I have also been informed that this Friday (9/4) there should be more copies of this text coming into stock. So please check the bookstore ASAP so that you can purchase this text. Beginning this upcoming week each student in the class will be responsible for owning a copy of the Mercury Reader.
For those of you who have not yet obtained the book, the Rowe article can be found here. Please read it.
I would like every one to post their responses to the Rowe article below as a comment. Here are the two questions I would like you to answer, with a full paragraph devoted to each:
1)How do you feel when you hear other people's cellphone conversations in public spaces? Why?
2) In your view, what is Rowe's strongest argument against cell phones? What is his weakest? Why?
I hope you all enjoy the long weekend. Have a safe Labor Day!
For the most part, I hate to hear other peoples' cellular phone conversations. But over the years, I have been able to understand why they take place in public places. I discovered this while I was out celebrating my birthday and received a call telling me that my mother was in the hospital. I took this call because it appeared urgent. I didn't know the number, yet it called me three times, back to back. Sometimes people take their calls for this reason. However, there are some people who take personal calls. These are the calls that I hate to hear, especially after a long day. They're loud and sometimes "personal" conversations to be had at home. So, I'm kind of split between the two.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, Rowe's strongest argument is that cellphones can sometimes be considered noise pollution. People are some what dependant on their phones. They'd take a call before they'd answer someone who may be calling them from within the same vicinity. Some cellphone users abuse them by speaking so loudly that other people's thoughts are clouded because they are so loud. His weakest point, in my opinion, is that cellphones are as deadly as smoking. Though, I would prefer not to hear other peoples' phone conversations, they are nowhere near as bad as second-hand smoking. They may just be as "annoying", though.
When I hear somebody’s cell phone conversation in a public place I feel fine. The only thing that will pick up my attention a little when the conversation is too loud and when there a note on a wall “no cell phones, please”, such as in a government or city offices ( departments of health, social services ) , doctors offices, schools, etc. According to my experience, most of the people are being respectful users of the cell phones. Good for us, we can put our cell phones on vibrate, so at least we do not listen a loud ringtone, or we can use messaging, which allows us have our socializing without annoying anyone. In the past three years technology was incredibly improved, and we can not go back. It conveniences our lives, gives us huge opportunities to learn and have fun. The only issue is to show our community how to use science achievements responsibly and normally.
ReplyDeleteAccording to an article the strongest argument against cell phones is that they make a cognitive pollution in our community environment. There are several reasons why I think so. First of all, loud talking on a cell phones distract and annoy people around those conversations. Second of all, some people are not responsible users of phones in crowded places. Also, lets not forget about our addiction to a cell phones, especially smartphones, that involve people for a long period of time. It would be very interesting to hear a statistics about how many hours a person spends on a phone. Additionally, this article shows us that phones become our priority and even show the status of the person. We ready do run to pick up the phone. The weakest argument is about health issues and cancer that can appear because of radiation. Our community would definitely use much less cell phones when they realize how we get our brains and body parts radiated with cell phones. Even when we do not talk on them, we constantly get bad radiation just carrying our favorite toys in the pockets and bags.
How do you feel when you hear other people's cellphone conversations in public spaces? Why?
ReplyDeleteResponse: I have no problem what so ever with people having conversations on their cell phones. I am one of those people, who sits on the bus and calls a friend just for entertainment. I feel that people can talk to whom ever they want, how ever they want, when ever they want, accept of course places such as the library, church or a classroom in affect. If people are talking on the phone during certain situations, that is also from there own will; if they want to be ignorant they can be, according to the law. It is okay to talk on the phone in public but you also have to understand that there is a time and a place for everything.
In your view, what is Rowe's strongest argument against cell phones? What is his weakest? Why?
