# Something I should know, but don't (attn: those who know a thing or two about e-mail) **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [June 14, 2000, 6:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/something-i-should-know-but-dont-attn-those-who-know-a-thing-or-two-about-e-mail/22318 "2000-06-14T06:57:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 11\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2000, 6:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/something-i-should-know-but-dont-attn-those-who-know-a-thing-or-two-about-e-mail/22318/1 "2000-06-14T06:57:20Z")
What is the difference between ‘CC:’ and ‘BCC:’? I know they both send copies (CC = Carbon Copy) of the message to the addresses following those commands. What, then, is the difference? ---
**Author:** ![Kilgore\_Trout\_1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/6de8d8/32.png) [@Kilgore\_Trout\_1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kilgore_Trout_1)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2000, 7:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/something-i-should-know-but-dont-attn-those-who-know-a-thing-or-two-about-e-mail/22318/2 "2000-06-14T07:04:14Z")
cc = carbon copy. bcc = blind carbon copy. the bcc is for the people you want to send this message to without the other recipients knowing. the cc list is visible to all other recipients. ---
**Author:** ![GaWd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/f08c70/32.png) [@GaWd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GaWd)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2000, 8:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/something-i-should-know-but-dont-attn-those-who-know-a-thing-or-two-about-e-mail/22318/3 "2000-06-14T08:12:25Z")
Blind…Blind, man. ---
**Author:** ![RealityChuck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/realitychuck/32/195_2.png) [@RealityChuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RealityChuck)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2000, 12:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/something-i-should-know-but-dont-attn-those-who-know-a-thing-or-two-about-e-mail/22318/4 "2000-06-14T12:52:03Z")
When I rule the Internet, the first thing I’d do is eliminate the bcc field. It is the spammer’s best friend. ---
**Author:** ![sulla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/6bbea6/32.png) [@sulla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sulla)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2000, 1:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/something-i-should-know-but-dont-attn-those-who-know-a-thing-or-two-about-e-mail/22318/5 "2000-06-14T13:31:20Z")
> [@](#): > > \*\* > When I rule the Internet, the first thing I’d do is eliminate the bcc field. It is the spammer’s best friend. > \*\* True - but I don’t know if I could live without bcc:ing at work. I’ts invaluable if you’re in a very political, back-stabbing environment with sensitive situations and you need to document every little thing. ---
**Author:** ![gazpacho](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/6f9a4e/32.png) [@gazpacho](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gazpacho)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2000, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/something-i-should-know-but-dont-attn-those-who-know-a-thing-or-two-about-e-mail/22318/6 "2000-06-14T14:20:03Z")
How does bcc help spamming? ---
**Author:** ![Myron\_Van\_Horowitzski](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de053/32.png) [@Myron\_Van\_Horowitzski](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Myron_Van_Horowitzski)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2000, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/something-i-should-know-but-dont-attn-those-who-know-a-thing-or-two-about-e-mail/22318/7 "2000-06-14T14:43:17Z")
Because you think you are the only one getting the email, when in fact it’s been sent to a kajillion people. ---
**Author:** ![gazpacho](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/6f9a4e/32.png) [@gazpacho](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gazpacho)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2000, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/something-i-should-know-but-dont-attn-those-who-know-a-thing-or-two-about-e-mail/22318/8 "2000-06-14T15:14:02Z")
Ah yes I can see how I would be fooled by the offer of dirty pictures as not being spam if only my name was in the to field. I don’t think that bcc helps spam much. Surely spammers have programs to generate the emails. These programs can send out email to you only just as easily as putting every body in the to field. This has been my experience with spam. The mail lists from some store that only my name appears in the to field. ---
**Author:** ![RealityChuck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/realitychuck/32/195_2.png) [@RealityChuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RealityChuck)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2000, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/something-i-should-know-but-dont-attn-those-who-know-a-thing-or-two-about-e-mail/22318/9 "2000-06-14T17:29:29Z")
> [@](#): > > I don’t think that bcc helps spam much. Surely spammers have programs to generate the emails. These programs can send out email to you only just as easily as putting every body in the to field. But it’s easy for the ISP to screen out mail that go over a certain number of entries in the TO: or CC: field (many do already). Also it would be easier to create a test on the entries to identify spam (e.g., more than 25 names, all in close alphabetical order in the ISP’s domain). They can’t do it with BCC:. ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2000, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/something-i-should-know-but-dont-attn-those-who-know-a-thing-or-two-about-e-mail/22318/10 "2000-06-14T19:45:56Z")
Anything that can be used can be misused. The potential for misuse is in direct proportion to the usefulness of said object. Hence the term ‘drool-proof paper’. If you idiot proof something to the point where any idiot can actually use it, like AOL, those who have work to do can’t do it because of the ‘safety features’. Very annoying, especially because politicians seem to be willfully ignorant of anything more advanced than an abacus. ---
**Author:** ![Earl\_Snake-Hips\_Tucker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/earl_snake-hips_tucker/32/3269_2.png) [@Earl\_Snake-Hips\_Tucker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Earl_Snake-Hips_Tucker)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2000, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/something-i-should-know-but-dont-attn-those-who-know-a-thing-or-two-about-e-mail/22318/11 "2000-06-14T19:52:55Z")
BTW, the email nerd where I work recently mentioned that since we’re so far removed from literal “carbon” copies, that an alternate term “courtesy copy” has been coined to replace the previous time-honored abbreviation.