I would wager (but for hopefully obvious reasons, I can't really provide evidence) that most people really don't want to receive these kinds of messages. Even those who are eager to share opinions with strangers might prefer to be in control of the exchange; even those who don't care about that would be right to suspect push polling a priori and it's not as if Apple should be expected to determine whose polls are legit. (Indeed, arguably that represents a far greater potential to interfere with freedom of expression.)
I don't know if it's because we live in Iowa† or what, but my wife and I receive anywhere between one to five of these political messages per day even now, nearly one year after the presidential election. I can ignore them, delete them, report them as junk, reply "stop", block each number, but nothing works. They'll just diligently continue sending from a brand new number each time. They're a scourge.
† Relevant because of its "first in the nation" status that was recently taken away. Pollsters and political candidates don't seem to have gotten the message.
>But not all “unknown sender” messages are created equal.
That's true, but as a user having one spam folder where I can filter through those messages and determine for myself seems logical.
I would be happy to fill out a quick anonymous poll for a honest to god polling service, but I've also been contacted by folks who I think were doing "push polls" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Push_poll) and I suspect my answers were irrelevant to the process.
Yes, almost single line of remote communication is now clogged with unsolicited spamming, scamming, and other money-raising schemes. If we want to be able to talk to each other remotely, we need some form of automated filtering and signal boosting.
The market-research/political-consulting/horse-race-polling firms are in fact part of the problem here, and casting it as a "threat to democracy" is ... well ... about what I would expect from Jeff Bezos' opinion page.
> Many will cheer the likely disappearance of political fundraising texts and robocalls around election season. But not all “unknown sender” messages are created equal.
Sorry but I do not pay for cellular service in order to receive unsolicited texts.
My daily driver is a dumb Consumer Cellular Link II (which uses a castrated Android under the covers). It's turned off most of the time. I don't use or want apps on it. My laptop satisfies those needs. My texting is limited to rendezvous with my family. A silent ringtone effectively blocks all unknown callers but I can't easily block unknown texts.
Apple is doing the right thing here if this feature works as described. Although I won't be switching any smartphone, I would immediately upgrade to a dumb phone that segregated texts this way and I hope to have that option in the future.
Maybe the WP has never heard of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Push_poll - or maybe that falls under an "omit any inconvenient facts" editorial policy of theirs?
This assertion didn't impress me either:
> AI could be used to allow legitimate polling calls and texts to go through, while filtering out fraud and scams.
I am shocked that someone who co-founded a research and analytics firm would be concerned about Apple filtering out unsolicited messages! /s
I admit the "undermining democracy" angle seems a bit new, but let's be honest, if our elected officials cared about their constituents, they could conduct town halls and use other mechanisms to determine what their constituents want. Democracy existed well before opinion polls and it will be fine if people are finally able to avoid political spam and misinformation posing as a poll.
We should be continuing to eliminate all the loopholes for politicians and religious institutions in all of our laws.
I would wager (but for hopefully obvious reasons, I can't really provide evidence) that most people really don't want to receive these kinds of messages. Even those who are eager to share opinions with strangers might prefer to be in control of the exchange; even those who don't care about that would be right to suspect push polling a priori and it's not as if Apple should be expected to determine whose polls are legit. (Indeed, arguably that represents a far greater potential to interfere with freedom of expression.)
I don't know if it's because we live in Iowa† or what, but my wife and I receive anywhere between one to five of these political messages per day even now, nearly one year after the presidential election. I can ignore them, delete them, report them as junk, reply "stop", block each number, but nothing works. They'll just diligently continue sending from a brand new number each time. They're a scourge.
† Relevant because of its "first in the nation" status that was recently taken away. Pollsters and political candidates don't seem to have gotten the message.
>But not all “unknown sender” messages are created equal.
That's true, but as a user having one spam folder where I can filter through those messages and determine for myself seems logical.
I would be happy to fill out a quick anonymous poll for a honest to god polling service, but I've also been contacted by folks who I think were doing "push polls" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Push_poll) and I suspect my answers were irrelevant to the process.
OMG, pollsters may be treated like spammers. Truly the greatest threat to democracy today.
https://archive.is/7uiOo
Yes, almost single line of remote communication is now clogged with unsolicited spamming, scamming, and other money-raising schemes. If we want to be able to talk to each other remotely, we need some form of automated filtering and signal boosting.
The market-research/political-consulting/horse-race-polling firms are in fact part of the problem here, and casting it as a "threat to democracy" is ... well ... about what I would expect from Jeff Bezos' opinion page.
I have one of these devices on my landline.
https://www.truecall.co.uk/shop/truecall-call-blocker
Having an equivalent functionality built in to a mobile would definitely be welcome.
Its like they were waiting to write something unfavorable about apple because they brought investments to USA
> Many will cheer the likely disappearance of political fundraising texts and robocalls around election season. But not all “unknown sender” messages are created equal.
Sorry but I do not pay for cellular service in order to receive unsolicited texts.
My daily driver is a dumb Consumer Cellular Link II (which uses a castrated Android under the covers). It's turned off most of the time. I don't use or want apps on it. My laptop satisfies those needs. My texting is limited to rendezvous with my family. A silent ringtone effectively blocks all unknown callers but I can't easily block unknown texts.
Apple is doing the right thing here if this feature works as described. Although I won't be switching any smartphone, I would immediately upgrade to a dumb phone that segregated texts this way and I hope to have that option in the future.
Maybe the WP has never heard of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Push_poll - or maybe that falls under an "omit any inconvenient facts" editorial policy of theirs?
This assertion didn't impress me either:
> AI could be used to allow legitimate polling calls and texts to go through, while filtering out fraud and scams.
I am shocked that someone who co-founded a research and analytics firm would be concerned about Apple filtering out unsolicited messages! /s
I admit the "undermining democracy" angle seems a bit new, but let's be honest, if our elected officials cared about their constituents, they could conduct town halls and use other mechanisms to determine what their constituents want. Democracy existed well before opinion polls and it will be fine if people are finally able to avoid political spam and misinformation posing as a poll.
We should be continuing to eliminate all the loopholes for politicians and religious institutions in all of our laws.