Theatergoers Want Mobile Phones Jammed
from the you're-breaking-up dept
A new survey says that 72 percent of British theatergoers want mobile phone signals to be blocked in theaters. Of course, like in the US, there's the small matter of such jamming being illegal in the UK, so new legislation would be required, but this opens up some questions: would the law codify times or places when it's okay to jam phones, or would it simply be a free-for-all? Either method seems pretty problematic: laws do a really lousy job of keeping up with changes in technology, or changes in attitudes towards it; allowing anybody to actively jam cell phone signals anywhere, at anytime just because they feel like it is pretty inherently a bad idea (though passive jamming, such as by using signal-unfriendly construction materials, on private property may be a little different). Like banning cell phone use while driving, blocking the signals in theaters merely eliminates one distraction, it doesn't solve the deeper problem of rude or inconsiderate people in the audience. Before phones were the big issue, people simply talking during performances was a problem, but there was no call for new laws banning it. There are probably better solutions than just jamming signals, such as forcing phones into silent mode, which make much more sense than getting the government involved to try to legislate people into having some manners.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Just Stop Going
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: And...
licensed or type accepted which is a sort
of group license (in a sense.)
Some transmitter covered under a subsection
of Part 15 do not need a license.
But must not they must interfere with licensed
users of the spectrum.
So a license would be required from the FCC and
they're not going to give you a license or
allow type acceptance for a transmitter that
interferes with a licensed user.
That's why the government is involved. It would
require action from the legislature to allow the
FCC to first write a specification and then change
the rules to allow a cell phone jammer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: And...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
sorry...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: sorry...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not such a great idea...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not such a great idea...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not such a great idea...
We always see this one when talking about cell phone jamming. It's the doctor's responsibility to be available. I'd be angry at the doctor for entering an area where his cell phone didn't work.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not such a great idea...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
yo jkarp
dude... it's not like you could've called yr doctor in the middle of the theater before cell phones existed either.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not such a great idea...
If you need to receive a call, don't go to the theartre.
Why should the other ticket buyers have their moviegoing experience ruined by your ringing phone? Because you just couldn't wait for that film to come out on DVD?
As long as people think like you do, there will be a need to block cell phones in theartres.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Not such a great idea...
right... I'm sure the movie theatre houses will jump all over this idea. I can see the advertising now...
"Need your phone?!?!? Go Away! I'd rather go broke then let a doctor in the house."
Of the 200+ IT staff that work at this facility, about 150 of them are "on call" after hours. You show me one theatre that wants to tell them they can't spend their money there. Just one, and I'll sms you a beer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Not such a great idea...
Much like another person above, I'm on call 24/7/365, and there are many, many people in the same business.
It's called the military.
By the book, we are supposed to be reachable at our recalls at all times. When you live in the barracks, as most military members between 18 and 25 do, your only recall is a cell phone. Failure to do so can cost you anywhere from a loss of your off-time for a week or two all the way up to half of your month’s pay, times to, 45 days restriction 45 days no liberty.
So you REALLY want theaters to stab themselves in the foot by making it so military folks in the prime moving-going demographic can't go to their shows, go for it. Hope you like DVDs.
For anybody who said "oh, the doctor shouldn't go to the movies" or "oh, the pregnant wife's husband shouldn't go anywhere"-- grow up. Please. You're responding to a rude sub-group by demanding a whole new responsibility of a different group. Why should these folks totally ignore advances in technology that help them do things better?
I'm firmly on the "enforce the rules" side. Isn't that the POINT of rules?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Not such a great idea...
Much like another person above, I'm on call 24/7/365, and there are many, many people in the same business.
It's called the military.
By the book, we are supposed to be reachable at our recalls at all times. When you live in the barracks, as most military members between 18 and 25 do, your only recall is a cell phone. Failure to do so can cost you anywhere from a loss of your off-time for a week or two all the way up to half of your month’s pay, times to, 45 days restriction 45 days no liberty.
So you REALLY want theaters to stab themselves in the foot by making it so military folks in the prime moving-going demographic can't go to their shows, go for it. Hope you like DVDs.
For anybody who said "oh, the doctor shouldn't go to the movies" or "oh, the pregnant wife's husband shouldn't go anywhere"-- grow up. Please. You're responding to a rude sub-group by demanding a whole new responsibility of a different group. Why should these folks totally ignore advances in technology that help them do things better?