Response: I believe Rowes weakest argument against cell phones is "There's the cell phone user, who wants to make noise. And there's myself (and probably numerous others), who would appreciate a little quiet. " - If that was the case of him and others wanting quiet, surely they must be in the library. People having conversations with one another face to face, as well as face to phone would pretty much make the same amount of "noise", so he should have also argued that people around him just want to make noise, cell phone or not. His strongest points however was referring cellphones to cigarettes stating "They produce secondhand noise, just as cigarettes produce secondhand smoke."; I for one am not a big fan of cigarettes! Also it is true how easy it is to listen on to someones conversation it can be contagious. Someone talks about something out loud another gets interested and tells someone else about what they heard and it keeps going on. Rowe might have been a little too demanding on wanting quiet but the case of second hand noise does exists.
1)How do you feel when you hear other people's cellphone conversations in public spaces? Why?
ReplyDeleteI really don't mind when people have cell phone conversations in public, so long as they speak quietly. Most people have the courtesy of speaking low while using their cell phones in public, so that they avoid disturbing others. It all depends on the environment they are in. If it is a quiet place and someone whips out their phone and starts a loud conversation, it's rude and distracting to others who are trying to relax or concentrate. Unless you want everyone around you to hear your conversation, there's really no reason to talk so loudly.
2) In your view, what is Rowe's strongest argument against cell phones? What is his weakest? Why?
I believe that Rowe's weakest argument would be comparing public cell phone use to cigarettes. The affects and damages caused by cigarettes are far worse than anything caused by cellular phone conversations. If someone smokes near you, you may become sick because of secondhand smoke. However, although it is annoying to have someone speak loudly on their phone near you, it isn't as harmful as secondhand smoke. I feel that his strongest argument was how he addressed public cell phone use as pollution. It can be annoying, distracting, and can also be considered somewhat of a hazard.
Q#1: How do you feel when you hear other people’s cell phone conversations in public spaces? Why?
ReplyDeleteA#1: When I hear other people’s conversations generally it doesn’t bother me if it’s in a larger public outdoor space like the street or a bus. I feel that if you are out in the streets it’s common and accepted to be on a cellular. The problem begins when you are no longer in those public outdoor settings it becomes a nuisance. I become more agitated when I hear people’s conversations in more crowded or intimate settings, where privacy and courtesy are required; for example the movies, or a fine dining restaurant. It is a serious pet peeve of mines that while in the company of other people someone is talking on there cell phone, people tend to forget the basic rules of etiquette and how no consideration for there surroundings.
Q#2: In your view, what is Rowe’s strongest argument against cell phones? What is the weakest? Why?
A#2: I believe that Rowe’s strongest argument against cell phones is his point on noise pollution. Noise pollutions is in my opinion comparable to second hand smoke, people fail to realize the effect constant chattering on the phone. It is difficult if not impossible to find a secular place for some peace and quite. Even in places that require quite; for example the library, you still find people whispering on a phone. I feel Rowe’s weakest argument is his proposed solution for noise pollution. His main argument consists of a quite car on the Amtrak trains, what about the hundreds of other places where there is a need for peace and quite? What is the solution for these other places? He does not provide an answer. Instead he proposes new technology that is not yet readily available to the mass market, so till then we all must suffer from noise pollution.
People using there phones in public places really does not disturb me at all. I do strongly believe that there is a time and a place in which one should not be conversing on the phone. I am split on both sides, because they are certain public places in which it is common to use cell phones and in other places that it is not. For example, having a conversation on the streets or in a mall is not bothersome to others , while having a conversation in a church or a job while working is not acceptable and disrespectful. Then comes the controversy of the importance of the call, if it is an emergency then the place where one is standing does not matter anymore. One should know how to speak at all times, if they are not in their own home a level of noise should be kept to a minimum. With that being said, the conversation taking place is respectful to others. No one other than yourself cares about you or your problems, so why bring it to their attention when its not there importance.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion Rowe’s weakest argument is the comparison he made between second hand smoking and using your cell phone. The affects that a second hand smoking has on a person are by far more dangerous than it is to use a cell phone. It has not been completely known that cell phone use may bring cancer but it is a known fact that even if you are not the one smoking directly second hand smoking does have the same affect as if you were. These two situations do not result in the same outcome in any way. In the other hand, his argument describing cell phone usage as pollution does make more sense. Many people will see the noises as pollution to there track of thought. Someone can be having a phone conversation and speaking so loudly that a person surrounding them will lose their track of thought. The conversation that they may be having has not only spread to the person in the other side of the cord but also to all those who are near because of the loudness that this person is articulating in. In that case it all becomes more annoying and non understandable.
