DO NOT CALL the CRTC

The Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) has been in the news recently, and my inner communications scholar was intrigued. This post was going to be about CANCON and the CRTC online, and the potential ramifications on net neutrality, but an interesting debate with my roommate today about another CRTC related issue prompted this post on the Do Not Call list instead. People often ask me what, in fact, the study of communications is, and both of these issues, along with many many others fall under the study of communications. Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) (the Internet; wind-up laptops aiding education in undeveloped countries; electronic voting, etc.) are constantly evolving and changing the way people communicate. Understanding and adequately regulating these interactions is vital in harnessing their potential for benefits to society. That is the importance of the study of communications.

So back to the Do Not Call List (DNCL). As of 30 September 2008 Canadians have been able to add their phone numbers to a national registry, which will prevent them from receiving phone calls from telemarketers. Unless, of course, those telemarketers happen to be: a charity; political parties; riding associations; candidates; newspapers; or organizations with which you have done business in the past 18 months. Also not covered are calls about market research, public opinion polls, or surveys, which the CRTC explains "are not telemarketing calls because the caller is not asking you to purchase, lease or rent products or services" (https://www.lnnte-dncl.gc.ca/cofi-fico-eng). This clause provides a neat loophole for companies to call you asking if you would like to answer a survey, after which they would progress to bombard you with their sales pitch. Some people have even found that they have received more calls from telemarketers. Some cell phone users had never received any calls until they registered their numbers, as the list provides a handy bank of numbers for telemarketers (why you would register a number that wasn't receiving calls in the first place I'm not sure).

There is clearly a demand for this service in Canada. On the first day the list was available, the website was overloaded and not everybody was able to register immediately. That much activity on the first day says to me that this is more than a nuisance and is on the mind of a lot of people. Four and a half million people registered in the two months following the implementation (about a seventh of Canada's population. In two months).

The DNCL is also clearly not working. Many of the phone numbers are displayed as a bunch of zeros, and are untraceable. The CRTC has received thousands of complaints, and has been able to do little about the issue. It has the power to levy $15 000 fines to those who break the rules, but this is clearly a difficult task, and one that is not slowing the tide of phone calls. Something must be done, whether it's increased scrutiny and swifter condemnation of offending parties involving the phone companies and the technology itself, or the further establishment of a Do Call List, where people can instead register to receive telemarketer's phone calls. Michael Geist, a professor at the University of Ottawa in the area of technology and law, has set up his own system called iOptOut (http://ioptout.ca/). Registrants with his system can have an e-mail sent on their behalf requesting to be removed from telemarketers' lists which would otherwise fit the exemptions.

The debate I was engaged in today was whether or not the list was necessary, and what was the nuisance/privacy factor involved with telemarketers. My roommate contended that it was easy to say no or hang up the phone when telemarketers call. It was not that big an inconvenience or an invasion of the private sphere, and was actually a legitimate form of doing business. I argued that calling people's private phone lines in an attempt to hawk stuff they don't need was an invasion of people's private time and space, as well as an aggravation and interruption. My house would receive numerous phone calls a week that when answered were nothing but dead air. An explanation I heard for this was the practice of companies using dialing machines to call multiple numbers at once. The first one to answer got the sales pitch, while the rest got nothing. This was an attempt on their part to reduce time wasted calling people who are not home. And we've all received phone calls once we've sat down for dinner. I believe both of these situations to be nuisances that are not reasonable expectations of phone-ownership.

He likened it to being approached at street corners by Amnesty International ("Can you spare a moment to save a life?") or Girl Guides selling cookies at your door. Yet both of these contain a fundamental difference to cold-calling. In the first scenario, you have left your house and entered the public sphere, where there is an expectation that you may be required to interact with other people. It is also easier to say 'no thank you' with a dismissive wave as you walk past than to move to and answer a telephone, and wait until they stop their initial spiel to say no. The second scenario is clearly different because it involves children in a community group, doing actual legwork to raise funds. I would be resentful of receiving random calls out of the phone book from Girl Guides, and be much less likely to buy cookies, however them walking around the neighbourhood shows some effort. This is also much less frequent than the sometimes daily calls.

I was dismissed as lazy for not wanting to get up from what I was doing to answer the phone, but this is not a fair assessment. It's not about the physical effort, but instead about the disruption and invasiveness. I should not have to screen my phone calls to avoid telemarketers. I should not have to feel rude about interrupting or hanging-up to avoid a sales pitch. I should not have to stop eating dinner to answer a dead-line that could have been an important call. These all become disruptive uses of my private technology, which are invariably different from pitches from the street-corner or the Girl Guides. It is also something the CRTC needs to do a better job of enforcing, lest it be left up to Michael Geist.

RM

The CRTC official Do Not Call List Website: http://www.lnnte-dncl.gc.ca/

My Blog entries may also take a Christmas break (perhaps something the 22nd), but we will return in the new year.