“I do not like them here or there. I do not like them anywhere.”
Unsolicited electronic junk mail, otherwise known as spam, is the oft received and seldom welcomed bane of the Internet experience. As a computer consultant by profession, and a frequent “surfer” by habit, I spend an inordinate amount of time in front of a computer. I, like millions of others around the world, receive countless advertisements for products and services ranging from the sublime to the (usually)ridiculous.
As much as the disdain for such email increases, the prevailing question is, “should there be laws to eliminate spam?” As with my children when asking me for candy or toys, my first reaction to regulation is often “no”. However, since you, the reader, are most likely not a child, I will offer a more verbose response to the question.
As of this writing, thirty-three states have enacted “anti-spam” laws, with Nevada taking the lead in 1997. Additionally, there are a number of bills coming from both Republicans and Democrats in the 108th Congress to reduce or eliminate the occurrence of spam. Yet, despite “opt-out” provisions, disclaimers, and advertisement labels, spam is on the rise with millions of unsolicited email transmitted across the World Wide Web every year.
It should be evident by now that legislation is not the answer to reduce or eliminate spam. Making an act a crime does not preclude individuals from engaging in the act. After all, criminals, by definition, disregard the rule of law. That aside, there are perfectly legitimate businesses whose primary method of reaching their target audience is through email. Such legislation could very often preclude these businesses from engaging in legitimate commerce.
If one were to decide to criminalize all forms of spam, then the next logical target would be regular junk mail. While we’re at it, let’s criminalize cigarette billboards too. After all, I don’t smoke, and didn’t ask to see the advertisements, but I’m forced to look at them during my daily commute. Or am I?
To many, myself included, such legislative interference goes beyond futility, resulting in negative unintended consequences. Clearly the marketplace is the best meter for determining the success or failure of an enterprise, provided there are little or no unnecessary regulatory constraints. Though the advent of the Internet and email has led to the development of spam, it has also created new revenue and job opportunities for companies attempting to eliminate it. Many Internet Service Providers (ISP’s) and software companies have developed filters and spam-blocking technology with varying degrees of success.
If we are to experience complete freedom in America, we must shed the notion that legislation or government is the panacea for society’s maladies. The private sector, fueled by market demands, is perfectly willing and capable to handle spam, among other things. Introducing legislation merely introduces additional problems, and will ultimately fail to bring its intended consequence into fruition. We all have the choice to delete unwanted emails, implement filters, or install preventative software – just as we have the ability to ignore that annoying billboard on the way to work…
Green eggs anyone?
| Sean Turner Sean Turner is a member of the Project 21 Advisory Council of the National Center for Public Policy Research, a regular columnist for RenewAmerica.us and a contributor to a number of conservative political websites. Readers can email him at Sean Turner. |