We all know getting unwarranted calls from telemarketers is bad enough, but nothing can be worse than receiving broadcasted messages that dole out inaccurate, misleading information.
If you want to know the inconveniences and consequences of what such a situation may entail, one can look no further than a recent news story carried out of Canada, in which 700 members of the public have come forth with complaints in regards to “fraudulent or improper robocalls” being placed on behalf of Elections Canada. The calls, which are in accordance with ongoing elections in that country, have gone so far as to offer inaccurate voting location information and even send voters to fake polling stations.
Shortly after the story garnered nationwide attention, Elections Canada installed an online complaint submission form on its website, and hired a team of “administrative” workers to filter through the electronic and phone complaints to send off the a small group of experienced investigators. Since its start, the online forum has attracted a whopping 31,000 submissions of grievances, most of which claimed recorded messages claiming to be Elections Canada told voters their polling stations had moved.
While investigators are doing everything in their power to get to the bottom of where the calls are originating from, and who exactly is behind the telephone mischief, this won’t be the first or last time illegitimate robocalls will make their way into a political campaign. According to a voice broadcast expert, as reported by the media source covering this story, since robocalls ideally solicit a one percent callback rate, it’s very likely there will be a significantly high call back rate by discouraged and frustrated voters.
In related news, Canada’s neighbor has already taken action to put a stop to unwarranted automated phone calls, as the U.S.’s Federal Communications Commission recently announced it will now require telemarketers to acquire written permission from consumers before placing a robocall. This new policy even eliminates the loophole enabling telemarketers to place a call if they had an “established business relationship” with the client, as consent will now be needed to do so.
While the FCC (News - Alert), along with the Federal Trade Commission, had previously drafted rules regarding unnecessary marketing calls, “too many telemarketers, aided by auto dialers and pre-recorded messages, have continued to call consumers who don’t want to hear from them,” as reported by CBS News. Accordingly, FCC’s actions to crack down on robocalls have created a rather thin line between what calls are deemed appropriate, as the new regulations don’t apply to informational automated calls, made by charities, airlines, schools, pharmacies, and political campaigns.
With robocalling, otherwise known as “cold calling,” on the chopping block, these marketers will surely face a new-fangled challenge for reaching existing and prospective customers. But for the categories of businesses previously mentioned that utilize automated calls to deliver information related to school closing, flight changes, and political campaigns, a legitimate voice broadcasting solution can be a smart alternative. These voice broadcast services typically equip companies with the ability to effectively reach out to a customer base rapidly and more reliably.
Unfortunately, situations in which people do take advantage of voice broadcasting technology to confuse the public and overhaul campaigns for their satisfaction and benefit, are going to make it all the more difficult for these companies to build the trust necessary for their messages to get across to the right people.
Edited by Jamie Epstein