Summary
The common belief that censoring “spicy language” in emails is a surefire way to avoid spam filters is largely a myth. While it might seem intuitive that words often associated with adult content or illicit activities (even if partially censored) would trigger filters, modern spam detection is far more sophisticated. These systems primarily analyze sender reputation, engagement metrics, email authentication, and the overall context of the message, rather than relying solely on a simple list of forbidden keywords. Attempting to censor words can sometimes even backfire, creating patterns that look suspicious to filters (e.g., unusual character combinations, excessive use of symbols).
Key findings
- Filter sophistication: Modern spam filters do not primarily rely on lists of spam trigger words. They use complex algorithms, machine learning, and sender reputation data.
- Context is key: The overall context, sender reputation, and user engagement are far more influential on deliverability than individual words.
- Censoring risks: Poorly executed censoring (e.g., Sh*t or MotherF***cker) can sometimes create patterns that look suspicious, similar to obfuscation techniques used by spammers.
- User complaints: Audience reaction, leading to spam complaints or unsubscribes, is a more significant deliverability risk than the words themselves.
Key considerations
- Audience preference: Prioritize your audience's comfort and expectations over hypothetical spam triggers from specific words.
- Reputation focus: Concentrate on building and maintaining a strong sender reputation through consistent engagement and proper email authentication.
- Overall content: Ensure your email content provides value and is relevant to your subscribers to minimize negative feedback. For more insights on content issues, see this article on unveiling the truth about spam words.
What email marketers say
Email marketers often wrestle with balancing brand voice and perceived deliverability risks. The consensus among marketers suggests that while direct use of profane or explicit language can be risky for audience perception, censoring it for spam filter avoidance is largely unnecessary. The primary concern shifts from automated filters to recipient behavior, as negative reactions (like spam complaints or unsubscribes) are far more detrimental to sender reputation than a few spicy words.
Key opinions
- Audience sensitivity: Marketers are more concerned about how their audience perceives explicit or censored language, which directly impacts engagement.
- Complaints trump words: High spam complaint rates or unsubscribes, triggered by offensive content or unexpected brand shifts, cause significant deliverability problems. This is distinct from specific spammy words.
- Censoring styles: If censoring is for stylistic reasons or recipient preference, any style is generally acceptable to filters.
Key considerations
- Brand alignment: Ensure that the tone and language, censored or not, align with your brand's image and your audience's expectations.
- Engagement monitoring: Closely monitor engagement metrics like open rates, click-through rates, and complaint rates after sending emails with potentially sensitive content. Learn more about spam words to avoid in general.
- Testing approach: Consider A/B testing different approaches to language or censoring if you are unsure of recipient reactions. While this article focuses on email templates, the principles of testing apply broadly.
Marketer view
Email marketer from Email Geeks notes that if you are censoring for style, or because you believe your recipients would prefer it, you should use whatever style you want. He clarifies that spam filters are unlikely to care about these stylistic choices.
Marketer view
An email marketer from FluentCRM suggests that certain phrases, including subtle ones, can still be flagged by spam filters. They recommend using alternative, more neutral terms to improve inbox placement.
What the experts say
Email deliverability experts consistently emphasize that spicy language or its censoring is rarely a direct cause of spam filtering. Instead, they point to broader factors such as sender reputation, email authentication (SPF, DKIM, DMARC), and user engagement. While some legacy filters or specialized nannyware might flag specific words, these are generally not the primary drivers of deliverability issues for legitimate senders. The real danger lies in content that alienates recipients, leading to spam complaints, which significantly degrade sender reputation and inbox placement.
Key opinions
- Minimal filter impact: Explicit language, even uncensored, typically does not trigger modern spam filters directly. The filters focus on behavioral and authentication signals.
- Nannyware consideration: While rare, some client-side or network-level nannyware could potentially block emails based on specific keywords.
- Reputation is paramount: The largest threat comes from negative recipient feedback, such as marking emails as spam, which directly harms your domain reputation.
