Bluetooth Marketing - Take II
Permission based marketing has a few key principles:
- Requirement for consumers to Opt-In prior to first contact
- Ability for consumers to Opt-Out
- Ability to identify the originator
Unfortunately – Bluetooth marketing doesn’t offer support for any of these… so far.
Bluetooth alerts are sent to any consumers who have their mobile phone configured for Bluetooth and set in “discoverable” mode. Fred Durman argues that if a consumer has their phone set to be visible to the world at large then it would include an invitation to be contacted by marketers as well as other regular consumers. In my opinion that is a tough argument to make.
The exception to Opt-In is an express or implied business relationship. Glyn Morgan, partner at law firm Taylor Wessing, believes that there may be a way to comply with this portion of the requirement by only operating blue tooth marketing services within a closed environment. A good example would be inside a movie theatre lobby, where it may be permissible to send blue tooth alerts to consumers advertising movie trailers, concession offers or other content directly related to the environment.
But how does a consumer express an opt-out? With SMS marketing you can reply to the message with the word “STOP” or “STOP ALL”. Not so with Bluetooth marketing. There is no way to tell the advertiser that you wish to opt-out from further marketing communications. One option might be to place an opt-out kiosk in a special place in the lobby and direct consumers wishing to Opt-Out to go to that kiosk and thus register their unique device as opt-out.
Identify the originator: Ok – so this is one that can be done as part of the content. If it’s a video clip it can include an originator with contact details. But what about a single track download. Do you really want to listen to the single from Cold Play and have the end of the track be an advertiser’s corporate details?
The industry view.
The advertising industry has a number of associations each having their own unique view on the topic of Bluetooth marketing. The IPA (
Ok – so how can Bluetooth marketing work?
Pairing is a specific set of steps to link your mobile phone with another Bluetooth device. In order to get your Bluetooth headset to work you have to “pair” with it. In order to connect your mobile phone to your laptop’s Bluetooth port for synchronization you have to “pair” with it – and yes – in order to flirt with anonymous strangers on the train (“toothing”) you have to pair with their mobile phone before you can exchange clandestine love notes.
When I’ve discussed this with various blue tooth marketing companies they have all resisted the idea as something that is too much effort for the consumer to do fearing that it would severely impact the effectiveness of the marketing. And to some degree I think they are right. But let’s look at the alternative. If brands SPAM consumers via Bluetooth and legislation comes along to indicate that it’s all illegal – then where will the Bluetooth marketing industry be?
One more time – from the top – with “feeling” this time.
If the first contact with the consumer is not requested – it’s SPAM according to the regulation.
The justifications:
- But if it’s cool content no one will mind.
- If they have their Bluetooth turned on they are asking for it.
- If we do it right it’s so hard that no one will do it.
- If they don’t want it they can just ignore it.
- If they don’t download the content then it means they want to Opt-Out.
These are all in the “nice try” category – but sorry. They don’t cut it.
Bluetooth marketing the way it is being done now is not in compliance with the spirit of current anti-SPAM legislation and industry code of practice and very soon it will be decided if it is compliant with the letter of the legislation covering mobile SPAM.
Whining: “But it’s hard…”
I’m the first to admit that marketing directly to consumers is getting harder and harder all the time. Consumers are rapidly taking control of their environment and their privacy and their personal space. There are telephone preference services, mail preference services, anti-SPAM legislation for e-mail and mobile and more. And why? Because marketers have gotten progressively more and more aggressive until the consumer has finally backlashed against the onslaught of marketing. Consumers have found a unified voice and the consumers are saying, “ENOUGH!”
It is time for a new paradigm. It is time for marketers to stop pushing and start listening to consumers and customers alike.
Until next week,

Sr. Consultant - Mobile Marketing
Pocket Reach Solutions, LLC


8 Comments:
Well, without sounding too much like an ad campaign, Jellingspot is an opt-in technology, because it uses a client-side application ... this means you get a LOT more power, and you must actively connect yourself to the Jellingspot. If you don't connect, you don't get bothered -- no spam. The battle now is between spam everybody solutions or opt-in ones like Jellingspot -- already, you can see a backlash forming against the spam ones ... I'm betting on opt-in.
