Did the algorithm change?

When faced with unexplained deliverability changes one of the first questions many folks ask is “Did the algorithm change.” In many ways this is an meaningless question. Why? Because there are two obvious answers to the question.
A1: Of course it didn’t.
A2: Of course it did.
Both answers are correct, but they’re answering different underlying questions. When we understand how two diametrically opposed answers are both correct, we understand much more about filtering.

What is an algorithm?

When we’re talking about spam filtering the algorithm is the process or rules to follow.

Basically, an algorithm is a computer program that is set up to filter spam to the bulk folder and filter wanted mail into the inbox.  This algorithm doesn’t change. It can’t.
In the case of many (most?) spam filters, the filters incorporate features of machine learning. 
This means the algorithm is constantly changing, learning more and more about what is spam and what is wanted mail based on user interactions.

Algorithms don’t change

Overall, the algorithms don’t change that frequently. They are fed data (lots of data) on a continual basis. They take feedback from recipients (spam / not spam buttons) and developers (new data sets of known bad and known good mail) to learn what good mail looks like and what bad mail looks like. But the underlying code doesn’t change very frequently.

Results change

Machine learning algorithms are only as good as the data they’re fed. In the case of spam filters, the input data is constantly changing. So the output results change. Sometimes an email that was not-spam one day is spam the next because the algorithm caught up with a new threat or new behavior. 

Delivery is still in your control

This machine learning and reliance on end users to help tune filters may make it seem like spam filtering is completely out of the senders’ control. That there is nothing a sender can do to get into or out of the bulk folder. The good news is, the underlying algorithms are pretty simple: wanted mail goes to the inbox, unwanted mail goes to the bulk folder. As with everything, details matter. Senders who are focused on recipients usually don’t have a difficult time reaching the inbox. Companies that focus on themselves and try gimmicks find it much harder to consistently reach the inbox.
 

More on AOL transition to Oath Infrastructure
Following CAN SPAM isn't enough to reach the inbox

Related Posts

Use all the channels

One of the hardest deliverability situations to address is when all mail from a certain sender is going to the bulk folder. I’ve had numerous clients come to me to address this situation over the years. Ideally, clients come to me before all their mail is going to bulk. Then we can make some tweaks and changes to their mail program, repair the reputation and then recover other addresses. We have knobs we can twist to fix things if some people are still getting messages in their inbox. We have data to measure.
When all mail is going to bulk, though, we lose access to the knobs and the data. There are zero complaints if mail is going to bulk. There are no opens or clicks, because many ISPs disable images and links in the bulk folder. Our normal “fixing reputation” tools are taken away from us.
Senders with all their mail going to bulk are faced with a profound challenge. How can they engage customers who are unengaged and who are not seeing mail at all? How can we fix deliverability when our normal tools and metrics are unavailable?
If we can get even a small percentage of recipients to go pull mail out of bulk or spam and move it to their inbox, then we’re well on our way to repairing reputation. But how can we get them to go look for the mail in the bulk folder. Recent Litmus research suggests that a significant percentage of folks regularly check their spam folder, but this isn’t always enough to repair reputation,
The question becomes how can the senders encourage recipients to go digging through their spam folder. 
This is the point where I start quizzing clients on what other channels they use to communicate with their customers. I’ll run through the whole list: social media, snail mail, push notices through apps, SMS, website popups, Facebook ads. I work with them to identify users who are engaged with their brand and brainstorm ways to get those users to look for mail.
I’m always pleased to see large brands using these strategies. Just recently Blizzard used twitter to communicate with their users about email problems. They tweeted.
BlizzardTweet
The link takes you to the Blizzard support site. Where they give specific instructions on how to whitelist mail and what mail to whitelist.

Read More

Data Cleansing part 2

In an effort to get a blog post out yesterday before yet another doctor’s appointment I did not do nearly enough research on the company I mentioned selling list cleansing data. As Al correctly pointed out in the comments they are currently listed on the SBL. And when I actually did the research I should have done it was clear this company has a long term history of sending unsolicited email.
Poor research and a quickly written blog post led to me endorsing a company that I absolutely shouldn’t have. And I do apologize for that.
With all that being said, Justin had a great question in the comments of yesterday’s post about data cleansing.

Read More

What do you think about these hot button issues?

bullhornIt’s been one of those weeks where blogging is a challenge. Not because I don’t have much to say, but because I don’t have much constructive to say. Rants can be entertaining, even to write. But they’re not very helpful in terms of what do we need to change and how do we move forward.
A few different things I read or saw brought out the rants this week. Some of these are issues I don’t have answers to, and some of them are issues where I just disagree with folks, but have nothing more useful to say than, “You’re wrong.” I don’t even always have an answer to why they’re wrong, they’re just wrong.
I thought today I’d bring up the issues that made me so ranty and list the two different points of views about them and see what readers think about them. (Those of you who follow me on Facebook probably know which ones my positions are, but I’m going to try and be neutral about my specific positions.)

Read More