- The scunthorpe problem: Automated filters can misinterpret innocent words or domains if they contain substrings that resemble offensive terms, an issue known as the Scunthorpe problem. This is more about false positives than intentional obscenity.
Key considerations
- Focus on fundamentals: Prioritize proper email authentication (e.g., DMARC, SPF, and DKIM) and maintaining a healthy sending reputation. These are far more impactful.
- User experience: The core concern should be to provide content that resonates positively with your subscribers, reducing the likelihood of negative feedback. Consider how language choices affect user experience.
- Monitor blocklists: While language itself might not block you, a sudden spike in complaints due to content can land your IP or domain on a blocklist. Regularly check your deliverability against common spam trigger words.
Expert view
Expert from Email Geeks asserts that spicy language itself will not trigger spam filters. They mention it could conceivably trigger "nannyware," but that is a rare occurrence, suggesting the primary concern is not general spam filtering.
Expert view
An expert from SpamResource explains that filters are less about specific forbidden words and more about patterns of behavior. They highlight that even a common word can become problematic if used in a spammy context or from a poor sending reputation.
What the documentation says
Official documentation and research on spam filtering rarely single out specific profanities or their censored versions as primary triggers. Instead, they focus on broader indicators of spam, such as sender reputation, authentication failures (e.g., SPF, DKIM, DMARC misconfigurations), malicious links, suspicious attachments, and high complaint rates. While some early spam filters might have relied on rudimentary keyword matching, modern systems use advanced machine learning to analyze numerous signals simultaneously, making simple word lists largely irrelevant on their own. The emphasis is on identifying patterns of spammer behavior rather than policing individual words.
Key findings
- Holistic filtering: Spam filters evaluate emails based on a multitude of factors, not just content keywords. These include authentication, sender history, and recipient engagement.
- Behavioral analysis: The primary goal of filters is to detect spammer behaviors, such as sending unsolicited bulk mail, rather than policing language.
- Authentication importance: Proper email authentication (SPF, DKIM, DMARC) is consistently cited as critical for deliverability, far outweighing concerns about specific words. Learn more about the benefits of implementing DMARC.
- User feedback signals: High complaint rates from users directly feed into spam filter algorithms, signaling negative sender reputation.
Key considerations
- Adherence to standards: Ensure your email infrastructure adheres to established email standards and best practices to maximize inbox placement.
- Monitor delivery metrics: Regularly review your delivery metrics via postmaster tools to identify any issues beyond content, such as email spam trigger words or IP blocklists.
- Engagement strategy: Develop strategies to encourage positive engagement from subscribers, which signals to ISPs that your emails are valued.
- Content relevance: Focus on sending relevant and desired content. This inherently reduces the risk of negative recipient feedback, which is a key driver of email filtering and blocklisting.
Technical article
Documentation from the IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force) RFCs on email (e.g., RFC 5321, RFC 5322) primarily define the technical standards for email transmission, not content filtering rules. They focus on envelope, headers, and basic message structure, leaving content analysis largely to mailbox providers. This implies that content decisions, like censoring, are outside the scope of core email protocols.
Technical article
A study by Symantec on email filtering highlights that modern spam filters utilize a layered approach, combining reputation analysis, authentication checks, and content heuristics. Simple keyword matching for explicit language is rarely the sole determining factor; instead, patterns of behavior and overall message context weigh more heavily.
Related resources
12 resources
![550+ spam trigger words to avoid in emails [+ alternatives]](https://fluentcrm.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Spam-Words-to-Avoid_-How-to-Stay-Out-of-Email-Spam-Folders.webp)
Related pages
Do specific email keywords trigger spam filters and influence unsubscribe rates?
Are email spam trigger words still relevant for deliverability?
Do words like 'viagra' trigger spam filters in email subject lines?
Do specific spam words still affect email deliverability?
What are spam trigger words and how do they impact email deliverability?
Will cannabis or alcohol related email content trigger spam filters?
What words and phrases are considered spammy and trigger spam filters?
Do spam trigger words affect email deliverability?
An in-depth guide to email blocklists
Why your emails are going to spam in 2024 and how to fix it
