This might seem like a dig at the Direct Marketing Association (DMA); it’s really not intended that way. When we launched Mobile Marketing Magazine four years ago, the DMA was one of the first organizations to contribute to the site, in the form of a Guest Colum from its then-Head of Interactive Media, Robert Dirskovski, outlining some of the rules and regulations pertaining to the practice of mobile marketing.
I just wonder, though, how many more studies we need to tell us that consumers are happy to receive marketing messages on their mobile phone, so long as they have agreed to receive them, or so long as they are “from trusted brands with sales promotions and offers that they find of genuine benefit”, as the txt4ever/DMA study puts it.
Admittedly, there is some merit in the study, in identifying that over half of respondents felt that companies did not make the opt-in process clear enough, but as for the stuff about consumers being happy to receive messages they have agreed to, don’t we know all this already? 
In a meeting today, someone presented me with a slide showing that in markets where consumer awareness of the service his company offers is greater, penetration of the service is higher. The rest of the meeting went well, but this struck me as a bit lame/obvious. As AdMob’s Russell Buckley said a few weeks ago when listening to someone presenting at a conference, we don’t need to be told any more that that the three things we take out with us every day are our mobile, house keys and purse/wallet.
Doesn’t the argument for mobile as a marketing channel need to be moved forward? Or is it the case that the vast majority of brands – including large brands – out there, are still at the stage where they would find this kind of stuff interesting or in some way enlightening?
I don’t claim to have the answer, but I’d be delighted to hear from anyone who does.

David Murphy
Editor