Check it out: www.jellingspot.com
12:08 PM
This discussion is very different in Germany, and not really up-to-date. Spamming people is definitely annoying, but generally hating ads is silly, too.
Troy Norcross is wrong. Bluetooth marketing is 100 percent permission marketing, because the user must opt-in before he receives content (press 'yes'). If he doesn't want to receive anything, he can opt-out (press 'no').
The only mobile manufacturer we know, who doesn't give a prompt ("wanna receive something or not") is Siemens. Are there more?
Unfortunately, BlueCasting did a bad job in the London subway. Of course setting the phone on *visible* does not mean you should send him ads.
It does not depend on the marketers. The only reason for BlueSpamming is bad working tec-companies, who have no idea of doing the right marketing.
-> Technically, you can exclude Siemens phones, because these don't show a prompt saying *wanna have content or not*
-> As a consumer, you can identify the sender, because the standard prompt of the phone says "wanna receive content by -nameofcompany-*
If BlueCasting doesn't - bad for them.
-> Of course you can turn down the transmission power, so noone ever gets content while passing by. You only get content while reading the poster, within 10 seconds the access point should find you.
-> Of course you can first offer something on a _small_ poster, afterwords sending the person something, if he really was identifiying himself as *I wanna have it*
-> Of course it is nonsense to equip a 30 x 60 meter poster with 10 Bluetooth access points, because there will be massive losses and no conversions.
Concerning clients on phones:
Actually there is no chance to sell solutions to a big brand, that work only on Series 60 platform. In Germany, Symbian has only 1,7 percent market reach - forget about it. You can do it only for very very small target groups like test markets, or a few special cases like b2b events.
All the best.
8:04 PM
It's an interesting set of points made - too bad he's completely anonymous when he posts so we can't have a good debate...
The first point about permission where we seem to disagree is the occurrence of the message "Do you want content?" - That's IS the SPAM. You must have permission in order to make the 1st contact.
Second point - the technology is completely flexible about the "origin" bluetooth name. It is probably meaningful to the content but may or may not identify the company. And even if it identifies the company - it doesn't provide full contact details.
The comments regarding Symbian clients - S60 phones - Siemens phones accepting Bluetooth content without prompting - sounds like worth further discussion.
All the best - back at ya.
Troy
1:18 PM
First, let me say Sorry for being anonymous. I am working in a mobile marketing company, and both the market, and the competition is rough.
Second: Most marketing experts in Germany do _not_ agree to your interpretation. The "Do you want content-message" is _no_ spam. It's the opt-in/opt-out function.
- Do TV ads have a permision to make the 1st contact? No. You cannot hide. The only opt-out is to switch to another channel.
- Do TV ads "provide full contact details"? No.
- Do radio commercials or music in a shoppig mall have a permission to make the 1st contact? No.
- Do newspaper ads "provide full contact details"? No.
- Do short messages or e-mails ask for your permission? No. The phone rings, and the content IS ALREADY on your phone / PC.
Bluetooth is different: You get the content AFTER you approve it!
Avoiding spam means, not to push content to people where they don't expect it. Indeeed, the marketer has to be very careful on how the advertising is done.
Identifiying the company means, the consumer must have a chance to understand, from which marketer the ad comes.
So - marketers should not push content for 100 meters. It should be used locally, where the user has to reed something first, that tells him which content is provided.
Why ask for extreme Bluetooth marketing requirements?
Why not challenge legalities of classic media, and mobile media (SMS), and e-mail-marketing?
That would be fair and adequate.
Regards.
4:20 PM
Well - ok - so it's a tight market. I'm taking a stand publicly in hopes that I can attract other marketers who are looking for responsible and legal marketing practices.