I'm firmly on the "enforce the rules" side. Isn't that the POINT of rules?
So here's a new idea. Why don't you clowns just put your phones on silent mode, than all of this would be a non-issue? Don't they teach you consideration for others or having a little foresight in army school?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Not such a great idea...
Along with your baseless accusation, your verbal assault on the group you've decided to villify ("clowns"? are you serious?) is patently rediculous.
I'm willing to bet that a poll of those disturbed in movies would show that the majority were disturbed by teenagers... the type who are in mid/highschool or college.
As he said, you're responding to a rude subgroup (that is, TEENAGERS w/cellphones and no manners) by foisting regulations on all the others (parents, on-call personnel, ME, etc)
Read before you flame, and if you've got no point to make, don't bother posting.
I agree completely with "Enforce the Rules"...
To the argument that theater-owners will never do it because it costs money? That's a real shame, because it's the responsibility of the proprietor to see that customers aren't disturbed by other customers (it certainly isn't MY job to keep strangers quiet in the theater), and if that doesn't matter to the proprietor, I'm sure as hell not going to the movies.
With a mentality like that, you can give it maybe two years and pirated dvds will put theater-owners all out of business for their refusal to respond to a serious encroachment on the majority of their customers' satisfaction.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not such a great idea...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
As long as it is signposted...
I'm playing Devil's advocate here - I would just as soon not have the jammers and just trust people to bebave responsibly, but that does not seem to be happening.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not such a great idea...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Kick them out
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
OK.. How about this
If it rings... benefit of the doubt. Rings and you talk? Safeties should come off.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
All The More Reason.....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And the idea that forcing carriers to implement technology that allows other people to mess with the settings on my phone seems like a much worse idea. Not to mention that if a phone vibrates, it's not going to prevent an inconsiderate person from answering it and talking on the phone.
The real solution here? Have employees keep an eye on the theaters. Enforce the "no talking/smoking/cell phone use" rules. Kick out people who refuse to follow them. Theaters used to do this, before the days of megaplexes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I agree with this anoynmous coward
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: I agree with this anonymous coward
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: I agree with this anonymous coward
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cell phone jamming
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cell Phones in Theaters
Yeah, kick em out the moment the irritating little device rings, sings, songs or whatever...
As far as jamming goes, doesn’t the government have more important issues to deal with? Like protecting us from terrorist? Why do people want the government to baby site them through everything? I think that’s been tried once, it was called communism and it failed miserably…
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Shielding, not jamming
Theatre could ADVERTISE this feature, heavily. Perhaps even offer the same movie on two screens, one shielded and one not... and see which one sells more tickets?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Shielding, not jamming
While I empathize with peoples desire to beat down cinema-cell-phone-frollickers, there ARE some legitimate times when blocking the signal is a very bad idea. Having a wife who is a physician, and on call 24 hours a day, I have seen where her getting a phone call has literally meant a patient life is saved. This has happened at the cinema and she is considerate enough NOT to talk in the movie (she runs like heck for the nearest door). However, blocking the signal means she would never get the notification in the first place, and I think that would be a horrible thing.
Also, I have recently become a daddy and although I love my progeny dearly those occasional "adult night outs" are very needed. I couldn't imagine going out to a place where I knew that they were blocking the signal for either mine or my wife's cell phone.
At any rate, you get the idea, I agree with all those that say the answer is in the movie theater management enforcing policy better rather than blanket jamming of signals.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Shielding, not jamming
Now theres a good idea. I (apparently all by myself here) would NEVER go to a movie if I knew cells were being blocked. Sorry, but being available is far more important to me than some annoying twit of a kid who can't realize other people are watching the movie.
You know why that twit of a kid doesnt bother me? 'cause I'll scold him for his rude behavior. Out loud, first incident. It's amazing how polite people are after being publicly shamed for being rude. especailly in a closed static environment.
Of course, that could get you killed in some theatres. That's not a problem for me. I don't frequent any place where practicing manners gets people killed.
I'll shame anyone into silencing themselves, but It doesn't have to be JUST cause of a phone. At the same time, if MY phone rings (it will actually vibrate, but you get the idea), I step outside to answer/callback after checking the number.
