Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

“Click to subscribe, call to cancel” is illegal, FTC says

niemanlab.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

821–830 of 890 posts

Re: “Click to subscribe, call to cancel” is illegal, FTC says

#821

Post by selcuka »

IanSanders wrote: post #257
xg15 wrote: post #167

> including an option that’s “at least as easy” as the one to subscribe Weirdly enough this sounds like a loophole. I can already see some companies trying to bullshit their way through an investigation: "Oh sure, we don't provide online cancellation, because our way to cancel is even easier than online:" * presents a way to cancel that is in practice more difficult than online *. I think either mandating that cancel…

There's also a "genuinely super easy way to unsubscribe, except it unfortunately is experiencing technical problems"

That's what happens with many of the Unsubscribe (from mailing lists, that is) buttons unless they are provided by a reputable third party such as Mailchimp etc.

Re: “Click to subscribe, call to cancel” is illegal, FTC says

#822

Post by askesisdev »

kieloo wrote: post #18

Same thing with The Guardian. Subscribed online and was then told I can’t cancel via email and have to endure a pushy sales call if I want to cancel. Similar experience with The Economist except it was via live chat instead. These experiences honestly make me want to never subscribe to a newspaper again.

I told the person at the The Economist's live chat that I was unsubscribing due to that dark pattern. The other reason is that even if the content is great their app isn't. The saved articles feature isn't shared between different devices. Another reason is that you need to get into an article and then get out instead of doing continuous reading. Ended up reading/annotating downloaded PDFs because it was a better experience than using their app.

Re: “Click to subscribe, call to cancel” is illegal, FTC says

#823

Post by MaXtreeM »

therealdrag0 wrote: post #757
MaXtreeM wrote: post #673

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's this one [1] and this is the text from it without WSJ paywall [2], but the main issue was with the video included in WSJ not in the article text itself. If I remember it correctly it is few clips from Pewdiepie's videos stitched together out of context to make him look bad. Note that I am not saying that he did not push his jokes too far but still a "serious newspaper" should not take short clips out of…

Sorta off topic but I read a “not that we’ll know old novel” recently and was surprised to find out that PDP read it as party of his book club (which I didn’t know existed). It changed my view of him a bit that he reads serious books and talks about them, whereas I thought he only fucked around to entertain children.

Yeah, there certainly is a ton of videos where he just "fucked around to entertain children" but he said it himself that he could just keep doing it forever. There was more serious side to him, like the book club, but I have no idea what he does now.

Re: “Click to subscribe, call to cancel” is illegal, FTC says

#824

Post by bodge5000 »

kuschku wrote: post #237
bodge5000 wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the FTC, not the EU (as far as I'm aware theres no EU legislation planned or in place for this). Of course you could argue that the EU might do it one day, but you could say the same about the UK. That being said I thought it already was against UK law. Maybe I got that wrong, or there are loopholes around it, or its just not heavily enforced. Who knows

The EU regulation on this was already passed several years ago, and is already enforced in some countries, it should be universally enforced by the end of the year.

Usually Germany is pretty snappy on enforcing EU regulations, but at least in this case it would appear not as I've heard Germans more than any other EU national complaining about this issue in particular. Again though, maybe there are loopholes (just look at GDPR, or to an extent even TPD).

Do you have a regulation reference by any chance?

Re: “Click to subscribe, call to cancel” is illegal, FTC says

#825

Post by mdp2021 »

mig39 wrote: post #641
kranke155 wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. Portugal is a (atm) an radically aging country, it is rife with corruption and politics are poorly led. Brain drain is massive. Employment is extremely difficult for both the jobseeker and the employer due to poor competitiveness, low productivity and terrible regulation. Healthcare systems have been dropping off a cliff. IMO going the direction of a dying country. And I am Portuguese. Virtually anyone I know wit…

Yes, everyone I know, in my age range, has moved to France, Switzerland, Canada, etc. We all want to retire in Portugal, but it seems there are few employment opportunities unless you know the right people. I'm sure "retirement" is the only growth industry in Portugal these days.

Also in order to retire somewhere - in order to stay anywhere outside a period of "apnea" -, you will want to find there that «good sense and reliability» mentioned ("reliability" as in "you can place trust in the policymakers and in the population in general", or what lets you avoid passing your time in the uneasiness of a "what insanity will they commit next". Some European countries have demonstrated quite an amount of perverse """creativity""", in the recent times. "Reliability" also means, conversely, that you can trust that policies will be issued to guarantee fair justice to defend the population against abuse - the thread is relevant).

