What were the advances in information technology that resulted in new ethical issues necessitating the creation of each act? BIS/229 09/05/2012 Malinda Marsh Week 1 Assignment In today’s volatile information era, information technology has revolutionized advertisement methods to consumers. The use of advancement in information technology, such as automated and prerecorded messages caused numerous controversies and complaints to the government authority. This engaged the Federal government and Congress to intervene in the protection of the consumers.
The Federal government and Congress had create statutes, such as Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), 1991, and Do Not Call Implementation Act, 2003 that prohibits or blocked unsolicited advertising via communicational devices. This report will illustrate the advances in information technology that resulted in new ethical issues necessitating the creation of each act? The advancement in information technology (IT) has redefined the techniques and strategies on how industries efficiently communicated and convey their information and services to the consumers.
However, certain technique, such as telemarketing caused numerous controversies and complaints to the government authority. This enacted the Federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991. According to “Class Actions under the Federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991” (2010) “The TCPA is a federal statute enacted in 1991 that prohibits unsolicited advertising by facsimile, automated recorded telephone messages, advertising calls to cellular telephones or other devices where the customer must pay to receive the call, and solicitation after consumers have included their names on the no-call list.
Order custom essay Information Technology Acts Paper Argumentative Essay with free plagiarism report
The creation of the act was formed to be addressing the consumer concerns about unsolicited advertisement via communicational methods. One-concern consumers had been intrusive behaviors of calls. Numerous consumers considered and found it inappropriate when telemarketers called during family time, early in the morning or late at night. Because of the random and interrupting call from the telemarketers.
Often consumers were disturbed and agitated because of the telemarketer calls interrupted important moments in the consumer lives. For example, in the moment when the consumer family is enjoying dinner while sharing exciting stories at the table and at same time indulgin the meal that was prepared by the grandmother. All of a sudden, the phone rang and purported to be important but unfortunately, discovered only to be a telemarketer interrupting the family mealtime together.
Furthermore, consumers believed that it was a violation of their privacy. Another concern consumers had was that there was no method to call back if the consumer wanted to respond to the telemarketers. Although Protection Act (TCPA), 1991 created certain provision that telemarketers has to oblige to the regulations and criterions within the act. There were certain consumers, who wanted to block telemarketers from contacting them via communicational devices.
Because of increasing numbers complaints from consumers to block telemarketers, the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) and Federal Trade Commission (FTC) conveyed to the Congress to pass the statute called the Do Not Call Implementation Act, 2003. According to "H. r. 395 (108th): Do-Not-Call Implementation Act" (2012), " (To authorize the Federal Trade Commission to collect fees for the implementation and enforcement of a "do-not-call" registry, and for other purposes. )”.
Even though the advance in technology information has revolutionized the advertisement techniques to convey to the consumers. The Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), 1991, and Do Not Call Implementation Act, 2003 created barriers and prevented unsolicited advertisements from telemarketers for consumers.
References Brown, D. B. (2010). Class Actions under the Federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991. FDCC Quarterly, 61(1), 84-98. H. R. 395 (108th): Do-Not-Call Implementation Act. (2012). Retrieved from http://www. govtrack. us/congress/bills/108/hr395
Did you know that we have over 70,000 essays on 3,000 topics in our database?