The National Do Not Call Registry is a rare example of how, just occasionally, centralized government can do something good for a change. Telemarketing is a major annoyance. Telemarketers call many times a day, interrupting whatever you're doing to sell their junk. They repeatedly leave annoying messages about Florida vacations on people's answering machines. They avoid being identified by calling anonymously or being located in an area where Caller ID doesn't reach. It's an invasion of privacy on a massive scale. It's about time something was done about it.
Clearly, state-wide do not call lists are pointless. How often are you called by telemarketers in your own state? How can your state enforce its laws against telemarketers from other states? So a federal law is needed. Miraculously, Congress recognized this necessity, and authorized the FTC to run a national do not call list. It's not perfect; it doesn't apply to áll telemarketers, and it has a three-month waiting period after you register a new number, but nothing's perfect, and it seems like a reasonable compromise. It's even good for telemarketers, since it lets them concentrate their efforts on people who aren't annoyed enough with telemarketers to have signed up for the list yet, and avoid wasting time on people who would just refuse to buy from them anyway.
But now the telemarketers are all upset, claiming their freedom of speech has been violated. There are two problems with this notion. One is that freedom of speech doesn't guarantee an audience. If someone doesn't want to listen to you, you can't force them to hear your message. This isn't like a hypothetical situation where someone runs across their advertising message on a web page, is offended by it, and wants to force them to take it down, which wóuld be a violation of free speech. But freedom of speech works both ways. The listener has the right to refuse to hear, so long as other listeners remain free to listen. And telemarketers are still free to call numbers that aren't on the list. The second problem with the telemarketers' argument is that while the content of their speech may be protected by law, that fact doesn't authorize them to invade people's homes to deliver their message. The telephone is a uniquely intrusive medium of communication. Even if the caller says nothing, by simply ringing the phone they've already violated someone's privacy. At that point, you have two options: ignore the call and hope that if it's important the caller will leave a message, or drop whatever you're doing and run over to check the Caller ID to see who it is before the answering machine picks it up. Contrast this with junk mail, which waits to be picked up at your convenience. Even though junk mail vastly overwhelms legitimate mail, it isn't anywhere near as annoying as the telephone ringing at inconvenient moments several times a day.
As annoying as the telephone may be, there are times when it's useful or even essential to have one. Going without a phone isn't a realistic option. As long as the telephone is a necessity, any efforts to minimize its annoyance factor are welcome. Millions of people have already signed up for the list, confirming the necessity of such a list. Telemarketers have no right to disrupt our lives with their unwelcome sales pitches.
![[Blue Ribbon Campaign icon]](http://br.eff.org/brstrip.gif){kind=small}
