Mail & Advertising: Myth Versus Reality

Although advertising mail is widely used by businesses, charities, unions, politicians, and associations, the image of this advertising medium is often clouded with myths and fables.

Despite whispers (and sometimes shouts) to the contrary, advertising mail is not clogging the nation’s landfills, not subsidized by first-class postal rates, and not unwanted.Here are advertising mail’s most common myths, and here too are the reasons such myths are unfair, unreasonable, illogical and plain wrong.

Myth 1: Advertising mail is nothing but “junk.”

The term “junk mail” presumes that advertising mail is something without value. It is a prejudicial expression, unfair and unwarranted, the equivalent of saying that a reporter is a “yellow journalist.”

To put the matter simply, if advertising mail is junk, if it is unwanted, unread, and unproductive, then it would have been abandoned long ago by advertisers.

The truth is that most Americans, most of the time, use advertising mail. The result is massive economic and employment benefits nationwide.

“The Postal Service has about 738,000 employees, relies on revenue from operations rather than taxpayer funding and is one of few federal bureaucracies with which most Americans have regular contact,” says The Washington Post. “It is at the center of a $900 billion mailing industry, which employs 9 million people in such businesses as direct mail, paper manufacturers and printers.” (See: Postal Service Finances Bleak, March 23, 2004)

Myth 2: Advertising mail is unwanted.

For this myth to make sense, it must be asked if any form of advertising is wanted. There are few (if any) reports of consumers demanding more ads in newspapers or magazines, or pickets standing outside radio and television stations pleading for more program interruptions.

In contrast, people request catalogs. People want to know about sales and special close-outs. They ask for coupons and they want free local newspapers. And people often ask to be on the mailing list of a favorite religious organization, environmental group, or charity.

Myth 3: Advertising mail is an environmental problem.

This simply is not the case. If advertising mail is a significant environmental problem, then why havemajor environmental groups been substantial and long-term users of advertising mail? For instance, according to The Wall Street Journal (May 13, 1991), the National Wildlife Federation was expected to send out approximately 60 million pieces of advertising mail in 1991 while Greenpeace mailed approximately 33 million pieces that year. All major environmental groups use advertising mail to reach current members, seek financial support and advocate positions and ideas.

When asked if Greenpeace was contributing to the nation’s environmental problems because the group uses advertising mail, Peter Bahouth, Greenpeace’s executive director, told ABC News (September 10, 1991) that, “accusing environmental groups of paper pollution is a bit like saying we need to get the ambulances off the street because they’re loud.”

Truth is, there is tremendous demand for scrap paper — including ad mail. China, as one example, imported scrap paper worth almost $1.5 billion in 2007.

Not only is advertising mail not clogging the nation’s landfills, in many cases it offers substantial environmental advantages. When consumers order from catalogs or use coupons received through the mail, they avoid needless trips, save gasoline, reduce air pollution, decrease highway traffic, lessen the threat of global warming, and cut our dependence on foreign oil sources.

Myth 4: Advertising mail is only for big companies.

One of advertising mail’s most attractive aspects is that it can be targeted. If an advertiser buys a spot on radio or television his or her message is broadcast to the entire community with an advertising rate that’s charged accordingly — even if the advertiser is just is a small store in a single location. In a similar fashion, even zoned editions of large urban daily papers often cover far larger areas than small advertisers need.

Rather than being just for large users, advertising mail democratizes the marketing process because it can be used by businesses, organizations, and religious congregations of every size. Local dry cleaners, restaurants, food stores, and pharmacies can all use advertising mail effectively, as can major auto manufacturers and vast national enterprises.

Myth 5: First-class postal rates subsidize advertising mail.

Not only is this myth not true, it’s also not possible under federal law. Federal law requires each class of mail to pay its own way. No class of mail can pay less — and no class can pay more — than its fair share of postal costs.

So how is it possible that advertising postal rates are lower than first-class costs? The Postal Service charges a variety of rates because it provides differing levels of service. As an example, if you mail a first-class letter you know that delivery within a certain time period is guaranteed, that your letter is private and cannot be opened, and that your letter will be returned if it cannot be delivered.

Other classes of mail enjoy fewer services. For example, advertising mail — mail often used by catalog companies, religious congregations, local retailers, and others — is subject to inspection and can be opened. There is no guaranteed delivery date for advertising mail and such materials are not automatically returned without extra cost.

Another reason rates differ is that mailers do much of the work that would otherwise be done within the Postal Service. For instance, mailers must deliver their mail to a limited number of specialized postal center, the mail must have appropriate ZIP+4 information, the materials must be arranged in ZIP code order, all envelopes must face the same direction, all labels must be machine readable, etc. In effect, less work for the Post Office and more work for the mailer produces lower rates.

Myth 6: Postal rates would decline if advertising mail were eliminated.

Over the years, advertising mail has become crucially important to the Postal Service. In 2007, according to the annual report of the U.S. Postal Service, advertising mail represented nearly 50 percent of all delivered mail.

Now imagine if a letter carrier normally has 10 pieces of mail to deliver each day. If advertising mail is suddenly eliminated all homes and businesses must still be served, even though the carrier has less to deliver and Postal Service revenues have been slashed by billions of dollars. The result would be that costs would have to be divided by the remaining volume of mail. Stamp prices would soar.

Myth 7: Once your name is on a mailing list it stays on forever.

It’s bad business for a mailer to spend good money on postage and materials to reach an individual with no interest in a given product, service, charity or message. For this reason, most mailers are happy to comply with a name removal request.

The advertising mail industry maintains a free service which allows individuals to have their names removed from many national mailing lists. For details, go to the DMA’s Mail Preference Service.

If a company or charity does not belong to an industry organization, then call the organization’s “800″ number and ask to have your name removed from its mailing list. Alternatively, send a note to the organization in the mailer’s self-addressed, postage-paid envelop and ask to have your name removed.

Myth 8: Advertising mail should be limited.

If it is agreed that advertising mail should be limited, then precisely who should stop mailing?

Should we curb the mail sent by our nation’s churches and synagogues? Should we restrict the mail sent by environmental groups, charitable organizations, educational and scientific institutions, labor organizations, political parties, or members of Congress? Should we limit small businesses? Big business? Minority businesses? And who should tell us who can mail and who can’t? A governmental agency?

If the goal is to reduce advertising by mail, why stop with advertising mail? After all, a substantial volume of advertising mail enters the nation’s homes in the form of second-class newspapers and magazines? Should we shut down these advertising outlets as well? As Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas explained with great care, freedom of speech means not only the right to print, but also the right to distribute, the right to receive and the right to read.

The best way to control advertising is to test its effectiveness in the marketplace. If people don’t like something they won’t respond, and without adequate responses advertisers will simply change the way they do business.

Technorati Tags: advertising, mail, myths, postal, reality, subsidies, volume