One Step Ahead

The Australian Prime Minister, John Howard, has been accused of being a spammer, after it was revealed that he hired his son's company to send unsolicited e-mail to constituents in the Prime Minister's electorate.

Political parties are exempt from the new anti-spam laws in Australia. However, the opposition parties have accused Mr Howard of breaching the spirit of the law.

Yes, the Prime Minister is a spammer. Not by the strict definition of the law, but certainly in the eyes of most Internet users.

But I can't understand why his opponents are criticising him for it (Well, actually I can understand it: It's a few weeks away from an election!). The law clearly states that political parties are exempt. So, sooner or later, a politician would take advantage of it.

This is not "cynically exploiting a loophole" or "a clear case of double standards", as the Labor Party's technology spokesperson Senator Kate Lundy says. The exemption is written into the law, and Mr Howard is entitled to use it.

BUT ... and this is a big but ... It should never have been written into the law in the first place! Politicians should not be allowed to send spam. There's simply no reasonable argument in favour of exempting political parties (nor charities and schools, for that matter) from the anti-spam provisions.

So rather than these politicians claiming to be shocked by one of their own taking advantage of something written in the law that they themselves wrote, we would all be better served by them removing that exemption. But you won't hear many pollies taking that approach. Why? After all, it would stop them from spamming in the future!