This is a communications age. Trying to STOP people from being reachable will not work. It will only serve to alienate people. Instead, try to get the irresponsible people to act responsibly with their communications devices.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Shielding, not jamming
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Shielding, not jamming
The basic problem here is one of rudeness; I carry a phone with me all of the time. When I'm in a space where it is inappropriate for it to ring, I switch it to vibrate or off. It is that simple. In a theater I switch to vibrate. If I get a call, I go outside and return the call - using the Caller ID information saved by the phone. This isn't rocket science.
There are too few people demonstrating courtesy these days, (used to be common courtesy, didn't it) and very few taking responsibility for their own actions. Sad...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How many shut off phones?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
use your mute button
The issue is with people not being respectful, I certainly try to be when in public.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Let's not ban, just deal with the problems
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Some answers...
It's not that difficult to rig a Faraday cage around a building to block incoming cell signals. I'd think it would be polite on the theater's part to have signage warning that cell phone signals will not work in the auditorium (please go to the lobby if you wish to use your phone).
How about that all-important emergency call? Well, being somebody that carries a pager (it vibrates) for emergencies, it is a given that if you go to a restaurant or a theater or anywhere else, you may be paged and your job requires you to be available. Nobody I've ever worked for said that I had to answer the phone immediately; they give you a set amount of time to be available for consultation (say, ten minutes) or even to be online (say, a half hour to an hour). You get paid for this, so you simply learn to avoid places where your pager/phone won't work. When you do get called, simply go to the rest room, lobby, or step outside and do your business. Of course, you realize that this means that you cannot take pleasure trips to Antarctica while you are on call--d'uh!
Again, if a place blocks incoming cell/pager signals, they should let people know... the people that NEED to be available will thank you and make alternative arrangements. If there should be a law, it might require a "standard" circle-sign that you can look for to tell if you are in a cell-free area.
By the way, I got paged on the way to a restaurant this past Monday. I turned around and went home. I ended up spending a couple of hours online instead of eating--my wife and daughter had a good meal without me, but they brought me home some food. Being Labor Day, I found out that this two-hour call netted me $750. I didn't piss anybody off; only disappointed my family that I couldn't be at the restaurant with them, but they knew I was on call. In fact, after they learned what I earned, there wasn't ANY negative feelings!
As for the idiots that answer their John Phillip Sousa full-volume Stars and Stripes Forever ring-tone in a theater with an extended conversation with somebody three seats down, well, you can't legislate against stupidity or insensitivity. Likewise, there isn't any legislation against pouring one's 30-gallon "Biggie Size" Coke (accidentally) against the offender, either...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Some answers...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Enforced rules are the only REAL solution!
That is all it would take to please anyone with any sense. Theater management, make the rules and enforce them, it would be less expensive than adding jammers or sheilding or the lost business of people that are on call.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Theater employee here
People with feet on the seats, outside food, unruly children are a concern of mine. Cell phones are a real pain to deal with, and text messaging is a real issue because of the backlight. It's a real distraction for our customers.
Some people are so ignorant they will nod when you ask them to stop, then immedietly start again as soon as you've left. There are issues that we need someone in the theater at all times, which we can't afford to do. You shouldn't have to, but if it's a distraction for you as a customer, it's best to bring it to our attention so we can deal with it.
One time we had kids in the dark theater throwing pennies at other customers. Nobody told us, so they weren't caught!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
either way - cost of movie-going increases
To implement any sort of technology like jamming signals in your theatres - more money. Tough situation - eh?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: either way - cost of movie-going increases
No... The only way theatres can make up for that financial burden is by getting better licensing deals from the MPAA.
Movies are too expensive period. They could get more people to go to the theatre if they made prices realistic, and made the experience at least a little more pleasant.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: either way - cost of movie-going increases
movies are expensive - but the public pays more and more every year to go see them. it is simple economics. we are off topic here but you are going the wrong way with this if you want to whine about movie theatres and their prices. if people did not pay the prices - they would be reduced or the movie industry would fail.
good point about chasing away business tough - but I do not think it would be as rampant of a problem as you make it out to be. i am an "IT Guy" on call and i assure you that most IT guys would gladly "forget" their cell phones when they want to see a movie. i do already and it is not required.
getting the film buyers to negotiate a better deal would be much easier if the public did not pay the prices. however, as long as we pay the prices, those costs will only continue to rise.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: either way - cost of movie-going increases
To implement any sort of technology like jamming signals in your theatres - more money. Tough situation - eh?"
