HANG UP!

In response to my Chinese mobile phones post, Narayanan says “In 99.5% situations, synchronous two-way real-time communication is a luxury.”

This statement got me thinking about a whole lot of things from telephones, technology and our communication culture.

Technology has stirred things up quite a bit, and most of us seem to be blissfully unaware of the function and the proper place of each mode of communication. Where an email will do, we text. Where a text will do, we call. Where a land-line call is feasible, we still choose to call from our cell phones to their cell phones, spending money, absorbing radiation into our skulls, and forcing the recipient to absorb some into his skull as well.

Apart from the need to communicate, there is the almost completely ignored question of manners: Stephen Fry, Writer, comedian, British national treasure and my pet god, puts it beautifully in an episode of the Brilliant BBC show Quite Interesting  (Series B Episode 05):

“Telephones are fantastically rude things. It is like saying 'speak to me now, speak to me now, speak to me now'. It is as if you went into someone's office and banged on their desk and said 'I'll make a noise until you speak to me' "

At some level, we are all aware of how intrusive telephones are: The recipient is at the mercy of the bloody ringing beast, and the annoyance often shows in the opening “hello” that s/he proffers.

With cell phones, it is like you take your ball and chain around with you. What is worse, we develop some sort of a Stockholm syndrome and start believing that this enslavement is necessary. See how alarmed we get when we realize we’ve forgotten our phones home – we panic that we are now “unreachable” and that fatal crisis for which we bought the cell phone in the first place, will now surely befall us.

The way I see it, there are two factors to consider- The appropriate choice of medium for a given communication need, and the level of intrusiveness of that medium.

1.     Email – replaces postal mail. Cheap, fast and sure – a winning alternative to the ponderous, notoriously undependable “snail” mail.
Intrusiveness Quotient: Lowest. Recipient can check mail and respond at his leisure

2.     SMS: Cheap, convenient replacement to telegram. Check if can be replaced by email.

Intrusiveness Quotient: Moderate, but recipient can choose to mute his phone and check messages at leisure.

3.     Telephone: replaces showing up at someone’s door unannounced. So this better be important.
Intrusiveness Quotient: Very high.

4.     Cell phone: Dire emergencies when AWAY from a fixed line or pay phone – ergo negligible need to most people.
Intrusiveness Quotient: Astronomical. Recipient has just volunteered to be at beck and call of all and sundry.

 COMMUNICATION HYBRIDS:

5.     Instant messaging (Chat)  - if looking for recreational communication with friends or family, this is perfect middle ground between the non-pressure of email and the instant two-way communicability of a phone or live conversation.
Intrusiveness quotient: Not applicable, since recipient need not sign into chat applications if he doesn’t want to.

I am not including Twitter in this list, because twitter is more like a mass communication tool – it is like having a personal radio station, into which audience can tune in if they want to. It's use is often broadcast of theme-based content and creative expression.

In his comment, Nayaranan made a brilliant suggestion about the midway solution of an SMS only device. An Internet search shows that a lot of people are looking for such a thing.

A text-only device would take care of the dreaded outdoor on-the-go “emergency” situation, but leave your tranquility unmolested.

No minimalist SMS-only device seems to exist, but these are clever devices along similar lines:

1.     Peek: Twitter only device – this design would be ideal for an SMS-only phone:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peek_%28mobile_Internet_device%29

2.     Messaging only (SMS/email/IM) device – target at text-addicted teenagers
http://www.physorg.com/news1392.html

3.     John’s phone: The opposite of a text-only phone – this is a call-only phone. Not relevant to our topic, but interesting. The address book on this phone is a just piece of paper with a pen!!
http://www.johnsphones.com/

If you are interested in trying this out to take back your peace and privacy, you can easily convert your current phone into a SMS-only phone.

Tweak the call profile to silent for all calls, and have an alert tone for SMS alone. Kill GPS service, switch to the most text friendly plan. If you have a smart phone, sell it and buy the most basic phone possible – like the good & hardy Nokia 1100 – black & white screen, killer battery life, tough build. (and bonus LED torch - Now THAT is what makes a cell phone a useful tool during emergencies)

In order to still be available for casual conversations, the trick is to appoint and publicize a certain day of the week, or a certain hour of every day as “available to talk” time. This way, you’ll still have friends left. Irritated friends, but friends nevertheless.

I am sorely tempted to undertake this experiment right away. Getting friends and family to cooperate will be no problem - my offers to disappear are usually met with relief and rejoicing- but the problem is business contacts. I do freelance work, and if someone calls me about a new project, how will they reach me? I can give them  a fixed line number – we have two landlines at home and one can exclusively be my work number (So visiting nephews don’t take calls from clients and inform them I am in the toilet, again) but availability can be a problem, and missing a work call is my loss, not theirs – I am the one who wants their cheque.

This means I’ll be obliged to take calls from every bloody unknown number, which will undo the whole point of going cell-phone free. Ideas?

As soon as I have this figured out, I am totally willing to switch to the text-me life and see how it feels.