I personally don’t really mind hearing other people’s cell phone conversation in public places and I don’t think it should be a problem. I think the whole idea of a cell phone is to use in public places. Cell phones are basically phones that you can take with you anywhere you go and that’s why everyone have a cell phone. Its used for personal reasons, business uses or emergence calls. Everyone that is actually on a cell phone in a public place is making an important call. We might not consider it to be important, however it might be to that person. Just a call might make someone feel a little more safe about someone special. Whether its just a friendly conversation, or a business call, its all important and everyone should understand that.
ReplyDeleteOne of Rowe’s strong arguments is that cell phone’s take away time from you friends and family. Even thought we can call them on the phone to say hello, we lose the times we spend together as a family because someone is busy on their cell phones. We tend to be so busy on your cell phones we don’t pay attention to the loved once around us. We might physically be with family but might just be so busy on your cell phone, its like you’re not there period. One of Rowe’s weakest point is quiet Amtrak car, I think if he doesn’t like the idea of noisy cars he should not take Amtrak and maybe drive to where he needs to go so he can get peace and quiet. Or even consider flying since no one gets service in a plane, he wont have a problem with the noise.
1)How do you feel when you hear other people's cellphone conversations in public spaces? Why?
ReplyDeletePersonally I really don't mind hearing other people's conversation as long the person isn't really blasting their voice into my ear. Due to the fact it is in a public place and the person had the right to do so. It's not in a place like the library where it is kind of required to stay quite. For example last week I had to get up and walk out of class because my old sister had been calling me. It turned out my older sister was calling me to tell me my little sister had fainted and that want me to meet them in the hospital after class.
2) In your view, what is Rowe's strongest argument against cell phones? What is his weakest? Why?
In my opinion both Rowe's strongest and weakest argument was the part he said "cell phones should be restricted�because many travelers are trying to get work done" this argument was both his strongest because yes people do need it to be quite do do their work. on the other hand it was his weakest because like Amtrak said "We hesitate to restrict responsible users of cell phones," it said, "especially since many customers find train travel to be an ideal way to get work done." so in my opinion i believe its both his strongest and weakest argument.
I don't really mind hearing other people's cell phone conversations at all. When and if I ever hear someone on the phone out in public and I start to get annoyed, I just turn the other way. I don't pay them any mind, it's easy not to listen to someone's phone conversations. Cellular phones are made to be used anywhere at anytime. Sometimes, if someone is on their phone out in public, it's an emergency. Imagine if you were the person on the phone, in the middle of an emergency, do you think other people will mind hearing your phone conversation? I feel if people do get annoyed from hearing someone's cell phone conversation, they should just turn the other way and not listen to what the person is saying.
ReplyDeleteI believe the strongest argument that Rowe made was the health risk of getting cancer. Radiation from cell phones are harmful & can definitely cause cancer if they are used frequently and for a long period of time. I think that Rowe's weakest argument was the amount of "noise" that cell phones cause. First of all, there are always noises being heard, all day, everyday. A ring from a cell phone (or a song) is not as "noisy" as a fire siren coming from down the street or the mister softee jingle. I also disagree when Rowe stated that "they represent more than mere annoyances." Cell phones can be used quietly and most of the time are.
Talking on the phone in public is sometimes considered rude especially when the person is loud. I cannot talk on the phone in public because it is almost embarrassing for me to let people in on my conversations. This occurs on the train very often. You will be sitting quietly trying to relax when a person walks in talking on their phone. Their conversation, interesting or not, is going to be the only thing that you’re going to listen to. How annoying is it to have to listen to a random stranger’s phone call? I don’t appreciate having to listen to other people’s cell phone conversations in public places. It can, however, be acceptable if the person keeps his/her tone down and cuts the conversation short.