Just for fun I'm going to contact a few marketing companies in Germany and ask them how they would apply the European Data Protection act of 2003 to Bluetooth marketing.
Becuase the original message in your example, "Do you want content" appears on a mobile device it is subject to the Data Protection law and is considered SPAM because the consumer did nothing to Opt-In prior to that first contact.
Your examples of Radio, Television, and newspaper don't have the same set of restrictions.
But what really concerns me is your assertion that short messages or e-mails don't ask for your permission. - The marketer MUST access permission before the first contact in the EU (not so in the US).
And as for telemarketing - it's not legal to telemarket to people on their mobile phones.
The underlying permise is very simple: If I am interrupted by my phone without having given my permission - then it is SPAM. And being interrupted - even to ask if I want the content - is SPAM.
The best way to do Bluetooth marketing is to promote that content is available within a given space via Bluetooth - and if a consumer wishes to download the content then they should pair their device with the marketer and then receive the free content. There IS a right way to do this.
You state: "Avoiding spam means, not to push content to people where they don't expect it." - I disagree. Avoiding SPAM is not to push content to people when they have not given their permission to receive it.
You say, "Why ask for extreme Bluetooth marketing requirements?" - I'm not. I'm stating that Bluetooth is subject to the same guidelines as currently apply to SMS, MMS, WAP Push and other forms of mobile marketing.
And I am completely unsure what you meant about challenging the legalities of classic media. As far as I can tell, traditional media and mobile media and e-mail marketing all have very clear guidelines and responsible, legitimate marketers understand how to apply them.
Troy
2:07 AM
Let's talk about "clear guidelines": Officially, they are existing. Of course, as a content company, you should provide double opt-in for newsletters, and you should provide full contact details, and full terms and conditions.
But in reality, most companies don't care about. And - funny - even most users don't. They get used to Spam, and they use their brains and senses as a strong filter.
So, it seems you want to be "more sacred than the Pope" (German proverb)...
In fact, companys like Jamba or Zed are the ones that cause a bitter flavour in Mobile Marketing - just think of their subscription methods and aggressive advertising.
Boring local marketing: Deutsche Post AG now has some new interactive posters that work with SMS. You have to send a SMS according to a certain content, afterwords it sends something back to you. What will you get? Stupid text messages, or 10 seconds-MMS.
But back to BT: How get the permission of a Bluetooth user?
1. First show him a local (!) poster, that explains which content is offered ("content's in the air"). This is the choice - like a shop window. The user decides if this offer is interesting or not. And he has the chance to identify the sender, and decides if it's trustworthy or not.
2. Then ask the user to put Bluetooth on. In this moment the user decides if he really wants to have this content stored on his phone.
3. Then ask him to accept incoming content. Now the user has still the chance to opt-out!
If you say opt-in messages are Spam, you and me both can quit the discussion, and you can close this blog. Because then Bluetooth marketing would never develop. Bluetooth architecture has certain technical features, that we have to accept.
You say "Radio, TV, and newspaper don't have the same set of restrictions" - ask why!?
Why are classic media rules different from Bluetooth marketing rules? Who are the pressure groups that influence the EU legislation?
Network operators, data protection specialists, and security companies. Imagine how big this lobby is.
If you don't want to read ads in newspapers you simply turn the page.
If you don't want to watch TV commercials you switch to another channel by pressing a button.
If you don't want to get content via Bluetooth, you press "no", or better, you not even put Bluetooth on.
Bluetooth marketing is annoying, when you do it like BlueCasting in the subway.
Bluetooth marketing can be wonderful, when you do it carefully, and locally, and for small target groups.
Why talk about Bluetooth marketing when you don't give it a chance? Why destroy a developing industry by categorically saying, it's all Spam?
I don't want to be rude, but if you are working for network operators you are basically not interested in supporting Bluetooth marketing, and then this disussion is obsolete anyway.
Regards
9:18 AM
Let's talk about "clear guidelines": Officially, they are existing. Of course, as a content company, you should provide double opt-in for newsletters, and you should provide full contact details, and full terms and conditions.
