As the Direct Marketing Association mulls hiring its next CEO, it should consider retaining a fanatic. By that I mean a leader who is willing to make an unpopular case because it is right for the industry, and then stick with it through all levels of court battles, legislative machinations, and public relations fronts.
For instance, consider the consumer-benefit argument. The DMA has not made this a large enough part of the public debate regarding restrictions. Where is the mass, consumer-focused campaign that details the higher prices, or missed opportunities, consumers face due to data and channel limitations?
And where has the sense of creative compromise been? Why have the absolute positions the industry is facing been accepted, rather than being viewed as starting points for negotiation?
Publicly, the DMA has conducted itself like an organization of gentlefolk, and perhaps, through backroom dealings in Washington, it has mitigated what would have been even more draconian restrictions than are currently in place on channel and data use. If this is the case, it would have been heartening to see the DMA
Network