ReplyDeleteRowe’s best argument was about how people have become so obedient to a ringing phone that they will go out of their way to pick up a phone call. This is beyond true and I’ve seen it happen countless times. We are being controlled by technology now even though there was a time when people were fine without all these high tech gadgets. Rowe argues that despite the belief of cell phones helping get work done, they actually hinder the process. Rowe’s idea of quiet cars on trains is not a viable one. How can a company restrict cell phone usage in certain cars? It just seems unnecessary to take such measures for a small annoyance.
While this article was written in November of 2000, nine years later people are not exactly the same. People, more than ever, are texting instead of talking on the phone so it doesn’t seem to be that big of a problem as it was before.
1)
ReplyDeleteWhen i hear other peoples cellphone conversations it doesn't really bother me.However when the volume of the conversation reaches an obnoxious level to a point where it is disrupting me along with others.Then that's when it becomes an issue.I find it extremely rude. I too use my cellphone in public places ,but while using it i always try to remain as discrete as possible . However you can only be so quiet. The whole problem derives from the people whom have no respect for others personal space and whom feel as though they do not owe anybody any sort of discretion.
2) Rowe had many well worded arguments in his article, however i feel his best argument was on how no matter where you are and no matter what your doing once you hear the phone ringing you must pick it up. You've become loyal to the ring of a cell phone. I feel this is extremely true because i always tend to run to get the phone once i hear its ringing. Rushing to answer the phone has become just as popular of an occurrence as talking on your phone. We as a society have grown so use to being on the phone that we look to use the phone even when we do not have to. Rowe's weakest argument i feel is his argument on the Amtrak quiet car. Yes a quiet car would be a marvelous thing however cellphones and mp3 players have become a humongous part of society. Almost everyone has one or the other, they have grown to be a part of us. Lets say parents for instance, im sure they would love 3 hrs of peace and quiet from there children, but at the same time they have to have there phone on them in case there is an emergency with there kids at home. Quiet cars would be a very hard thing to enforce, because there will always be unknown variables ,such as who is to say whats an emergency call, or how loud ones mp3 should be. What happens if someone has amazing hearing and they hear everything? Everyone is different and every one has different definitions of emergencies. It will hard to determine whos emergencies are truly emergencies. Therefore it will be hard to create a truly quiet car.
1.When I hear other people’s cell phone conversation in public places, at times I feel annoyed and disturbed. There are those days when you had a rough day and you just want peace and quiet but then there is always that one person that ruins it by speaking louder than necessary. I understand the need to take an urgent call and the reaction can just overwhelm you however if it’s casual phone call and your speaking at a volume that is louder than necessary that just really bugs me. Especially when there is a no cell phone sign hanging right in front of them and they are just talking and disturbing everyone, which is rude and disrespectful.
ReplyDelete2.In my point of view, Rowe’s strongest argument against cell phones is comparing cell phone noises and conversation to cigarettes and smoking. He sends the president of Amtrak a letter and suggests him to provide “Quiet Cars” as they have provided No Smoking cars, therefore, “The yakkers could yak, others could enjoy the quiet.” When people talk on the phone in public they seem to have the need to increase the volume of their voice so the person on the line can hear them through the phone and in person from somewhere around the world. It’s rude, disturbing, and a nuisance. Cell phones can be just as harmful as second hand smoking. When you hold the phone next to ear to talk on the phone, it radiates which can lead to cancer. In my point of view, Rowe’s weakest argument was technology ruins relationships. I have been to Hong Kong and Rowe is right. There are cell phones everywhere and people don’t pay as much attention their surroundings anymore but that doesn’t mean they don’t spend time with their loved ones. Cell phones are our tools for communication. From Rowe’s point of view, they were just talking on their cell phones, but they may have been talking to their parents, a relative, their boss, or someone important to that person. We, as humans, have a choice to answer the call or to ignore it. That father talking on the phone while those kids were bored, he could’ve been talking to an airline making tickets to go to Florida’s Walt Disney Resort for a family vacation. Everyone has different values and priorities in life. Talking on the phone while you’re with someone does not necessarily mean anything.