Wait, I have a better idea - why not simply fine the people who are being rude? So it costs more to hire ushers etc, but for just one $25 fine, you could pay someone for about three hours work. With all the jackasses around these days, the theaters may actually end up making money this way. Patent pending.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
our culture is known well for how rude it is.
- the doctor example is a bad one - someone had a great answer that it is the doctor's duty to be available when on call by not entering a "jammed" zone.
- make 2 theatres available - one with and one without - unfortunately you will never see that experiment - but i can guarantee the one with jamming will do much better business.
- some people have legit reasons for carrying a phone - no one argues that - but like one person above mentions - they made it fine before this "communications" age. I'm a techie and I still "forget" my cell phone often. not saying i am the perfect example - just saying i don't understand the "being available is most important" mentality.
the theatre is an expensive outing and it is worth every penny of it --- if you have a great presentation without interruptions. people everywhere agree --- look at movie grosses!
no worries though - this will never happen. government must get involved and that wont happen in the US - we are much too rude of a society to permit such a practicality.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dealing with symptoms...
Am I the only one seeing a correlation here? There must be a reason OTHER than "blocking cigarettes from being lit" at play here. I would assume that it is a combination of other patrons speaking out (to management, not w/rude shouts or fists or spilled drinks) against offenders and management responding by ejecting the viewer or forcing him to extinguish the cigarette. (I would personally be in favor of the former)
I believe that the theaters need to step up their in-show security, have a monitor who ejects audibly ringing cell-phone owners from the theater immediately, no refund, no excuse. If not a monitor, than a CALL button or something (though a cell-phone can be stashed quickly, and a call ended abruptly, so a monitor is still the best bet)
The warnings to put the phone on silent are already in place, nobody would have a foot to stand on in complaining about being ejected. No phone comes w/out a silent mode, and nobody has any excuse for not using it. (Personally I abhor hearing obnoxious rings no matter where I am, and rather than be a hypocrite, I leave my phone on vibrate literally all the time I spend outside of my house or car)
Cell phone use in theaters is no different from cell phone use in any other occasion where obnoxious ringtones don't belong: sit-down restaurants, speeches, traditional theaters, libraries... the list varies per person, but common courtesy isn't common anymore, and people have to stop treating the symptoms with rediculous counter-measures.
If we get dogs to get rid of the cats that we got to get rid of the mice... what will we use to get rid of the dogs?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
All comes down
Most people have them. But, like the bible belt, what happens is called "a vocal minority".
Everyone has said it, keep your fone on vibrate, leave if you want to talk. Again, manners.
The other thing you can do (and I've done) is keep a large cup of ice water. People hate it (and can't do shit about it) if you dump water on them if they are being rude.
I had one person take me to court once, but the Judge rightly dismissed it. 1, because since it was only water, nothing was harmed (except his pride) and 2, the Judge agreed with me (and I think secretly was amused at my "it was an accident" bullshit story (the guy was behind me).
You may or may not get popped for it, but its better than listening to the dipshit yap all night (think of the movie "Scary movie" where the girl was eating chicken and talking on the phone, close to that bad).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's not just phones...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's not just phones...
I am not saying theatres should not be a part of the enforcement - I have 7 years of managing my own theatre under my belt too. It's not rocket science when it comes to controlling people in the crowd. So - are you going to be there holding each patron's hand throughout every film? No.
Think of average 12-18 plex theatre - add 12-18 more employees per shift? add possibly 36 more shifts to a days work? It will never happen.
It will not get resolved until someone gets seriously injured - shot or knifed - for reacting to a cell phone user or being the cell phone user. People DO get that angry over it. I choose not to toss cold water on a fellow patron in the big city because I really do not want to be that example.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
and if you need to reach us in an emergency - call the "BigBucks Theatre" at Regency Oak at 123-555-1234 - we are going to be in the 10 PM show of Superman.
