Spam trigger words, do they exist, or don't they? And if spam trigger words exist, what are they? Here's the definitive answer. Ask 5 different email marketing or email deliverability experts whether there is really such a thing as spam trigger words, and you'll get seven different answers. Even highly respected deliverability sources will say something like "There is no such thing as spam trigger words... except.." or "Spam trigger words don't exist, but...". Because you see, spam trigger words do exist.
Google is ending a pilot program that allowed political campaigns to bypass the spam filter, and they have filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit that the RNC filed against them. Note that Google is not 'restarting' spam filtering in Gmail for political campaigns, as claimed by some, and that's because they never stopped. Confused? You won't be, read on.
By now everybody knows that business email addresses that go directly to one individual, such as jo********@ex*****.com, are considered personal data (personally identifiable information, or PII) for the purposes of GDPR and, increasingly, email privacy laws in other countries. But what about generic business email addresses, such as in**@ex*****.com, sa***@ex*****.com, or co*****@ex*****.com (also known as 'role account' email addresses)? The conventional wisdom is that those are not considered personal data, and so are fair game to add to your mailing list without prior consent. But not always, there's a catch!
Users of mass email services such as Gmass, Woodpecker, Lemlist and others, that have been using Gmail's API to send bulk email that tricked recipients into thinking that they were receiving personal one-to-one emails, have been put on notice today by Google: "Applications that use multiple accounts to abuse Google policies, bypass Gmail account limitation, circumvent filters and spam, or otherwise subvert restrictions are prohibited from accessing Gmail API scopes."
Here's one way to tell transactional email vs marketing email: have a court slap you for putting what it says is advertising or marketing content in your opt-in confirmation email. This court decision happened inside the EU, however it is also a cautionary tale for anyone in the U.S., or Canada, or really anywhere that has national email marketing laws.
If you're looking for the promised "this is spam" option that Google promised with it's new Gmail political campaign pilot program (you know, the program that lets political campaigns sign up to by-pass the Gmail spam filter and go right to your inbox), you're not alone. Oh, it's there, but it's hidden.
We all know that email delivery problems are costly, and can damage your email reputation. But […]
"Which copyright date should be on a website?" someone asked us recently. Webmasters are often confused about which date they should use as their copyright date on a website. In fact, a whole lot of sites have the wrong copyright date on their website. As an Internet policy institute, and because our CEO is an Internet policy lawyer, we often get questions unrelated to our core offering of email sender certification and deliverability services, and we are happy to answer them if we can. The answer to this one is actually really easy, and will make perfect sense to you once we explain it.
Google's Gmail Verified Sender Pilot Program for political campaigns is up and running, and political campaigns can now apply to be part of Google's program which allows political campaign email to bypass the spam filter and be delivered directly to Gmail users' inboxes, but only once unless the user doesn't click on the big red "I don't want this" message that will accompany it.