Answ. #1 1. When I’m at a public place and I hear people talking on their cell phones, it kind of bothers me. For example, this one time I was on the bus on my way home from school. It was a long day and I was really tired therefore I closed my eyes to take a quick nap.However, this guy got on the bus and he started talking real loud on his cell phone. Not only had he disturbed me from my nap because of the noise he was making also from hearing his conversation he was about to meet up with the same person on the phone.i understand if it’s an emergency you can use your phones. But once you in a closed place around other people for example the bus I do not think it’s a good idea to be on the phone. If you decide to have a conversation in a public place at least keep your voice low, just because you’re having a conversation with an old friend the whole world doesn’t need to hear it too.
ReplyDeleteAnsw.# 2 2. In my view Jonathan Rowe strongest argument was when he says cell phones are destroying families. Instead of them trying to converse with each other they were avoiding each other’s eyes and talk on their cell phones. He also said cell phones were big problems to travelers who were trying to do work or reads. Traveling used to be peaceful but nowadays it’s a just a cell phone hell. I think he’s weakest argument was when he compares cell phones users with smokers, he says cell phones users should have their own section just like smokers. He has a point if one thinks he’s going to be on the phone every second then the ones who aren’t should have their peace and quiet.however,its not he’s strongest argument because like cigarettes hearing somebody else’s conversation will not kill you or make you sick.
When I’m out in public and hear other people’s conversation on cell phones, it doesn’t quite affect me. Everyone is living their own lives and have places to be and people to talk to. Cell phones were invented so they can be used a portable device to call and get work done faster. I don’t care because I’m not part of their lives in any way and have no connection to them. There life, their conversation and words have no affect on what my present or my future will be like. Ones who tend to talk loudly and irritating me, I simple walk away or zone them out.
ReplyDeleteRowe’s strongest argument towards cell phone usage is when he is talking about how the cell phone has taken over our lives. Throughout the article, he first talks about how a family is at a local coffee shop and the father is on his cell and how the whole family is in there own world and not making eye contact. Another instance in the article, he talks about how having people on trains, such as the Amtrak, people are on their cell phones and how the train was made so people can recollect their thoughts and have some peaceful, quiet time to themselves away from all of the hectic lives they have. But with modern technology, this is not possible because their lives follow them wherever they go and quiet time is not available. And this last point, really sold his strength in this argument, how whatever we are doing, working, at home, watching TV and other activities, but once the phone rings, boom, all of these are gone and we have all of our focus on that one ring and who it is, why they are calling and what they are asking of me, the receiver of the phone call.
One part of his argument, I felt that he could leave out because it wasn’t strong enough and it held the article back, about the train. True, I showed that it had some strength to it previously, but at the same point, it was weak. Trains are a way of means, such as walking, taking the bus, driving and riding a bike. During any of these commutes, we will be on a cell phone having a conversation, but talking on the train isn’t a strong argument without having these other mentioned. Talking about having two different cars, one for noise pollution and for non noise pollution is a useless opinion he stated. Trains are probably the most useful ways of transportation and mainly everyone who is traveling will use a train and you can’t make a special car for those who want to make noise or those who don’t. This won’t solve anything and will only cause further noise pollution because more people will be jammed into one car.
1)How do you feel when you hear other people's cellphone conversations in public spaces? Why?
ReplyDeleteHonestly I find that people are often put in situations where they may need to raise their voices. I have no issue with how loud a persons volume is because I know that there may be a day when I will have to raise my voice in a public place and will hope others can just deal with it. If noise is really an issue for the people in my vicinity I'd recommend earplugs or headphones.
2) In your view, what is Rowe's strongest argument against cell phones? What is his weakest? Why?
The strongest argument Rowe brings forth is definetly in the paragraph towards the end of the article that begins "There is something lonely about a wired world". He goes into the fact that we become so caught up in using devices like phones that we start to become more private. People are becoming less social. His weakest argument would have to have been the one about noise pollution and comparing it to cigeratte smoke. This was going a bit far, cell phone conversations never harmed a person for being next to them. This arguement had the least support from the writer and should have just been left out of the article.
