I think the election of Donald Trump proves that substance is overrated as a political tool, and I wonder whether the Democrats might get more mileage out of seizing on things that the Republicans do that are just plain unpopular than they typically get out of arguing over who gets a tax cut or what might happen to people with preexisting conditions. For example, why not make every Republican candidate for office defend this?
The Republican National Committee is backing a petition that would allow political campaigns and businesses to leave automated messages on your voicemail, without your phone having to ring. Under consideration by the Federal Communications Commission, which has been asked to review ringless voicemail, the proposal would free telemarketers from restrictions that prevent them from robo-calling people’s cellphones without first getting their permission.
For the RNC, which filed comments in support of the petition to the FCC last week, regulations designed to limit straight-to-voicemail messaging would hinder free speech, and raise constitutional questions about the rights of political organizations. Supporters of so-called ringless voicemail don’t see them as robocalls or “calls” at all. “[D]irect-to-voicemail technology permits a voice message to go directly to the intended recipient’s mobile voicemail via a server-to-server communication, without a call being made to the recipient’s telephone number and without a charge,” wrote the RNC.
And proponents argue that straight-to-voicemail messages don’t come with the same frustrating dinner-time disruptions that many associate with telemarketing calls.
I’m not saying there isn’t a substantive issue here, but it’s a minor one. You get robocalls on your land line (if you still have one) all the time. Should you get them on your cell phone, too? How about a bunch of crap filling up your voicemail box that you didn’t ask for and most definitely do not want?
Sometimes, the most effective politics is the kind that has no ideological flavor to it. There’s no “team” for annoying voicemail spam. When a party decides to fight for their right to give you annoying voicemail spam, they ought to pay a big price for it.
I can’t breach the paywall and find out if the article names names. Are any elected GOPers on the record? We can target them and see if the issue takes off.
arstechnica might be a better source on technical issues:
Republicans claim 1st Amendment right to send you robo-voicemails
Seems like the humans are hiding behind the RNC.
By damn, you betcha that’s an issue us little people could get behind. Heck, one reason I still keep a landline is to siphon all the junk calls off to it, where I can glance at the caller ID and deep-six the crap on the second ring. And yet I still get spam voicemails on my cell phone even though it’s turned off most of the time. Down with spammers! Down with anyone who’d encourage them!
No one likes spam on their voicemail and if Ds are the ones who oppose it while Rs support it that will get some non voters to the polls.
Right now I can block the number of a robo call made to my cell phone. Of course, they appear to try again with another number. However, if I understand correctly, there would be no way to block the of voice mails. Hope Samsung, Apple, et al can quickly find a way to block voice mails unless the person is in your directory. I’d hope the carriers would want to find a way to do that as well.
I still have a land line. But, for both my land line and my cellphone, I keep my voicemail full to keep from getting any more. If I look at the number from which the call from and recognize, I call back whoever it was.
A Democratic emphasis on this issue could combine nicely with Republican destruction of Internet privacy (already done) and net neutrality (in process). All of the three are major giveaways at the expense of the public, Republicans and Democrats alike. The ads write themselves, and they need have no real ideological content at all.
And this whole line of attack could support an overall Democratic theme of return to competent, honest governance in the public interest. There is just so much Republicans are doing right now that anyone can detest, no matter where they fit on the partisanship scale.
I actually get robo calls on my cell phone and you can only block so many of the calls. They’re now even using a number very similar to mine.
This robo-voicemail thing would be ridiculous
I’ve had numerous calls on my landline from, purportedly, ME — my exact number on the caller ID. Have never answered, as it’s too meta-creepy. And they never leave a message.
The corporate predation is escalating on so many fronts — I concur that these would be great issues for Ds to seize and run with!
It highlights a secondary issue that people should care about but would probably be a non-starter:
If I’m not mistaken, the reason robo-spam is banned from cell phones is because incoming calls get counted as call time if you’re not on an unlimited plan. I’m out of touch with the cell market in the US, but that was a premise that served as a sort of building block for what exists now.
I don’t know about just every country in the world, but so far in my travels outside the US, incoming calls to a cell phone are free. You have to have an active account, of course, but if you sign up for $20/month with 5 minutes of calling time, you can still get unlimited incoming calls.
The downside to that is of course you get plenty of spam calls and texts.
Like I said, nothing to be made into an issue when more basic stuff is at risk of going out the window.
Since “Citizens United” deemed that $=speech, it’s become something of a trend to use 1st Amendment rights as the go-to reason for everything. So, PACS cannot fill your voicemail? 1st Amendment rights!! I expect that they’ll even flog the issue once they’ve filled up everyone’s mailbox. Full mailbox? Can’t have that, 1st Amendment rights! And don’t you even think of dropping your cell phone service, because 1st Amendment rights!
I’m waiting for the inevitable, which is that paying taxes violates free speech rights. Because that’s what it’s always about, tax evasion.