From the where-the-heck-have-you-been file comes an article in the Direct Marketing Association’s “Politically Direct” newsletter headlined: “State Focus: Misguided Registry Laws Won’t Protect Children.”
The points the newsletter raises—that the registries place an unfair burden on legitimate marketers while possibly putting kids e-mail addresses at higher risk of getting into the hands of online predators—are valid, and have been spelled out repeatedly here and pretty much nowhere else.
The Politically Direct article finishes by saying that the DMA and the Internet Alliance are working to educate lawmakers about the problems child no-e-mail registries pose.
Pardon us if we’re a little skeptical on this last point. Registry laws have been enacted in two states, and four more states have introduced them into their legislatures. As near as we can tell, the DMA has not testified at any of the state hearings concerning the registries.
Rather, it’s been Trevor Hughes of the E-mail Sender and Provider Coalition who has been making marketing’s case against so-called child-protection do-not-e-mail registries.
As is usually the case with issues surrounding interactive marketing, the DMA seems to have been absent.
The organization declined to file court papers supporting pornography trade group the Free Speech Coalition’s lawsuit against Utah’s child-no-e-mail registry because the DMA wanted to avoid bad press.
Siding with pornographers battling a law ostensibly aimed at protecting children is an uncomfortable proposition. But if a trade association won’t fight these battles, who will?
DMA president John Greco’s regime is still making its mark, and the registry battle is far from over. It presents an opportunity for the DMA to demonstrate a previously seemingly non-existent commitment to defending interactive marketing.
Then again, we keep hoping Cuban cigars will come pouring out of the sky any day now and that Martinis will become a sports drink.