Reach Out and annoy someone
ReplyDeleteWhen I hear peoples cell phone conversations in public places I get upset not because of the fact that they are on the phone but because they are speaking so loudly. It annoys me that I literally have to seat their and listen to his/her whole conversation about who did what, when, where, how and why. I myself use my cell phone in public places but I speak at a normal level because I don’t want people knowing what I’m talking about. Some people don’t take others feeling into consideration when they are speaking on the phone, they act as if they are alone where they can laugh out loud, or have these unusually outburst. When I’m in public places I expect to have some type of peace and I expect people to learn how to lower their voice when they are on the phone because at the end of the day no one wants to listen to a conversation that’s boring or has no point to it.
In my view one of Rowe’s strongest arguments was that cell phone use produce secondhand noise, just as cigarettes produces second hand smoke. When sitting in public places or someplace quiet and someone’s phone constantly begins to ring its tends to become annoying and upsetting to many people because of the unnecessary noise, the persons who’s phone is constantly ringing can easily place it on vibrate that’s the easiest solutions for both parties. One of his weakest arguments was that “secondhand noise is going to become a bigger issue in the next decade than secondhand smoke was in the last.” Even though the noise people make when using their cell phones are annoying and rude it would never be a bigger issue than secondhand smoke. The smoke from these cigarettes pollutes our air and makes it unsafe for us to actually breathe clean air. We can’t die from standing next to someone talking on their phone, but when can most definitely die by someone smoking directly next to us that is why he really can’t say that cell phone usage would become a bigger issue.
“Reach Out And Don’t Annoy Someone, Please”
ReplyDeleteAfter reading (and laughing a little) about this article, I realized the distinct meaning of Johnathan Rowe’s entire argument through one of his statements: “Does the person own the cell phone, or is it the other way around”? I believe that this one statement has abridged all of his ideas, arguments, and examples. The cell phone has a huge impact on American culture as well as other civilizations and countries around the world. But honestly, for me to hear a person’s conversation on the phone is quite entertaining at times, depending on the conversation…that is. And sometimes it just doesn’t bother me at all. I like hearing the different views and opinions of other’s while I sit there and think about it to myself. It sometimes provides me with a whole different realm of thinking. And brings up the questioning spirit…the famous “what if” statement, if you will. I just enjoy having a small conversation in my head, when I‘m entirely uninterested in what ever is happening. I know I can be weird at times, but that’s my way of coping with the annoyance of everyday life. Though it can be very irritating when you hear things you really don’t want to. And on occasion you get those conversations where you are just like… “what the hell”? But nevertheless, for others to hear personal conversations can be very rude and just embarrassing to be frank. (Alittle bit of “TMI” actually) There is a time and place for everything. When Rowe mentioned the scene at the coffee shop with the parents and child, I see a lot of that example in my everyday life. Especially in those cliché movies and books, where someone is on the phone and someone else tries to get their attention for some reason. The famous line that every one uses: “Don’t you see me on the phone”? Essentially, you hear those lines everywhere. But it can be rather infuriating for that to happen to you, well for you to be the one getting ignored. And that’s why I believe that everyone should have some sort of music player (aka IPOD) to block out the ignorance of others. But then again, there’s a time and place for those too, but that’s a whole new different story.
Technology is so advanced in the world these days; you cannot escape it. Almost everywhere you go someone owns a technological device. Specifically, one of the most extremely popular high tech gadgets available is the cell phone and nine out of ten people own one. Personally, I don’t have a problem with people who use their cell phones in public; but there are some people who just don’t know how to conduct themselves while on their phones. For instance, some of these people can be loud and obnoxious; while others use colorful vocabulary with no regards for others. As time goes by; technology has becomes more advanced and soon it will be impossible to avoid.
