Ouch! Mobile users zap columnist

I wasn’t kidding.

I really do believe portable phones should be restricted at airports, if not banned altogether, as I suggested in last week’s column. I think phone-free terminals will make airports safer, saner places, and I’m not going to back down from my conclusion that curbing loudmouth wireless callers is a reasonable idea.

But who cares what I think? You obviously couldn’t wait to weigh in with your opinions, and let me tell you, you didn’t hold back. I’m still suffering from virtual third-degree burns inflicted from the hundreds of e-mail flames you shot at me after the story posted. Here are just a few of the ones we could publish:

“It is unusual that I ever disagree with all of your opinions,” wrote Bob Beilstein of Syracuse, NY. “But this time I do.”

Turns out my observation that talking on a cell-phone could be rude shorted his circuits. “It is no more discourteous than talking on any telephone anywhere. It merely frees one from having to rely on some giant phone company to string a wire to wherever it is you need to make or receive a call,” he insisted.

“Great idea,” sniffed reader L. Michael Mastela. “Ban cell phones in airports so those of us traveling on business can just sit and twiddle our thumbs when flights are delayed or cancelled – just sit and be unproductive or queue up for a payphone. Right.”

Mastela recommended that I write about the other annoying habits of airport patrons. “I can’t stand the aroma of cheap perfume and cologne either in the terminal or aircraft, so let’s ban that too. And [how about] body odor, bad breath, plaid pants, fat women in spandex, and bad hair pieces on aging executives?” he fumed.

Les Kamens seemed equally upset about the column. “Get real,” he wrote. “Cell phones do something for us that has never happened before: they keep us in touch with our business and personal lives. If people feel that it is infringing on their personal space at an airport, then let’s look a little closer at what is taking place [there].”

And what is going on? Kamens says the activities that bother some airport users – hearing one-sided cell phone conversations and other noise associated with modern communications devices – is perfectly legitimate, considering that the terminal is a public place. “To use the analogy of second-hand smoke does not apply. One is a major health risk. The other, although annoying, poses no harm,” he added.

Except, maybe, to your sanity.

“Limiting other people’s cell-phone use because [it] can be annoying is not only futile,” said Bob Folkman of Brigham City, Utah. “It is ridiculous.”

Folkman described my complaining about mobile phone talkers as “a new form of prejudice,” claiming that the noise is no different from other conversations, the ubiquitous CNN Airport Network, and the constant barrage of public announcements. “There is simply no escaping our attempts to communicate with others,” he added.

But not everyone believed cell-phone chatters have an inalienable right to talk anywhere, anytime. Some of you indicated a willingness to give up wireless devices – under certain conditions.

“My take on banning cell phones in airports is that it would be a great thing to do – but only when there are no more flight delays and cancellations that require travelers who don’t have them to either wait on long queues to use the inadequate supply of pay phone or wait in long queues at the counter to reschedule their flights,” wrote reader Ellen Hoffman.

Jim South, an Arlington, Va., consultant, concurred. “I would argue that cell phones should be banned the day after the airlines adjust schedules so that all flights depart on time, make a pact with God so there are no more weather-related delays, and provide you with e-mail access.”

(I’m aware that the airline industry employs some of the most powerful lobbyists inside the Beltway, but I’m not sure if even they have the kind of influence to prevent weather delays. Then again, I’d better check with the Air Transport Association just to make sure.)

But some of you actually agreed with me. I saved your comments for the end because you deserve the last word.

“Your column was right-on,” wrote Dave Penney of Mascoutah, Ill. “What is missing, in my opinion, is common sense and consideration of others.”

Penney just returned from a flight on which he encountered a selfish cell-phone chatter. “At the last minute before the flight was closed, a cell phone enthusiast took the aisle seat near me – why do they always sit next to me? – and within seconds he was engaged in a high-volume call designed to illustrate to a friend how he could make calls from an airplane sitting on the ground,” he reported. “The flight attendant politely requested that he secure his cell phone so the plane could push back. We had to wait a few more minutes while he waited for a break in his friend’s conversation and so he could gracefully terminate the call.”

Gary Crown agreed that a ban on cell-phone use is warranted under certain conditions, but he said the problem transcends wireless gadgets. “Second-hand cell phone conversations are annoying at best and adds to the noise pollution that has increased geometrically in our hectic society,” he wrote. “I believe the traveler suggesting the ‘cell-free zone’ was actually crying out for peace and quiet. Remember when the airline lounges afforded the traveler that opportunity? No longer.”

It all comes down to manners, observed Ron Holmes, who also was quick to point out the difficulty of controlling travelers’ behavior. “What is needed are widely-propagated codes of conduct for all cell phone users so that the irritation of them does not kill the many benefits,” he noted. “Of course, the people running the airports don’t pay the same courtesy to travelers when Ted Turner wants to put another TV in [a waiting area].”

OK, I can’t handle all this CNN-bashing. As regular readers of this column probably know, I’m no fan of CNN, and even before I became a former contractor for the media giant, I was a vocal critic of the CNN Airport Network (talk about noise pollution). Maybe a future column will focus on the Turner Empire’s audio stranglehold on our airport waiting areas, although truth be told, it will be difficult to restrain myself from making comments about the company’s poisonous corporate culture, so maybe I’ll hold off for now. Meantime, surf over to Tedsturnovers.com, a clever site put together by former CNN employees, for a preview.

In the end, there were plenty of complaints but few solutions. Daniel Sweet was one of the exceptions when he suggested that airports ought to open “Copper Tank” restaurants featuring copper mesh wiring on the walls, which would make them impervious to cell phone signals. “All of the Mike Markers of the world will flock there in droves – if there is a market here that really cares about these things,” he wrote.

And then there were travelers at their wits’ end who just wanted a little peace and quiet at any cost.

“Please send me information on building a portable cell-phone jamming device,” wrote Kramer Darragh of Little Rock, Ark. “I am appalled at the self-absorbed, invasive behavior of some cell-phone users. I fully understand that the use of such a device may be illegal.”

You’re darned right it is. According to the Federal Communications Commission, the operation of transmitters designed to jam cellular communications is punishable by an $11,000 fine or imprisonment for up to one year. The equipment can also be seized and forfeited to the U.S. Government.

Come on, folks. It’s not that bad, is it?

Christopher Elliott is the author of Scammed: How to Save Your Money and Find Better Service in a World of Schemes, Swindles, and Shady Deals. Critics have called it “eye-opening” and “inspiring” — it’ll “grab your attention and won’t let go.” Order your copy now on Amazon, Barnes & Noble or iTunes.

1 comment