The problem with definitions has always been part of language. I might define something in a certain way, but for someone else that definition might change a bit. There are a number of reasons why these multiple definitions take shape for a single word. One reason that might not have been thought about much is that we are living in a fast changing world. Collective experiences change definitions of a word.
Now lets look at the problem of definitions for a more contemporary word. Spam. We all have known and experienced spam for bad or for worse. How do we define spam? And is there really a universally accepted definition of spam?
The more widely used definition of spam is any kind of email that is sent to a recipient without his or her permission. Permission was the one thing that used to separate spam mails from legitimate mails but that is not the case anymore. These days permission is more a technicality than anything else. Usually marketers ask for customers’ permission by asking them to sign up for their newsletters through an opt-in form. This also means that customers have the option of opting out of these newsletters. But then is it fair to just look at this like black and white? Is spam all about being in or out of a mailing list? Spam might have started out like that but it no longer lives within that classification.
One reason that the definition of spam has changed is because marketers have overdone email marketing. At many times marketers have gotten carried away with the possibilities of emailing directly to their customers that they have overused the medium. Yes, email marketing is exciting because it allows marketers to speak directly to their customers but that does not mean that privilege can be overstepped.
It seems more and more customers are getting such a huge rush of mails from marketers that even if they have signed up for the newsletter they might think that it is too much. After all, there is something called information overload. So now, the definition of spam has also extended to information overload. Customers feel that even if they are legitimate marketers, if they flood their email inbox with newsletters then that is as good as spam. The situation becomes worse when different departments from the same company send mails to the same recipient. This just means that the recipient has to read multiple mails when it could all have been put into one mail. Once again, an excess of these unnecessary mails could easily be tagged as spam.
Going back to the original definition of spam, which is classified by the presence or absence of permission, what happens in a situation where the customer changes his or her mind? Most legitimate newsletters make it possible for recipients to unsubscribe from the mailing list at any given point in time. However, the fact is that very few people bother to go through the process of unsubscribe even if they are given the option. So, technically speaking, these newsletters are unwanted and the permission that was once given can now not be taken for granted. This, of course, is not within the marketer’s control but that does not change the fact that according to the recipient, the newsletter is spam because it is unwelcome.
The spreading out in the definition of the word ‘spam’ is not entirely within the marketer’s control. Earlier spammers might have been considered vile and thick-skinned people who do not give a second thought to a recipient’s consent in matters to do with receiving mail. But even that perception does not seem to be working now. It is possible that ‘innocent’ marketers might fall into the category of spammers even if they do not have any intention of sending unsolicited emails. And that has entirely to do with the recipient’s attitudes towards newsletters.
This kind of a perception towards newsletters has mostly come about because of the overload of information on the Internet. Email users have become more wary of the mails that they get, to the extent that they might be losing their patience with mailing lists that they have opted into themselves. There might not be a quick-fix solution to this and marketers should push for solutions within the bigger picture of spam mail for their own benefits. The only thing that marketers can really do is to keep their newsletters to the minimum. Include only the information that is necessary, club information together and cut down on the frequency.
