|
As a high-tech marketer,
you are probably familiar with the thought processes, planning stages,
factors, and risks involved which lead to a carefully planned and
executable direct mail marketing program. The costs involved, creative,
printing, postage etc., combined with adherence to basic guidelines,
yield a responsible campaign to market goods or services to consumers.
Consider how this entire
paradigm drastically changes when it is performed electronically
utilizing Email or the Web. With the removal of investment, risk
and guidelines, it's easy for anyone to initiate a marketing campaign
with no responsibility for their actions. Could this define a valid
role for government intervention?
From one point of view,
the Internet democratizes marketing, allowing entrepreneurs to solicit
customers in the same arena as larger companies. However, the paradigm
shift due to the construct and accessibility of Email messaging
and the Web opens an uncontrolled floodgate. With this floodgate
open, anyone capturing Email addresses or establishing a home page
can easily perform unethical marketing acts without any costs or
risks. Intervention could help to preserve and nurture the legitimate
marketers while, most importantly, protecting the consumer.
With some form of government
involvement in place on the Internet, the unscrupulous vendor will
think twice about the content of their mass Emailings and who they
are targeting. It will also alleviate the mindset that marketing
on the Internet is only for opportunists. Legitimate marketers who
adhere to the guidelines will have momentum to use the electronic
medium where they might have originally avoided it in fear of being
labeled as "schlock."
|
|
The government can add
definition to how marketing is performed on the Internet, and actually
make it a safer place for legitimate marketers by minimizing irresponsible
opportunists.
It's not government interference,
but marketing responsibility that will make it better for all of
us, including the consumers.
If you observe the origin
of the Internet, the US Government has actually been involved all
along, starting in the 1960's with the Advanced Research Projects
Agency Network (ARPANET) funded by the Department of Defense. The
primary use of the ARPANET was to allow scientists and researchers
to easily access each others information, and to continue accessing
information if one of the systems went off-line due to a military
attack.
In the 1980's, the Government's
National Science Foundation officially created the Internet, replacing
the original ARPANET with a more modern, higher-speed network. The
NSF's original goal for the Internet was to provide distributed
access to government-owned supercomputers. Intended as a broad-base
educational and research network, the Internet has evolved to include
businesses, commercial services, and consumers. In addition to remote
computing, file access, and Email, the Internet later supported
multimedia elements, specifically color, graphi`cs, audio, and video
via the implementation of the World Wide Web, which is based on
the infrastructure of the Internet.
With the Internet's
governmental roots, there is a place for continued involvement.
Perhaps by charging a milli-cent for electronic communications coupled
with the implementation of legitimate guidelines, a heightened level
of responsibility would result. These charges could then be available
for expenditure on continued services while adding further improvements
to the overall infrastructure.
|
