Trump Campaign Angry That Cell Carriers Blocked Company Texts To Voters (arstechnica.com) 103
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: President Trump's re-election campaign has accused Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile of "suppression of political speech" over the carriers' blocking of spam texts sent by the campaign. The fight was described Wednesday in an in-depth article by Business Insider and other reports. "The Trump campaign has been battling this month with the biggest US cellphone carriers over an effort to blast millions of cell users with texts meant to coax them to vote or donate," Business Insider wrote. "President Donald Trump's adviser and son-in-law, Jared Kushner, didn't appreciate it when AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile blocked mass campaign texts to voters. He called the companies to complain, setting off the legal wrangling."
When contacted by Ars, a Trump campaign spokesperson said that "any effort by the carriers to restrict the campaign from contacting its supporters is suppression of political speech. Plain and simple." The Trump campaign statement also said it "stands by the compliance of its texting programs" with the US Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) and Federal Communications Commission guidelines. Business Insider wrote that "the showdown got serious at the start of July when Trump's team sent a blast of texts to people who hadn't signed up for them," and "a third-party firm hired to screen such messages for the major cellphone companies blocked the texts." The article said that campaign lawyers and the carriers "are still fighting over what kinds of messages the campaign is allowed to send and what the companies have the power to stop." Politico wrote about the dispute on Monday. "People familiar with the chain of events said Verizon, T-Mobile and AT&T flagged potential regulatory problems with the peer-to-peer messaging operation, which differs from robo-texting in that texts are sent individually, as opposed to a mass blast," Politico wrote. "But within Trump's orbit, the episode has further fueled suspicions that big tech companies are looking to influence the election." The Trump campaign has not explained why the texts are legal and shouldn't have been blocked. They also didn't say how many people they tried to send the texts to, or whether the texts were unsolicited or sent to people who had signed up for campaign communications.
Carriers "viewed the texts as a possible violation of federal anti-robocall laws and Federal Communications Commission rules that come with hefty fines," Business Insider reported, citing information provided by "two Republicans familiar with the effort." Trump "campaign operatives" contend that its texting "exists in a legal gray area that allows campaigns to blast cellphone users if the messages are sent manually," Business Insider also wrote.
When contacted by Ars, a Trump campaign spokesperson said that "any effort by the carriers to restrict the campaign from contacting its supporters is suppression of political speech. Plain and simple." The Trump campaign statement also said it "stands by the compliance of its texting programs" with the US Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) and Federal Communications Commission guidelines. Business Insider wrote that "the showdown got serious at the start of July when Trump's team sent a blast of texts to people who hadn't signed up for them," and "a third-party firm hired to screen such messages for the major cellphone companies blocked the texts." The article said that campaign lawyers and the carriers "are still fighting over what kinds of messages the campaign is allowed to send and what the companies have the power to stop." Politico wrote about the dispute on Monday. "People familiar with the chain of events said Verizon, T-Mobile and AT&T flagged potential regulatory problems with the peer-to-peer messaging operation, which differs from robo-texting in that texts are sent individually, as opposed to a mass blast," Politico wrote. "But within Trump's orbit, the episode has further fueled suspicions that big tech companies are looking to influence the election." The Trump campaign has not explained why the texts are legal and shouldn't have been blocked. They also didn't say how many people they tried to send the texts to, or whether the texts were unsolicited or sent to people who had signed up for campaign communications.
Carriers "viewed the texts as a possible violation of federal anti-robocall laws and Federal Communications Commission rules that come with hefty fines," Business Insider reported, citing information provided by "two Republicans familiar with the effort." Trump "campaign operatives" contend that its texting "exists in a legal gray area that allows campaigns to blast cellphone users if the messages are sent manually," Business Insider also wrote.
