MarketingVox reports that Mediapost reports:) that a most recent DMA study revealed that Return on Investment (ROI) for telemarketing campaigns increased for app. 750%.

Is this the consequence of the Do-Not-Call Registry implemented in the US last year, or only a consequence of a faulty methodology?

On one hand it certain makes sense, since the Do-Not-Call Registry decreased the number of calls people are receiving, limiting them to companies that have explicit concent from consumers for phone communication.

Basically, the Do-Not-Call Registry decreased telephone SPAM.

I'm wondering what would happen if the same registry was applied to e-mail?

Probably nothing as long as people can still send e-mail from third-world countries, remaining annonymous and out of the law's reach.

Back to the study ...

According to this new information the ROI for telemarketing campaigns actually exceeded e-mail ROI.

MediaPost reports that some disagree:

"Industry observers say that Sunday's Direct Marketing Association report appears to be out of line with other industry research showing that e-mail marketing is more cost-effective than telemarketing, said David Daniels, a research director at Jupiter Research. "It seems to contradict conventional wisdom, and the direction we've seen most of the industry going in," said Daniels."

MediaPost further reports that another study, which was just released yesterday, finds that consumers prefer e-mail marketing to telemarketing, which is naturally good news for e-mail marketers.

Looking at this from another viewpoint, these reports do make comparing RSS and e-mail quite irrelevant, since most or even all of the marketing industry still focuses only on e-mail.

Does this mean that these people just aren't catching on or that some of us are going to fast?

Or that RSS is getting its rightful place as a content delivery channel, but not at all replacing e-mail as the prefered internet marketing channel?