I of course assume that they are calling to get me to somehow commit to buying something, so I usually beg off by saying something about just not responding to such calls. I used to cite civil liberties. Now I just say that my agent doesn’t allow me to recorded without them arranging to pay royalties.
If the case is for “quality purposes”, I could imagine it is to check that the caller is not just charging their employer for a call that wasn’t completed, or that was answered by an answering machine, Following that line though, an employer can find out almost anything about a prospective employee to find out if they are honest, before hiring them. So the recording would mean that they are hiring an employee that they didn’t trust. If the employer doesn’t trust the employee, than why should I?
The latest call was a survey by the National Fisheries to ask how many people in my family fish. What kind of quality are they looking for in how that question is asked? It is rather straight forward. Are they evaluating the “quality” of my response in how I say none, or one, or two? How dare they!
If, as I suspect, the taping is to tape my agreeing to, or being trapped into buying something, then the caller has lied to me at the outset. Why should I trust them at all after that?
In this day when everyone is concerned about the privacy of their calls from government surveillance, (and they should be more concerned about unknown industries taping them), there must be many people who decline such calls. If the call really is for a survey only, why turn off many recipients by taping in the first place.
So, logically, there cannot be a good outcome for the caller, if they indeed are just calling for a survey, by taping me, and claiming that it is just for quality purposes.