Odd I have been getting (Score:2, Interesting)
Just my 2 cents
Re:Odd I have been getting (Score:4, Informative)
Re: Odd I have been getting (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. To me that sounds like "robot call". But if they're sending them individually that *is* a significant difference.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Odd I have been getting (Score:5, Interesting)
I started getting Biden texts after I donated to them, never got them before that time
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So: after you gave them your contact information (email and/or cell number) and permission (possibly through a checkbox you didn't notice) to contact you whenever they felt like it? Then they started sending you stuff? I'm shocked, SHOCKED!!
Well yes, that was the GP's point. Why would you be shocked literally or sarcastically about it?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
I do not get how American political parties decide on their candidates.
Every year, I go from "Well, this year they have people who look halfway normal, and whose motivations I can understand!" to "These are the two lizardfolks I have to choose between?"
Were Trump and Clinton the best American politics had to offer, the last time? What on Earth made Biden attractive to the Democratic voters, this timne? He is the closest they could get to Clinton - were they so happy with the 2016 outcome they needed to ro
Re: Odd I have been getting (Score:3)
Romney was hardly a terrible candidate. He simply stumbled into the era of media frenzy. Politically, his achilles hill was his difficulty with evangelical Christians. But demographically this was probably ok, as the crazies were much more concerned with baby-murdering Democrats than they were with heretical prophets.
He mostly suffered from running against Obama. Obama won a Nobel Peace Prize just for being Obama. Defeating that kind of political cachet was going to be insurmountable for pretty much any can
Re: Odd I have been getting (Score:4, Insightful)
Mitt Romney is a decent person. His biggest liability is being part of the Republicans Party. I could see him helping to lead a successor to the GOP. The GOP is hemorrhaging members who don't want to be affiliated with the current administration.
Re: (Score:2)
The other Democratic candidates were crazies, neo-communists, ...
Sounds like just the thing to cancel out the phalanx of neo-fascists crazies on the Republican side.
Re: Odd I have been getting (Score:2, Interesting)
Biden is the capitulation candidate for the angry Clintonistas. Every one knows Biden should have been the one running in 2016. Every one knows Trump wouldn't be president if Biden had run in 2016. But because of the Clinton donor apparatus, they sold out Biden for Clinton's money in the hopes it would bring a blue wave. Turns out, the party elite were operating in an echo chamber. Enough of them have now stumbled out of their information bunker and now they are trying to "fix" history by putting Biden in t
Re: (Score:2)
I assume the candidates are chosen from the pool who have enough money to put themselves forward, by the real leaders (no, not "teh joos") who have the money to run the maga-expensive campaigns. And the one left standing is the one they think is most compliant to their desires.
Remember the Republican party tried quite hard to stop Trump from getting the candidacy, it was only the popular support that he got that forced their hand.
Also remember Obama was a 2-bit lawyer until he was chosen, and now he's a mul
Re: (Score:2)
And he's destroying it right out from under his own feet. I guess that's a plus to you.
Re: (Score:2)
It was beautiful, they did a good job of saying it with tears in their eyes. He's the best at knowing what planet this is. Believe him!
Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)
You donated to Biden? I don't even think he knows what planet he's on. Say what you will about Trump but he seems to know where he is.
I donated to Biden too , and I have also been getting the Biden texts twice daily.
Biden isn't my first choice. Maybe in 2016. If the DNC shaved a dogs ass and made it walk backwards, and ran it against trump I'd be voting for the for the dogs shaved fucking ass.
Know this with every fiber of your being, trump is WORSE than unqualified. He is worse than an actual chimp (at being POTUS). He is worse then a dog , with its ass shaved walking backwards.(at being POTUS)
trump is a con man, a cheat , a liar and
Re: (Score:3)
And then there are people who live in actual reality, where two of Trumps accomplishments were pushing the USMCA and getting behind the 'first step act'... Both actions undid shit legislation backed by Biden, NAFTA and Biden's crime bill... This is the reality everyone else actually sees outside of the Democrat echo chamber.
You must be high. the USMCA ? You Mean NAFTA rewritten to be anti Mexican. Is this what your infinite wisdom and time outside reality (the democratic echo chamber) has lead you to believe? It's convenience to forget the fact that the continent of North America is stronger when we are all stable and prosperous. It's convenient to ignore the fact that our president dislikes brown people. It isn't noble it isn't to be celebrated.
