 |
 |
The new Act defines direct marketing as the communication(by whatever means) of any advertising or marketing material which is directed to particular individuals. I have been considering much the same questions as you and in my view, block advertising can be differentiated because it is not targeting me individually. Inserts would be the same except that having material individually addressed perhaps makes a difference in both cases. We could overcome this with an internal distribution but not when we send things to students. I am taking a common sense view and like you taking steps to enable suppression of inserts where objections are received but not any action about block advertising. We have payslip advertising currently but this will be discontinued at the end of the present contract. We also have affinity marketing schemes through our development office but individuals are made aware of these from the outset and given a chance to "opt-out"(& the DPCO have expressed the view than an opt out will be sufficient). A related issue which has cropped up is sending marketing material to individuals which although addressed to them as individuals is really to them in their work capacity (eg as Training Officer of an organisation). I would have hoped that this would be exempt but the DPCO's view is that it is not. Under the old Act it would not have been processing by reference to the individual but since reference to the individual is not now required, it is caught. I am not sure how this better protects the rights and freedoms of data subjects........... Gail Waters DP Coordinator Open University > -----Original Message----- > From: Dennis Barrington-Light [SMTP:[log in to unmask]] > Sent: 14 April 2000 11:36 > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Direct marketing > > > > Can I ask for advice on two separate issues? > > 1. The University issues a Newsletter to all its staff which is > personally > addressed with a label from the payroll system to their work address. The > last issue included an inset advertising a certain make of car which was > paid > for by the company concerned. The Newsletter also includes block > advertising > by non-University companies. This helps to defray the costs of > production. A > member of staff objected to the insert and asked to be removed from the > mailing list in future. I have taken steps to ensure that he does not > receive > future issues but it has raised a number of issues: > > a) Is the insert direct marketing? > b) Is there any difference between inserts and block advertising? > > 2. The University has relationships with certain companies to offer staff > benefits i.e. health cover, telephone discounts, etc. In the past I have > allowed details to be circulated with payslips where I considered it to be > in > the interests of employees. > > a) What is the position now. Is this direct marketing? > b) Is a flyer (either sent direct, or included with the Newsletter) > giving > the details of a scheme giving discounts on BUPA membership which gives > details of the company concerned direct marketing? Would there be any > difference between a flyer or an article actually in the Newsletter? > c) Should I prohibit circulation of this type of material using payroll > data? > If I provide an opt-out option then the employee will not be notified of > other > possibly important information contained in the Newsletter. > > Any advice would be most welcome. > > Dennis Barrington-Light > Head of Student Records and Statistics and University Data Protection > Officer > > University of Cambridge, 10 Peas Hill, Cambridge CB2 3PN > Tel: 01223-332303 (Direct line) Fax: 01223-331200 > Email: [log in to unmask] or [log in to unmask] > %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%