New FCC rules mandate ‘one-to-one’ marketing consent

The Federal Communications Commission is cracking down on robocallers and texters that have been asking forgiveness instead of permission.

The agency voted last week to adopt stricter rules on how so-called lead generators must obtain consent to reach consumers. The rules are aimed at closing a “loophole” that FCC Chair Jessica Rosenworcel said is “a significant source of a growing number of robocalls and robotexts.”

Lead-generation companies and comparison-shopping sites are not allowed to obtain bulk consent from consumers to contact them about a variety of products, services, and providers, the rules clarify.

This means that when you check a box to receive marketing communications from one company, you’ll hear only from them—not hundreds or even thousands of other entities they may be linked to through a marketing network, Rosenworcel said.

“We make clear that any company that wants to use robocalls and robotexts in their businesses obtain consent one to one. That means consumers get back the power to pick who they want to communicate with and when,” she said.

Indeed, automated and unsolicited texts are on the rise, according to new data from Robokiller. The spam call and text blocking platform found that, compared with the same period last year, robotexts rose by 8%—amounting to some 13.9 billion communications—in November, the equivalent of 19 spam texts per person.

FCC Commissioner Nathan Simington, a Republican, partly dissented from the decision, saying he supports the general idea of limiting marketing communications to logically related businesses. However, he said the agency needed to collect more information on how the restrictions affect small businesses like mortgage lenders, insurance brokers, and real estate agents.

“If I give consent to be robotexted about car insurance offers, I expect to receive texts about car insurance, not about garage doors—and, indeed, not even about car loans. Great. Makes sense,” he said in prepared remarks.

But he said the commission should not have narrowed the item to require one-to-one consent, at least not immediately.

“​​We could have developed a fulsome record that actually contemplated that issue, instead of parachuting in an approach at the eleventh hour that caught American small businesses flat-footed and risks benefiting only the plaintiffs’ bar,” he said.