ReplyDeleteIn the article “Reach Out and Annoy Someone” By Jonathan Rowe, he mainly discusses his strong opinion about people and their use of cell phones in public. He stated “I've watched people complete a conversation, start to put the thing away, and then freeze. They sit staring at it, as though trying to think of someone else to call. The phone is there. It demands to be used, almost the way a cigarette demands to be smoked”. This quote was his strongest point because the need to use cell phones is like an addiction to drugs. Cell phone usage has become an epidemic; most people own a cell phone because they are easily accessible for mostly anyone.
However, his views were weak as he acknowledges that, “There is a real opportunity here for Amtrak to get ahead of the curve, I said. Why not provide "Quiet Cars" the way they provided No Smoking cars when smoking first became an issue”? This quote is not his strongest point because so many more people use cell phones compared to those who don’t. It would not be logical for Amtrak to separate the cars because only a small percentage of people don’t own cell phone and it would not be profitable for the company to cater for those who don’t.
When I hear other people conversation, when they are on their cell phone, in a public area, get me upset and annoyed. I understand when people need to answer their cell phone when with company and/or public area. It could be an emergence, like if they have children or have a family emergence, I would understand because it could happen to me; But when they just talk about nothing or private things and doing it loud or just plain yelling it so everybody could hear their business is not ok. Not everyone wants to know or goes on with their life. Things you say to people should stay between the people you talk to, not for the whole world to know. I like to keep my conversation between me and the person I am on the phone with. When I talk to others, what they are saying to me or what I am saying to them should be private. I do not like when everybody knows what I am saying to the person I am talking to. Maybe it is the way I was raise that influence the way I am thinking and the way I am. While I grew up, my family (mainly my grandmother) always said “your conversation with other people, with phone or face to face are always private.” And I follow or should I say believe on what my grandmother say.
ReplyDeleteRowe had many arguments about the use of cell phone in a public area. One of the argument that he pointed out that I think is the strongest is that “cell phones are cigarettes.” The reason why I think that this is the strongest argument is that this statement is true. Cell phone is like cigarettes because they are polluting the area like cigarettes, but with noise. People can be anywhere, like a bus or a train or you just walking down a street and all you hear is people conversation in all direction. Some people like a little quiet when they are on their way to work, school or home so they could think, do some work, do some homework and/or just relaxes from a stressful or hard day. I do not think Rowe had a weak argument. I think all his arguments are strong and has a point.
A loud isolated sound or noise in an otherwise quiet place can be very annoying. It does not matter what the source of the sound is. If you are in a somewhat quite place, for example, hospital, office area or a library, and someone is talking loudly with other people or even to him it can be very disturbing to people around who are quietly trying to concentrate on their work, study, thought or even a nap. To me, it does not matter what is the purpose of the conversation. I sometimes come across people in a public place talking very softly on the cell phone, and I am fine with it. It is only that most people mistakenly think that the person on the other side of the phone cannot hear them if they do not speak louder than their usual tone.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion Rows has two strongest arguments in the article, cell phone causes cancer if you use too much. The radiation is harmful for the body, especially for the pregnant woman. The other argument is noisy, like in the quiet place if someone talk loudly it may disturbing someone around him. I think the weakest argument is that the cell phone user does not get time to spend with their family, but I think cell phone is very important to contact with the family, when you are far from them. I understand the importance of the cell phone when I came here (USA) and I feel lonely without my family. The only way to contact them is cell phone.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete1. I do not really care if someone is talking on their cell phone in public spaces unless they start yelling and gesturing for unknown reasons and the only reaction I usually get is having to stifle a laughter if the person is talking about things that shouldn't be discussed in public. Occasionally, it can be annoying if you try to have a conversation and the person suddenly ignores you to answer their cell phone.
ReplyDelete2. The strongest argument in Rowe's article is that the noise pollution created by cell phones automatically causes non-users to have to acquiesce to the will of disruptive cell phone talkers. The weakest argument is that he thinks cell phones will be the next scourge of society when he says that "Secondhand noise is going to become a bigger issue in the next decade than secondhand smoke was in the last", which is an excessive analogy.