What out current leader fails to comprehend is that all our our global spending
Re: (Score:1)
I have a nice montage of Trump hanging around "brown people" (as you so casually racist say) and they're all smiling and laughing like nothing is up and they're all rich people getting along fine.
And the caption that goes with it says "nobody thought Trump was racist, until he stood for election".
the trade deals are complicated - nobody would say that the deals you have with China have done your country much good overall. perhaps you shoudl try watching Fox News for a bit yourself.
Re: (Score:2)
I have a nice montage of Trump hanging around "brown people" (as you so casually racist say) and they're all smiling and laughing like nothing is up and they're all rich people getting along fine.
And the caption that goes with it says "nobody thought Trump was racist, until he stood for election".
the trade deals are complicated - nobody would say that the deals you have with China have done your country much good overall. perhaps you shoudl try watching Fox News for a bit yourself.
Right...nobody thought Trump was racist until he stood for election....except for being found guilty of race discrimination in renting, race discrimination complaints at his casinos and other properties (most were settled when he realized he couldn't win or outspend the complainant), his published ad wanting the Central Park 5 arrested and jailed, etc (despite their being found not guilty due to actual evidence establishing their innocence), his comments over the years...all long before he he stood for elec
Re: (Score:3)
What our current leader fails to comprehend can fill a star system!
Re: (Score:1)
> Say what you will about Trump but he seems to know where he is.
In deep shit? I love the latest ad by the Lincoln Project that points out just how deeply enmeshed in child preadator Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislane Maxwell's circle he is, with a voiceover of him this week saying he wished child sex trafficker Ghislane Maxwell well.
Standard GOP projection - every accusation of theirs is a confession. "The DEMS are running a child slavery ring out of a nonexistent basement in a pizza restaurant!!! But pay
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Reply to them (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Prove it.
Re: Odd I have been getting (Score:2)
No, they are spam. Just because they weren't caught doesn't mean malice. As a Republican, I get tons of crap that I never signed up for from neighboring states local elections; all Republicans no Dems. Same with YouTube ads.
So I won't fault the carriers for blocking some spam. Something is better than nothing. The Trump campaign should request the Biden stuff be blocked and move on. The onus should be on the carriers to show if they made a mistake and correct it or why it wasn't/shouldn't be blocked.
And
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
the Biden campaigns unsolicited texts for a few months now. So I guess texts from the Biden campaign are not spam.
The Trump campaign texts I've seen were super spammy though, while the Biden texts seemed more straightforward and less clickbaity. Maybe there's just a normal spam filter at the bottom of all this. I guess I shouldn't be surprised that the Trump version was ... less than classy.
Re: (Score:1)
Maybe because the Biden campaign texts do not include niceties as "China's virus", "build the wall", etc. in them?
Politics.. so annoying (Score:5, Insightful)
Wouldn't it be nice if political ads were illegal and the candidates simply had to do debates with each other to win over the votes?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, allowing corporations the ability to spend endlessly as "free speech" has been a big part of the problem
The only way for Dems to compete is like Obama and Sanders, millions and millions of small donors
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
This would be totally unfair for morons who want to run for office!
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Politics.. so annoying (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Wasn't there some Heinlein quote to the effect that a desire to hold public office should preclude you from it?
To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.
Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe
Re: (Score:2)
They have something like that in Japan. Most political advertising and campaigning is banned. No TV or radio ads, no web or social media campaigns. In fact only one broadcaster, NHK, is even allowed to do news coverage during the election campaigning period.
They are allowed to campaign from open top busses and with posters.
I'm not sure how well it really works, they have had an almost unbroken run of one party in power for 50 years.
Re: (Score:2)
what number are they from? (Score:2)
In other words . . . (Score:3)
the anti-spam restrictions put in place by the FCC headed by Ajit Pai are doing their job.
