, 2005). These are rules that the companies must follow. This can affect both parties. To see how this may affect the rights of both citizens as well as the thousands of people who work as telemarketers, we must look at both sides.
Phone calls from telemarketers can hurt the privacy of citizens because not all calls are dismissed by the Do-Not-Call registry. These calls can include: calls from, or on behalf of, political organizations, charities, and telephone surveyors. In addition, calls from companies with whom you have an existing business relationship, a company may call you for 18 months after you make a purchase or three months after you submit an inquiry or application, and calls from companies you’ve given permission to call (Federal Trade Commission, 2005). Even with your name on a list, people can still get through. Privacy is not just a matter of our homes; we are facing privacy issues everywhere. Throughout medical establishments, banks, and credit card companies, privacy has become a very large issue that everyone feels needs protecting. The privacy being protected in these situations is not any different than protecting ones privacy within their home.
We as Americans do have the right to privacy in our life. There are many issues now that affect this right such as, The Patriot Act signed in by President Bush to help with our fight against terrorism. It seems that everywhere you go you must fill out a privacy act paper as businesses are attempting to protect our right to privacy, yet we are still having our identity stolen, our medical records disclosed to the wrong persons, and financial information stolen at that. Can we at least just have one aspect of privacy protected? Phone calls from telemarketers can annoy people and interrupt a person’s daily activities. Our right to privacy is being violated in this matter. Free speech and privacy just do not go hand in hand in this situation
Then we have rights of telemarketing businesses who are exercising the right to freedom of speech. With the new caller Id in place, a person may know that it is a telemarketer and they are most likely not going to answer. This can harm the businesses because more than that person may live in the home and they may not represent the views of all persons of that home. We see people standing up for their beliefs and if we don’t agree, we just don’t listen. When it comes to telemarketers calling our home, by putting restrictions on calls takes away from the revenue that could be brought in. There have been cases that have gone to court over this controversy, stating that the Do-Not-Call registry is violating the telemarketing businesses right to free speech. In one case, Judge Edward Nottingham went against the Do-Not-Call registry because he said it was unconstitutional. He argued that the government was banning too little speech by allowing charitable solicitations but not commercial calls (Waldmeir, p. 592). The fight for free speech is sure to continue to protect the first amendment rights of telemarketers. Not only is it a matter of free speech, but it involves person’s jobs as well as a decrease in economic spending.
The telemarketing bureaus brought in 11 billion dollars in sales and had 348,353 employees among the 3,344 establishments in the year 2002 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2006). The census bureau updates every five years, so these numbers have obviously grown because our economy grows everyday. Although the numbers increase, since the Do-Not-Call registry, numbers may have decreased within sales and jobs. If we can look at what a telemarketing business does, we see how it provides jobs for Americans, brings in large amounts of revenue, and provides services for persons unable to shop or not comfortable purchasing online for privacy reasons. There are people who do purchase goods over the phone and don’t mind phone calls. These people who purchase keep the telemarketing businesses in market.
Don’t call means, don’t call. And for those who chose to do nothing to protect their privacy further, can be fair game for solicitations. Placing your number on the do-not-call list is simple and can prevent some unwanted calls. But it is also reality that people need to make a living by selling goods over the telephone. The solution is simple, companies and telemarketers still have customers who are not on the Do-Not-Call list; so they can call them. Telemarketers should not call those who wish to not receive calls. This clearly isn’t a case where one side should win and the other side should lose, but a case where everyone should get what they want; whatever that may be. “We all share the same constitution; somehow, it must protect us all” (Waldmeir, p. 592). We need to find a common ground because there is no reason to violate either ones rights.
References
American Fact Finder. (2006). Economic fact sheet: Statistics from the 2002 economic census. Retrieved November 4, 2006, from http://factfinder.census.gov
Federal Trade Commission. (2004). Are you getting telemarketing calls you don’t want. Retrieved November 4, 2006, from http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs /alerts/dncverifyalrt.htm
Federal Trade Commission. (2004). Complying with the telemarketing sales rule. Retrieved November 4, 2006, from http://www.ftc.gov//bcp/conline/pubs/ buspubs/tsrcomp.htm
Stein, L. (2004). Do not call. U.S. news & world report, 137, 13. Retrieved November 4, 2006, from EBSCOhost.
Waldmeir,
P. (2006). Freedom of speech and my right to silence at bath time. In A. T. Rottenberg.,
&. D. H. Winchell (Eds.), Elements of
argument: A text and a reader (3rd ed.) (pp. 591-592).