In today’s digital age, receiving a text message can be as commonplace as how getting a letter in the mail used to be. However, when those messages become unsolicited spam, it’s not just an annoyance—it’s a breach of trust and privacy. This is the situation that Telstra, one of the country’s leading telecommunications companies, found itself in.
After inundating Australians with over 10 million text messages that violated the nation’s strict spam laws, it has been hit with a hefty fine of $626,000.
The Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA), the watchdog responsible for upholding these laws, has taken a firm stance against Telstra’s actions, stating unequivocally that there is ‘no excuse’ for such breaches.
ACMA’s investigation revealed that between 2022 and 2024, Telstra sent millions of texts with improper unsubscribe options, including 10.3 million messages that required recipients to provide personal information to opt out.
Furthermore, ACMA discovered that 43,000 texts were sent to customers of Telstra’s Belong brand who had either not given their consent or had explicitly withdrawn it. This disregard for customer preferences not only undermines consumer trust but also contravenes the fundamental principles of choice and consent in digital communication.
ACMA member Samantha Yorke emphasised the gravity of the situation by pointing out that Telstra, as a well-established entity, should have been fully aware of the compliance requirements. The spam consent rules have been in place for over two decades, and businesses are expected to adhere to them without fail.
In response to these findings, Telstra has paid the maximum penalty of $626,000 after self-reporting the issues. The company has also been tasked with conducting an independent review to identify and rectify the root causes of these breaches.
Telstra is expected to implement the recommended improvements and report back to ACMA on its progress.
In a statement, Telstra expressed regret, saying, ‘Customers have a right to have their choices respected, and we’re sorry for not meeting this obligation for some of our customers. We know there’s always more we can do to improve.’
The spokesperson for Telstra acknowledged the right of customers to have their preferences honoured and offered an apology for falling short. The company has also initiated a program aimed at bolstering its processes to prevent future violations.
This incident is part of a larger trend of businesses being held accountable for spam violations, with more than $16 million in penalties paid out over the last 18 months.
Notable cases include the Commonwealth Bank, which faced a $7.5 million fine for over 170 million non-compliant emails, and Pizza Hut, which was fined $2.5 million for sending more than 10 million marketing messages against spam laws.
For our readers over 50, who may be particularly sensitive to unsolicited communications, it’s reassuring to know that there are protections in place to safeguard your digital privacy.
Still, we encourage you to stay vigilant and exercise your right to opt-out of unwanted communications. If you ever find yourself on the receiving end of such messages, remember that you have the power to report these breaches to authorities like ACMA.
Have you experienced similar issues with unsolicited texts or emails? How did you handle it, and what advice would you give to others facing the same annoyance? Share your thoughts and experiences with the YourLifeChoices community in the comments below.
Also read: Allianz’s misleading travel insurance claims exposed—here’s why it matters
The offence: the distribution of over 10 million text messages that violated the nation’s spam laws
The punishment: a fine of $626,000.
This fine is described as hefty by the author of the article. It amounts to around 3 cents per offence. It seems to me the author needs to look up the definition of “hefty”.
Unsolicited messages – for the last 4 years I have been receiving emails from Dave KELLY ( Member for Bassendean) and roger cook (Premiere of WA) from the WA labor party. Interestingly I have never provided them with my email (not the labor party, nor each of the recipients, in fact not to any political organisation or member of parliament)- Despite repeated contacts requesting them to cease and desist and remove my email as well as explain how they got it the messages persist. One wonders whether they are getting emails from government department data bases as the public service now appears to be so politicised (something Brian burke set out to do years ago, but which the perception now is has become far more likely under Mcgowan and now Cook). Would the same laws as applied to telstra and banks, apply to political parties???????