Amazing.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
>"SPAM == anything I disagree with!"
To me, SPAM = anything I didn't actively request to receive. Just because some company or organization HAS my Email, or phone number, doesn't mean I want their crappy "communications." "Opting out" is meaningless. You have already been annoyed, they often don't honor it, if they do honor it, it is only AFTER several more spams, then they decide what communication is "so important" that you can't opt out of it, and then give the contact info to another "department" t
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
So we don't get political spam and a shit pile is getting sacked?
I'd call that win-win.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Ajit is just another tool that CROOKED government is using to undue the hard work putting in protections for citizens so abusers can make a buck.
Ajit does need to go. Perhaps if Trump is ousted, Biden will replace him.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
text's
Number of instances in the English language where an apostrophe forms a plural: 0
Trump understands something? (Score:1)
After thinking about this more (Score:3, Insightful)
Just my 2 cents
Re: (Score:2)
If the provider allows all the messages in without any filter, people complain about how much spam comes in. If the provider filters spam to a spam folder, customers will complain that things they want get filtered and things they don't want don't. Further, they'll also complain about the quantity of spam they get even when it's being filtered into the spam folder. If the prov
Re: (Score:2)
>"If the provider allows all the messages in without any filter, people complain about how much spam comes in. If the provider filters spam to a spam folder, customers will complain[...]"
It is why a lot of ISPs simply stopped doing Email, period. It was just too much work and too many complaints from users. They just gave up and forced people to use crappy webmail like gmail.
I am in the same boat administering Email at work. We stop all spam BEFORE delivery. So there is no filtering, per-say, just b
Re:After thinking about this more (Score:4, Informative)
They didn't filter your messages, they filtered Trump's. Stopping spam at the source is not invasive to you nor is it slimy.
Please, TV networks - do the same (Score:1, Flamebait)
TV Networks - please block this braying idiot from his meandering rallies labeled "Press Conference."
When he starts braying... or insulting women... or Black people... WALK THE **** OUT. Leave it to OANN and FOX.
If only every time he acted like an ass people would walk out of the room we wouldn't have Don Jr, Barron, or his endless stupid comments about a COGNITIVE test he still thinks is an IQ TEST but can't remember it's name.
Plane. Man. Woman. TV. Go away and give us a real leader.
E
Re: Please, TV networks - do the same (Score:4, Interesting)
Thank you. Totally agree. I don't mind if the reporters stay or go. Just stop reporting on it. If the topic is supposed to be about COVID-19, it's news only if it stays on topic. Once the conference deviates, stop reporting and stop asking questions. Stop airing Trump's random brain wanderings and rabbit holes; you are only encouraging it.
There is TONS of news around the world, plenty to fill time with. If you see a network misreporting the conf or attacking; then do a lite report correcting it and move on.
Also what's up with all the proTrump/anti-carrier posts on here? Carriers blocked mass texts. That is a good thing! Full stop, the details don't matter. I get crap from Republican runners in neighboring states and even thou I am a Republican, I WISH they would be blocked.
All mass texts should be subscription based. "Org Y would like to send you txts, do you accept? Details at bit.ly/ab34x" Only a Yes response should allow future texts. Everything else is BLOCKED.
Re:Please, TV networks - do the same (Score:4, Insightful)
The media gave us Trump because they loved the ratings they got by broadcasting his rants. It is hard for them to stop doing that.
His press conferences should never be broadcast live. If they are true journalists, the press conferences should be taped, and presented to viewers if they are truly newsworthy. Merely passing through a video feed is not journalism. There is no contextualizing, no fact checking. You are allowing, and in fact broadcasting many outright lies and then claiming you have no responsibility for spreading the lies.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree. Fact check and report on everything said. Of course, each media organization would still show their biases. The FOX version versus MSNBC would not appear to be the same event based on each's distinct reporting style and ethics.
Raw propaganda via media was one of the tools of Nazi's and Hitler.
