Thank you, Fred!
I am honored and humbled to be called out as a Goddess of Email Deliverability by Fred Tabsharani in his recent deliverability.com post. He has named and lauded people I am proud to call colleagues and friends. Thank you, Fred.
I am honored and humbled to be called out as a Goddess of Email Deliverability by Fred Tabsharani in his recent deliverability.com post. He has named and lauded people I am proud to call colleagues and friends. Thank you, Fred.
Exacttarget published a Deliverability whitepaper today. They interviewed a number of people around the email industry and asked them what they would tell C-level executives about email and email marketing.
It’s well worth a read, particularly given there are at least two ISP representatives speaking out about what they think makes a good email marketing program. You’ll see many of the themes we talk about here represented in the various articles.
Good delivery boils down to a few things, the most important of which is sending mail people have asked for and want.
I’ve watched a couple discussions around the email and anti-spam community recently with a bit of awe. It seems many email marketers are admitting they are powerless to actually implement all the good advice they give to others.
They are admitting they can’t persuade, cajole, influence or pressure their companies to actually follow best practices. Some of the comments public and private comments I’ve heard from various industry leaders:
A spam filter looks at many things when it’s deciding whether or not to deliver a message to the recipients inbox, usually divided into two broad categories – the behaviour of the sender and the content of the message.
When we talk about sender behaviour we’ll often dive headfirst into the technical details of how that’s monitored and tracked – history of mail from the same IP address, SPF records, good reverse DNS, send rates and ramping, polite SMTP level behaviour, DKIM and domain-based reputation and so on. If all of those are OK and the mail still doesn’t get delivered then you might throw up your hands, fall back on “it’s content-based filtering” and not leave it at that.
There’s just as much detail and scope for diagnosis in content-based filtering, though, it’s just a bit more complex, so some delivery folks tend to gloss over it. If you’re sending mail that people want to receive, you’re sure you’re sending the mail technically correctly and you have a decent reputation as a sender then it’s time to look at the content.
You want your mail to look just like wanted mail from reputable, competent senders and to look different to unwanted mail, viruses, phishing emails, botnet spoor and so on. And not just to mechanical spam filters – if a postmaster looks at your email, you want it to look clean, honest and competently put together to them too.
Some of the distinctive content differences between wanted and unwanted email are due to the content as written by the sender, some of them are due to senders of unwanted email trying to hide their identity or their content, but many of them are due to the different quality software used to send each sort of mail. Mail clients used by individuals, and content composition software used by high quality ESPs tends to be well written and complies with both the email and MIME RFCs, and the unwritten best common practices for email composition. The software used by spammers, botnets, viruses and low quality ESPs tends not to do so well.
Here’s a (partial) list of some of the things to consider: