I read a story today about email which, if weren’t so grotesque, would be funny.
That government department which deals with youth problems will reject all emails sent to it which contain the word teen.
An overzealous (or moronic) webmaster has decided that the potential pornographic connotations of the word teen outweigh the importance of communicating about teens – with a government department who’s responsibility they are.
A client recently sent an email to it’s database which turned up a very high error rate – after exhaustive investigation we determined the word breast had caused the problem – even though Bayesian filter authors will tell you that context affects such decision – our client sells meat, and the breasts in question were chicken ones, and so YahooXtra bounced the lot.
It all stems, of course, from our obsession with diminishing spam volumes. The manner in which this manifests itself in the above examples is endemic of the way our society deals with all problems and consequent legislation nowadays – punish all to mitigate the behaviour of the few.
And it’s rubbish.
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Monday, October 19, 2009
The threat of social media?
Many wise heads have suggested the social media revolution spells the end for email.
I beg to differ.
First it was Friends Reunited, then MySpace, Bebo, Facebook, and most lately, Twitter. New, exciting ways to communicate. Only Facebook and Twitter still cut any ice, and I believe Twitter to be no more than a fad. Watch it die death as mainstream media as celebs desert it en masse.
Facebook may survive, but already its pages are littered with the remains of casual, lapsed users. Try searching for a name, and see how many dormant entries there are.
These are not media - they are applications, whereas email is a unique medium. Applications will come and go. Some will morph into survival, some will die through user inertia, or stark lack of revenue.
But email has already taken it's place amongst the bedrock media on which our lives are based, and will endure. As a communications tool, as a marketing device. Email works, and does not depend upon being commercialised to survive.
Clever marketers will integrate social media into their campaigns, but email will need to be, must be a fundamental component of these for the campaigns to succeed.
Email is, after the telephone, our best chance to talk directly, personally and individually to people. It is already many people preferred method of communication. It allows response, rather than reaction.
It has so many benefits, and it will be here long after Facebook, Twitter et al have been consigned to the publishing graveyard in the nether regions of the world wide web.
I beg to differ.
First it was Friends Reunited, then MySpace, Bebo, Facebook, and most lately, Twitter. New, exciting ways to communicate. Only Facebook and Twitter still cut any ice, and I believe Twitter to be no more than a fad. Watch it die death as mainstream media as celebs desert it en masse.
Facebook may survive, but already its pages are littered with the remains of casual, lapsed users. Try searching for a name, and see how many dormant entries there are.
These are not media - they are applications, whereas email is a unique medium. Applications will come and go. Some will morph into survival, some will die through user inertia, or stark lack of revenue.
But email has already taken it's place amongst the bedrock media on which our lives are based, and will endure. As a communications tool, as a marketing device. Email works, and does not depend upon being commercialised to survive.
Clever marketers will integrate social media into their campaigns, but email will need to be, must be a fundamental component of these for the campaigns to succeed.
Email is, after the telephone, our best chance to talk directly, personally and individually to people. It is already many people preferred method of communication. It allows response, rather than reaction.
It has so many benefits, and it will be here long after Facebook, Twitter et al have been consigned to the publishing graveyard in the nether regions of the world wide web.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Spam? What spam?
Heard about Spam recently? It seems to have dropped off the radar completely – as a news item anyway. I still get around 30-40 junk mails everyday. But at least I know they are illegally sent. What a comfort.
I also still get several faxes and phone calls on a daily basis – all unsolicited, all unwelcome and all far more intrusive. But they are legal. They are also from reputable organisations – banks and such, all with outstanding, must have offers which just don’t seem that appealing when you are trying to get the children to bed.
So is that it for spam? Have we just accepted it? Have people realised that pressing delete 30 times a day is actually not that hard? Could it even be that as the first internet generation ages, emails about the little blue pill are not quite so unacceptable?
Time marches on, email is old hat, Facebook, Twitter et al get all the headlines now. And people deal with spam – as they always should have. That’s what will defeat it in the end. Hitting the delete button.
I also still get several faxes and phone calls on a daily basis – all unsolicited, all unwelcome and all far more intrusive. But they are legal. They are also from reputable organisations – banks and such, all with outstanding, must have offers which just don’t seem that appealing when you are trying to get the children to bed.
So is that it for spam? Have we just accepted it? Have people realised that pressing delete 30 times a day is actually not that hard? Could it even be that as the first internet generation ages, emails about the little blue pill are not quite so unacceptable?
Time marches on, email is old hat, Facebook, Twitter et al get all the headlines now. And people deal with spam – as they always should have. That’s what will defeat it in the end. Hitting the delete button.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
In to win?