Good Documentary on Netflix: Hitler, A Career
Received a few in May (Score:2)
I received a few spammy text from the trump campaign in May within a week. That was annoying but they went away.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
More like a kidney stone.
Trump Campaign Trolling (Score:5, Informative)
I have never donated to either of these guys. I am getting texts from both candidates. I get a text from the Trump campaign about every 3 day. I get a text from the Biden campaign about once a month.
Biden's texts ask me to please donate if I can afford $5. Each text comes from the same number. I can reply and unsubscribe if I like.
Trumps texts tell me each time that I am a "FAILURE" for not donating. Each text comes from a different number. There is no way to unsubscribe that is noted.
Here are just three unsolicited texts from the Trump campaign this week.
-> "You FAILED to use your 500% match & it EXPIRED. 15 Trump Patriots were chosen. Why did you let us down? FINAL CHANCE. 500% Match for 1 HR"
-> "You were 1 of 15 Trump Patriots chosen for a 500% match. But if you FAIL to use it by 11:59pm, it will go to waste. Don't let Trump down"
-> "CRITICAL DEADLINE: 500% MATCHING FEC deadline to restore Trump's majority ENDS in 24 HOURS. Don't let Trump down. 500% MATCH for 1 HR"
Here is the Biden Text:
-> "Hey there! Joe Biden will select his running mate in a few days, but first he wants to hear who Democratic voters think is the top choice! Which of these accomplished women do you think is the best pick to beat Donald Trump and lead our country in the future? Vote here, or reply Stop to unsubscribe"
There is a distinct tonal difference to the two. I assume that emasculated men will jump at the chance for the president to notice that they're a good patriot by donating and getting on a list hoping that the president of the United States will not call them names.
For me as a tech guy, I'm more impressed when someone follows the spirit of the law, doesn't call me names and offers a way for me to easily unsubscribe from their crap. Even Walmart offers an unsubscribe feature.
--
The intelligent world is far from being as well governed as the physical world. - Montesquieu
Re: (Score:2)
"500% match"... is this an online casino ad?
Re:Trump Campaign Trolling (Score:5, Funny)
Don't let Trump down?
Depends on what we let him down into, and what's waiting there for him.
Re: (Score:3)
Oh my goodness, yeah. The Trump texts are insane. Aunt of mine who's diehard Trump fan is receiving somewhere around three/four text per day. They're mostly the "donate NOW for 500% matching!" or something something patriot. Aunt has donated already like something around $200 to Trump and eventually called to ask how to stop text messages. Was quite the conversation. On the other end, my hyper liberal sister has maybe max gotten a single text from Biden.
I mean, I don't want to draw any conclusions her
Re: Trump Campaign Trolling (Score:2)
I might text someone 3 times a day if they ended up sending me $200 for it. Sounds like someone who appreciates getting my texts.
Re: (Score:2)
A couple of times a month I get emails from our state level politicians.
I've never gotten anything from/for biden.
I wonder if some of those trump ads are just unaffiliated scammers going after the gullible.
Re: (Score:3)
Thanks for sharing the text of the messages. It really helps paint the picture of how they go about messaging.
Fear and pressure or a call to give your opinion.
Re: (Score:2)
"Trump Patriot"? As in loyalty to Trump is the definition of patriotism, not loyalty to the patria? The mind boggles.
Re: (Score:3)
I assume that emasculated men will jump at the chance for the president
Those aren't emasculated men, they are patriots! Why do you hate America? You should donate to prove that you want America to be great. /sarcasm
Seriously those were the actual texts from the Trump campaign? It's like an advert for an online casino that struggles to get custom.... oh actually it makes perfect sense now.
Re: (Score:2)
It’s the same with the stuff that comes in the mail. Lots of fear mongering, lots of solicitations for money, lots of, “the neighbors KNOW if you don’t vote!” messages.
[John]
Sorry Trump. (Score:1, Flamebait)
Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile are private companies and are free to disallow certain speech on their platforms.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, and they all have rules about new accounts sending too many messages. They even apply to Republicans.
