At a previous job, I was asked to create a separate email list from our current, all-church list for a new ministry. It was a good ministry. Several people would be interested in it. However, I faced a problem. The people on our new list had not signed up to receive information about the ministry.
I voiced my concern, mentioning a worst-case scenario like being locked out of our email newsletter account. People more or less shrugged off my worry, saying something like, “Just sign them up. They can opt-out if they want.”
Admittedly, I understood and understand the response. It’s easy and takes a whole lot less time than asking people to sign up on their own. Plus, the action seems relatively harmless.
Like I said, I get it. But I still think it’s wrong.
My opinion is that churches should outdo whatever ethical laws, written or unwritten, are put in place to protect personal information. They should obey the law, of course, but they should go beyond the requirements voluntarily. For example, during a building project, a church should offer public forums—even when the project requires no public discussion or is minor in scope.
We should do no less than that when handling personal information. In fact, I argue for handling it with utmost integrity. We must, if we truly desire to be churches dedicated to relationship and community.
I know that makes more work for us. It could even cause some problems. But I think it’s the only way to go. Let me show you why with a couple of stories, followed by a few practical tips.
Bypass People’s Communication Preferences
Once upon a time, I worked with a church database system that allowed members and guests to connect via groups. Administrators of those groups, called group leaders, could send emails to all group members with the single click of a button. Recently, the software disabled the ability.
The software provider explained the button had been discontinued because group leaders were bypassing members’ preferences. Even if a member said they didn’t want to receive group emails, they would if one of their group leaders used the button.
I wondered how people were receiving the change, so I headed to the software’s discussion forums. The results alarmed me: Many church communicators were angry. They wanted the button back, pronto, arguing its loss inhibited their abilities to communicate effectively.
The comments dumbfounded me. Rather than talking about new ways to communicate with group members, the leaders blamed the software. But software should never be responsible for my ability or inability to communicate.
It’s a tool. When it changes, I need to change and find another way. This is a good, healthy thing. In my experience, the search for another way often leads to a better way, one that honors people’s information communication preferences.
Just Give Them the List
I once witnessed a church member who worked in real estate ask the office for our email and address database. They wanted the list so that they could send marketing materials and promote their business.
Leadership gave the list to the person. While I understood the “why”—the church member is a wonderful person—I disagreed with the decision. I couldn’t help thinking about our other congregation members. Shouldn’t their wishes play into whether we give or don’t give out their contact information?
They should. I know I wasn’t happy to find myself on that contact list and to receive unwanted emails about the local real estate market. Fortunately, the agent employed an opt-out, so I was able to stop the emails.
But every Christmas, I’m reminded of the incident with an automated holiday card. I see it and think we’ve got to do better. We must encourage ourselves and our leaders away from worst practices and toward a blanket opt-in mindset. Is it tough? Yes. But it’s worth it, and it is possible to communicate well within that parameter.
Opt for Explicit Opt-in
If you ever read email marketing softwares’ terms of use, the writing rivals that of Hemingway. (Eh, not really.) While the language may be obtuse at times, the terms are usually pretty clear on how you should acquire email addresses.
Campaign Monitor, for example, features a “Permission to Send” page. It says “explicit opt-in” is required. (More on that below.)
Emma is less clear, saying a “member who pays dues to the organization” grants explicit permission. (They don’t.)
The others—Constant Contact, MailChimp, iContact—require some manner of permission to send, too.
What is the equivalent of explicit opt-in in our churches?
Becoming a member? Filling out a guest card with their email address where there is no checkbox to opt-in to the email list(s)? Registering for an event where they supply their email address but don’t know they’re signing up for an email? No. Absolutely not. None of these examples constitutes explicit opt-in.
Get People’s Permission the Right Way
Explicit opt-in happens when people knowingly sign up for a specific email. Let’s use your children’s ministry as an example. If you want more people to receive the children’s ministry email, pass around an iPad at the next parent meeting and collect email through a simple registration form.
While the tablet travels the room, explain why they should register. (If you can’t explain why, don’t pass around the iPad.) Also train your children’s ministry team to regularly mention the email. They can tell parents (arguably, the best marketing method) why the email newsletter is a great way to stay up to date and informed.
Will growing your list this way take longer? Yes. But let’s not make excuses. Instead, let’s work for every name on our list. The world already requires we handle personal information a certain way. We should go above and beyond its requirements, though, because doing so increases our integrity, improves our communications, and develops trust with our church members.
Image: Christina Xu