Smart companies are constantly looking to increase their databases. You have to, just to compete with organic database fatigue and wastage. These factors reduce most lists by around 7% per year.
Any database growth will, by the very nature of its initiative, lead to a higher wastage level initially - usually because joining the database is incentivised - a good portion of those who sign up for your incentive do so because they want to win the prize - not because they want your newsletter.
But it is still a valid way of increasing database numbers.
However, and it is a big however, I recently spotted a flaw in this - I investigated further and found that at least 50% of email based competitions which were aimed at database growth contained this flaw.
The email in question offered a great prize, and I signed up immediately. But the only contact detail it requested was my email address. Three weeks later, I was routinely clearing my junk folder of the 700 odd emails offering me the way to sexual nirvana, when I happened upon one saying I had won the prize being offered.
I immediately rang the organisers only to be told that I was too late, and the prize had been given to someone else. I explained that their email (Subject line YOU ARE A BIG WINNER) had been filtered. Why hadn't they called me, I asked? They didn't have my phone number, they replied - because they had not asked for it.
And there lies the flaw. Any email making noise about being a winner in the subject line (especially all in caps) is likely to be considered spam and get junked. If, however, the subject line looks mundane, then it may not get read - especially if the sender is not on your "must read emails from" list.
So get a phone number as well - if you are running a competition, and all people need to do is enter, then it is your responsibility to ensure winners are properly notified - and become good members of your email database.
Any database growth will, by the very nature of its initiative, lead to a higher wastage level initially - usually because joining the database is incentivised - a good portion of those who sign up for your incentive do so because they want to win the prize - not because they want your newsletter.
But it is still a valid way of increasing database numbers.
However, and it is a big however, I recently spotted a flaw in this - I investigated further and found that at least 50% of email based competitions which were aimed at database growth contained this flaw.
The email in question offered a great prize, and I signed up immediately. But the only contact detail it requested was my email address. Three weeks later, I was routinely clearing my junk folder of the 700 odd emails offering me the way to sexual nirvana, when I happened upon one saying I had won the prize being offered.
I immediately rang the organisers only to be told that I was too late, and the prize had been given to someone else. I explained that their email (Subject line YOU ARE A BIG WINNER) had been filtered. Why hadn't they called me, I asked? They didn't have my phone number, they replied - because they had not asked for it.
And there lies the flaw. Any email making noise about being a winner in the subject line (especially all in caps) is likely to be considered spam and get junked. If, however, the subject line looks mundane, then it may not get read - especially if the sender is not on your "must read emails from" list.
So get a phone number as well - if you are running a competition, and all people need to do is enter, then it is your responsibility to ensure winners are properly notified - and become good members of your email database.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Missing in Action?
Do all emails either reach their intended destination, or get reported as a bounce? This is a question that arose during our recent bounce metric test - more on those next week.
They threw up a couple of apparent, and if true, major anomalies, which web developers say are simply not possible - the main one being the concept of the vanishing email.
We tested all our apparent bounce emails, and whilst most did bounce, some didn't. Call them non bouncers.
We then tested the non bouncers - asking them to reply if they got the message. Some did - so we discarded them.
We then rang the remainder - people whose email was being reported as getting through, but who had not responded. 8 out of 100 denied ever receiving it, so we begged their indulgence and sent them another whilst staying on the phone. All 8 reported were reported as delivered - no bounce messages, and all 8 people confirmed that they had not actually received anything. Spooky. By this stage I was thinking of calling my Sculder or Mully!
I checked with the technical people. Not possible they said. But my evidence seemed to say different.I always use a read receipt with my personal email, and make every effort to convince all my email correspondents to use it. It eliminates the possibility of the odd, probably vital message getting lost in cyberspace.
Of course, it could be held up by a filter. But all 8 confirmed they had no rigorous filters in play, and checked their junk folders, but found nothing. DerNer Derner
So unless there is a secret monster out there munching random emails and thriving in it's lair in the nether regions of the Interweb, there are only 2 explanations. Either the Internet is leaky, which I believe to be a strong possibility, or ISPs are filtering emails so aggressively (too make it look as through their attempts to combat spam are effective) that a certain percentage of legitimate email is getting junked by the post office, so to speak - collateral damage, I believe they call it.
If true, a worry. I will now probably be taken in the dead of night by a crack team of ISP sponsored hit men and silenced forever. Or eaten by the monster!
They threw up a couple of apparent, and if true, major anomalies, which web developers say are simply not possible - the main one being the concept of the vanishing email.
We tested all our apparent bounce emails, and whilst most did bounce, some didn't. Call them non bouncers.