But in reality, most companies don't care about. And - funny - even most users don't. They get used to Spam, and they use their brains and senses as a strong filter.
So, it seems you want to be "more sacred than the Pope" (German proverb)...
In fact, companys like Jamba or Zed are the ones that cause a bitter flavour in Mobile Marketing - just think of their subscription methods and aggressive advertising.
Boring local marketing: Deutsche Post AG now has some new interactive posters that work with SMS. You have to send a SMS according to a certain content, afterwords it sends something back to you. What will you get? Stupid text messages, or 10 seconds-MMS.
But back to BT: How get the permission of a Bluetooth user?
1. First show him a local (!) poster, that explains which content is offered ("content's in the air"). This is the choice - like a shop window. The user decides if this offer is interesting or not. And he has the chance to identify the sender, and decides if it's trustworthy or not.
2. Then ask the user to put Bluetooth on. In this moment the user decides if he really wants to have this content stored on his phone.
3. Then ask him to accept incoming content. Now the user has still the chance to opt-out!
If you say opt-in messages are Spam, you and me both can quit the discussion, and you can close this blog. Because then Bluetooth marketing would never develop. Bluetooth architecture has certain technical features, that we have to accept.
You say "Radio, TV, and newspaper don't have the same set of restrictions" - ask why!?
Why are classic media rules different from Bluetooth marketing rules? Who are the pressure groups that influence the EU legislation?
Network operators, data protection specialists, and security companies. Imagine how big this lobby is.
If you don't want to read ads in newspapers you simply turn the page.
If you don't want to watch TV commercials you switch to another channel by pressing a button.
If you don't want to get content via Bluetooth, you press "no", or better, you not even put Bluetooth on.
Bluetooth marketing is annoying, when you do it like BlueCasting in the subway.
Bluetooth marketing can be wonderful, when you do it carefully, and locally, and for small target groups.
Why talk about Bluetooth marketing when you don't give it a chance? Why destroy a developing industry by categorically saying, it's all Spam?
I don't want to be rude, but if you are working for network operators you are basically not interested in supporting Bluetooth marketing, and then this disussion is obsolete anyway.
Regards
8:14 PM
Ok - last comment for this entry... and let's start by asking you to please come out in the open if you want to have a serious discussion. You have my email address from my profile - just e-mail me.
Point 1: Companies and consumers "do" care a lot about SPAM. Legally companies care. And consumers are more sensitized against SPAM than ever.
Point 2: Jamba and Zed offer mobile content subscriptions. This is different than unsolicited mobile marketing.
Point 3: In your "getting the consumer permission" your Step 3 is the broken step. Step 3 should be: Ask the user to PAIR with the marketers content source - then ask them if they want to receive content.
Because it is a mobile phone - it doesn't matter what the first message is (opt-in or actual content) - the first time the consumer is contacted it must be permission based. This is the most basic premise. You can not talk to the consumer on their mobile phone - in any way - without first having permission.
Point 4. Bluetooth can be used for marketing and very effectively. There are clear guidelines for how it can be used that are permission based.
Point 5. Radio, TV and newspaper are not subject to Data Protection laws. Mobile and e-mail are very personal and offer consumer special protection from unsolicited communication.
Point 6. I am not working for the OpCos - you're right - they don't want Bluetooth to take off because they make no revenue from it.
This BLOG is about educating marketers and consumers about responsible mobile marketing - raising awareness and having discussions about what a consumer will consider SPAM and breaking down some of the old, outdated and socially irresponsible ideas of broadcast marketing.
Bluetooth marketing can be done and very effectively - but the opt-in has to be an action first taken by the consumer (PAIR with the marketer) - NOT with the marketer making the first contact.
Do you want to receive this content - Yes/No is the original unsolicited message.
Thanks for an interesting debate. If you want to have further discussions, e-mail me.
Troy
10:51 PM
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home