Permission required... (Score:4, Insightful)
The GOVERNMENT can send out messages to everybody, but a CAMPAIGN cannot. Presidents, Congresspeople, and some Judges have to comply by this rule... then again, when have rules ever stopped Trump to argue against those who forced him to stop.
US Campaigns can send as much as they want (Score:2)
Actually, no.
In the United States, there are loopholes for political speech.
You would think they could not send you text messages [fcc.gov]. But as soon as a human is in the loop, they can send as many as they want [wsj.com].
All you need is an app that shows the message, adds the name and phone number to send to, and has a "Send" button to send the text message. Click "Send" and the next target appears, ready for you to click "Send" again. I've seen a volunteer using such an app and clicking it rapidly while bored in class.
Re: (Score:2)
So far no political spam texts but I have received a few CBD spams. I need to hunt down a blocker for them.
[John]
Re: (Score:2)
In the United States, there are loopholes for political speech.
You would think they could not send you text messages. But as soon as a human is in the loop, they can send as many as they want.
False. ALL unsolicited political calls or texts or emails or letters violate rights arising under the 9th Amendment. All persons have the right to only receive these things when they opt-in, as a fundamental right in a free society - and also a consequence of the right to ethical practice of law.
Every lawyer, every politician, every judge, every high government official to uphold the Bill of Rights - including all the many rights that can be asserted under the 9th Amendment as rights 'retained by the peop
Re: (Score:2)
They can't send without an address for both to and from, and those that spam everybody are kicked out.
All I can say is (Score:2)
Thank you, T-Mobile! I haven't gotten a text from either candidate yet. But, then, I live in Washington state - they probably both figure it's a Biden-safe state AND the race will already have been decided before our polls close (not to mention we have fewer than 10 electoral votes.
Of course our entire state has been vote by mail for quite a few years now, so most people have voted weeks ahead of time.
Re: All I can say is (Score:3)
I'm in California, and I received some Trump texts a few weeks ago. I don't think it's particularly targeted demographically. It seems more like traditional spam, where it's designed to weed out anyone too smart to be duped by amateurish scams. Once you get a bite, you're campaign has almost guaranteed the person is super dumb and gullible.
Selective enforcement? (Score:2)
(I say this with no political agenda.)
Yeah, the carriers refuse to do fuck-all squat about robocalls and roboSMS, but suddenly they'll drop one particular candidate's robo-SMS-spam.
You'll forgive me if I find this a little suspicious.
Re: Selective enforcement? (Score:2)
I work for a company that sends text messages as their business model. I assure you, carriers are enforcing these rules all the time. They don't catch everyone, but if you are sending out messages to 20 million people, they're gonna notice.
Block unknown (Score:2)
I have my phone set to block unknown senders, and unknown callers go straight to voicemail.
None of this is a problem for me personally. More people need to use these features.
Net Neutrality (Score:4, Interesting)
I thought Republicans said businesses should be free to pursue whatever business model they like at whatever expense to the consumer. Think of it this way, if they were cool with Verizon charging extra or outright blocking to access certain services (especially of competitors) then why would they be against this?
private (Score:3)
Gee trump what's that about how private companies in possession of data aren't bound by the first amendment or the fourth amendment?
Sorry bud you can't have your cake and eat it too, you gotta follow the same rules we do, and unless a law is being broken telecoms can block who they damn please just because they are private companies who aren't bound by the first amendment.
And you really are an annoying asshole so not that they even need it but they actually have a good reason to block you.
"sent manually"? (Score:2)
What does that really mean?
If the phone number was entered one digit at a time, and the test was entered one letter at a time, that would definitely be sent manually.
What if the phone number is pre-loaded like we do when we use our contacts list, but the text is entered by hand one character at a time? Probably still "sent manually"
Then, pre-load the phone number and cut and paste the text. Getting into gray area, but if a person is doing all these steps, it might be considered manual.
Pre-loaded phone num
I would be really disappointed if... (Score:1)
Not just the carriers... (Score:1)