We then tested the non bouncers - asking them to reply if they got the message. Some did - so we discarded them.
We then rang the remainder - people whose email was being reported as getting through, but who had not responded. 8 out of 100 denied ever receiving it, so we begged their indulgence and sent them another whilst staying on the phone. All 8 reported were reported as delivered - no bounce messages, and all 8 people confirmed that they had not actually received anything. Spooky. By this stage I was thinking of calling my Sculder or Mully!
I checked with the technical people. Not possible they said. But my evidence seemed to say different.I always use a read receipt with my personal email, and make every effort to convince all my email correspondents to use it. It eliminates the possibility of the odd, probably vital message getting lost in cyberspace.
Of course, it could be held up by a filter. But all 8 confirmed they had no rigorous filters in play, and checked their junk folders, but found nothing. DerNer Derner
So unless there is a secret monster out there munching random emails and thriving in it's lair in the nether regions of the Interweb, there are only 2 explanations. Either the Internet is leaky, which I believe to be a strong possibility, or ISPs are filtering emails so aggressively (too make it look as through their attempts to combat spam are effective) that a certain percentage of legitimate email is getting junked by the post office, so to speak - collateral damage, I believe they call it.
If true, a worry. I will now probably be taken in the dead of night by a crack team of ISP sponsored hit men and silenced forever. Or eaten by the monster!
Monday, June 1, 2009
Picture this
One of the great assets of Html email is its ability to present images - images which help sell the message of your email.
Images help break up, and consequently complement and illustrate content A good pic replaces a 1000 words. In fact, the pics, if done well, dictate the content - which should say only what the image cannot say.
The temptation, of course, is to load your email with images - but the consequence is either excessive overall file size, or poor quality images. Neither is very helpful.
So balancing the image equation is essential - get it right, and sales could go through the roof. Get it wrong, and deliverability and rendering issues, or simply poor presentation will lower response rates dramatically.
You do not need to be a professional photographer to get good images - digicams allow for lots of experimentation, and a little imagination goes a long way in making a pic look both attractive and artistic. Think location and context, background and angles.
Get your pictures right and people will read your text - and then you are a long way down the track to getting your message across, and appropriate action taken.
Images help break up, and consequently complement and illustrate content A good pic replaces a 1000 words. In fact, the pics, if done well, dictate the content - which should say only what the image cannot say.
The temptation, of course, is to load your email with images - but the consequence is either excessive overall file size, or poor quality images. Neither is very helpful.
So balancing the image equation is essential - get it right, and sales could go through the roof. Get it wrong, and deliverability and rendering issues, or simply poor presentation will lower response rates dramatically.
You do not need to be a professional photographer to get good images - digicams allow for lots of experimentation, and a little imagination goes a long way in making a pic look both attractive and artistic. Think location and context, background and angles.
Get your pictures right and people will read your text - and then you are a long way down the track to getting your message across, and appropriate action taken.
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
I like bouncing
We are about to undertake an interesting exercise - testing our bounce reporting mechanisms.
Every email deployment results with a number of bounces, and our mailing software duly lists a variety of reasons for why messages have bounced. Do we trust them?
I guess the answer is no - which is why we are going to strip out all the bounced emails and send them a special message asking if they receive them or not. If not, then we will cull them, but I bet there will be some who say yes.
If I am right, does this throw up the whole issue of how accurate email metrics are?
My gut feel is that they are inaccurate, but consistently so - which is why we always encourage clients to look at trends rather than actual numbers when assessing campaign metrics. Trends are more valuable anyway.
We recently established a really good upwards trend for a new client by making a series of improvements over a period of weeks - opening rates, responses and orders have all grown consistently. Historically the client, with a DIY email set-up, had little faith in the medium. Now they love it!
We'll report back shortly on the bounce test results - could be interesting!
Every email deployment results with a number of bounces, and our mailing software duly lists a variety of reasons for why messages have bounced. Do we trust them?
I guess the answer is no - which is why we are going to strip out all the bounced emails and send them a special message asking if they receive them or not. If not, then we will cull them, but I bet there will be some who say yes.
If I am right, does this throw up the whole issue of how accurate email metrics are?
My gut feel is that they are inaccurate, but consistently so - which is why we always encourage clients to look at trends rather than actual numbers when assessing campaign metrics. Trends are more valuable anyway.
We recently established a really good upwards trend for a new client by making a series of improvements over a period of weeks - opening rates, responses and orders have all grown consistently. Historically the client, with a DIY email set-up, had little faith in the medium. Now they love it!
We'll report back shortly on the bounce test results - could be interesting!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