Posters seem to say that Portugal has highs and lows. There should be a general balance anyway. I have been concerned for a long time about which territories have remained more solid in said terms of "good sense".

Re: “Click to subscribe, call to cancel” is illegal, FTC says

#826

Post by TheTrotters »

hirsin wrote: post #790
idworks1 wrote: post #756

Anecdata (only because I don't have access to the data anymore). Customer satisfaction is so much higher when they get a one click unsubscribe. In fact, when the friction is so low, the customer is likely to start the subscription back. I say this as someone who worked in customer service automation. The worst customer satisfaction score with lowest rate of re-subscription is from companies that make it hell to unsub…

Speaking to this myself - I was blown away by Masterclass letting me do this, after I forgot it would renew. I responded to their "hey you've been charged" email with something like "I forgot about this and didn't mean to renew". In perhaps ten minutes I had a cancelation notice and refund. Way more likely to get their stuff again. Bonus points for not sending the bill from some faceless "no reply" address.

I had a great experience with Audible. I switched from Audible UK to Audible US but forgot to cancel the former. After six months I noticed I had 6 credits I didn't want. I sent one short e-mail explaining what happened and within 15-30 minutes I got a response that said they'll refund everything.

Re: “Click to subscribe, call to cancel” is illegal, FTC says

#827

Post by TheTrotters »

kieloo wrote: post #18

Same thing with The Guardian. Subscribed online and was then told I can’t cancel via email and have to endure a pushy sales call if I want to cancel. Similar experience with The Economist except it was via live chat instead. These experiences honestly make me want to never subscribe to a newspaper again.

I had very good experience with The Economist but, despite that, I'm still hesitant to re-subscribe because I just don't want to bother e-mailing them if I want to suspend or cancel my subscription (or add/remove print etc.).

Re: “Click to subscribe, call to cancel” is illegal, FTC says

#828

Post by gigantecmedia »

strenholme wrote: post #344

Since I live in California, which has a “click to subscribe means you must have click to cancel” regulation, this isn’t an issue for me. After the New York Times published their inaccurate hit piece attacking Scott Alexander and Slate Star Codex/Astral Codex Ten, I was able to cancel online just clicking my way through. I now subscribe to The Wall Street Journal, which looks to be the most neutral newspaper right now…

exactly my case. this is why I sometimes subscribe but only on Apple iOS devices, which helps me cancel all those things much easier... and cheers! I also subscribe to the WSJ. A little bit biased here and there but very high quality and neutral. Reading nyt, washpost, etc. can be very exhausting.

Re: “Click to subscribe, call to cancel” is illegal, FTC says

#829

Post by sreitshamer »

hirsin wrote: post #790
idworks1 wrote: post #756

Anecdata (only because I don't have access to the data anymore). Customer satisfaction is so much higher when they get a one click unsubscribe. In fact, when the friction is so low, the customer is likely to start the subscription back. I say this as someone who worked in customer service automation. The worst customer satisfaction score with lowest rate of re-subscription is from companies that make it hell to unsub…

Speaking to this myself - I was blown away by Masterclass letting me do this, after I forgot it would renew. I responded to their "hey you've been charged" email with something like "I forgot about this and didn't mean to renew". In perhaps ten minutes I had a cancelation notice and refund. Way more likely to get their stuff again. Bonus points for not sending the bill from some faceless "no reply" address.

A “you’re about to be charged” email would be friendlier and give the customer a feeling of more control. That’s what we do. (We of course will also refund the charge if you email us after it happens.)

Re: “Click to subscribe, call to cancel” is illegal, FTC says

#830

Post by cma »

somethingwitty1 wrote: post #771
Joeri wrote: post #759

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is this common perception of companies as if they are entirely rational organizations, and every policy that we don’t like exists because it is profitable and benefits the company at the expense of the customer. But sometimes bad policies are just bad, they benefit no one, and they exist for dumb reasons. Maybe call to unsubscribe is one of those policies.

An opposite statement can be said with the same amount of authority though: There is a common perception that companies only create policies we don't like through accidents and unforeseeable outcomes, not by specifically crafting policies to benefit the company. But sometimes bad policies are malicious and designed to maximize profits, even at the expense of long-term profits and customer retention. Maybe call to uns…

Also, a single rule about what monetizes best may not apply to all companies (pissing off high dollar investment clients over something like that?), so they may mostly all be optimizing it even if there are different choices.
Post reply on HN