Justin Cooperman wrote:
- You all know and have seen how these email scanners are becoming more popular (and sophisticated) and we may be moving to a world where it will be very difficult to make sure these metrics are accurate, regardless of using CC or not.
Heck, I read and dismiss a lot of emails on my watch or lock screen now without ever loading tracking pixels or clicking links.
Could this new feature be a way to ensure an inbox or email address received at least 1 copy of every particular email?
I asked this question in the community a few months ago at the link below, and it seemed like at the time that the BCC function was the best fit for the task. However, this resulted in of every email being sent to the inbox BCC'ed, rather than just one copy of the email.
Would the Email CC feature be a better solution to this problem? If an email used dynamic content or tokens, will the recipient be CC'ed on each individual version or send?
[I]t seemed like at the time that the BCC function was the best fit for [ensuring a mailbox was copied on every email].
Would the Email CC feature be a better solution to this problem?
No, it wouldn't.
The only way to use CC to accomplish this would be to ensure that one (and only one) person who qualified for every send had a certain secondary email field filled in. All others in every send would have to have that field empty. Obviously, this isn't any easier to manage than the old "make sure your CC mailbox qualifies for every send" method!
The CC feature is for a much narrower use case: to create, in essence, a group message wherein all links are owned by a single recipient. For example, sending to an executive, their assistant, and their sales owner and keeping all in the loop during a subsequent Reply-All thread. I'm not too taken with the idea because of link tracking, as you can see above.
This is how I thought the new Email CC feature worked, but I was hopeful that maybe this would help me with this request. Thank you for the clarification.