--------------------------
Gee - that was difficult.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
There is no "legitamate" reason to carry Cell phon
Personally I would like to have a personal cell phone jammer. Something like those neckless air purifiers they sale on TV. That way it could block all celluar signals within 20 feet of wherever I am. Two reasons for this. One, it would be funny and two i would not have to be annoyed by people on cell phones. I would just have to be annoyed by people for other reasons. That is until I invent a jammer for all annoying things people do. I guess I would have to walk around looking like MR. T after that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Well said.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
All it will take...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
My Movie Theater
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Shielding, not jamming
and you're from what generation now? publicly shamed for being rude only results in juvenille retorts. maybe this would have worked in the 50s, but kids today have grown up with south park. that alone is enough to prevent your hypothesis from being realized in the modern world. not to mention the internet... anyone who has grown up with the internet has been, at some point or another, involved in flaming. this has conditioned us to not actually take offense to such attempts at verbal onslaughts and to formulate personally degrading responses to such attacks in a quick, efficient manner.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dealing with symptoms... by Tom P
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Domo Arigato, Mr. Vibrato
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Maybe a technical solution...
What if the theatre had a "cell" inside? The cell would capture the phones, because it would be by far the strongest. Outgoing calls could easily be blocked (you'd want to program the cell to accept 911 calls).
The in-theatre cell could then answer any incoming calls with a message, "the patron is in the (x) theater at this time. If this is an emergency, there will be a $2 charge to put the call through. Press 5 to accept the charge."
Thus, the doctor could get those pregnant mother calls, and I suspect most people who were just calling to chat would be too cheap to pay the $2. That would cut down the numbers to a very small percentage of viewers who had (a) friends who were extremely rich; and (b) were too rude to turn off the ringer and put the phone on vibrate.
The theatre could pay for the cell with the fees for putting calls through.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Maybe a technical solution...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
if the mobile producers got behind this, maybe marketed it as a feature "QuietCell Enabled Device", it would be a great shush.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Duh.
Some people in the world are born complainers, These people need to get over it, and realize that somethings in life are more important then a story that someone put to film to entertain others.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
now we are getting somewhere
Go get rich Mike Brown - great idea!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
re: Duh.
some people here are providing seriously workable solutions.
people taking a $10 movie-experience too seriously?
you get real. everyone is entitled to their own opinions and lifestyle. do not put someone down because they have serious interests in something you obviously do not. most of the people who have posted so far have an interest in a solution to help both sides. you are interested in complaining about the complainers. go elsewhere to bash people.
the people who need to be "bashed" are the people who answer that ringer "What's up homey?...Naw just chillin in a theatre...yeah...the good part is coming....AWWWW...." - most of you know who I am referring to - that one guy who DOES ruin the experience. I think most of the people here realize that. We just have different approaches. Yours is apparently to pay $10 for a movie and get a social club out of it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Turn off your phone ad's.
Since they have been doing that I never hear a phone go off in the theatre.
I find the bigest distraction is parents that bring small children to action movies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Screw all this
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No more talking!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Public Flogging
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wait for DVD
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
To forgiving
No cell phones period (emergency number provided here)
If you talk during the movie, your gone.
If your fat, you have to buy 2 seats so the guy next to you can be confortable.
If your tall, please sit in the back.
If you want to make out with your partner, get a room.
If you dont want to pay our overinflated rates for food or drink, bring your own.
Please take care of your bodily functions before the show starts.
Since we all know that these things will never happen, buy a home theater. Were always going to have something to bitch about, cellphones, talkers, babies, crowds, fat people, tall people, foot on chair people, the list goes on. Get yourself a nice flat screen, surround sound, snacks, and sit back in your lazy boy and watch that crappy film. Be sure to pay special attention to the "Dont be a thief by stealing movies" clip that you can't fast forward thru, while you monitor your torrent for the next piece of theft of the day. Have yourself a nice juicy packaged non-recycleable-ozone depleating-saturated fat enriched mcdonalds #1, while you chat away on that cell phone to your friend bitching about the price of gas for your 6 ton roadkill making suv that gets 4 miles to the gallon.
I LOVE BEING AMERICAN!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Auto silent mode using Bluetooth
that would be cool
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Auto silent mode using Bluetooth
Also this doesn't stop people from using older phones without bluetooth.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
re: military
as far as ad placements - they are all over the trailers. people laugh at them though.
i still like the idea of a technological solution that manages this situation without completely losing the calls. However, I would be all over plain old keeping those cell phones out of the theatres.
Military man - I understand your constraints. I am sure you are trained as such to handle any situation with the best resources available. Like I said - no reason to believe the US will even consider this for years - but if they considered it and enforced it - remember - the law would only >>lift restrictions for cell phone jamming
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Military person
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
contimuation of #69
here is the rest...if you are interested:
Like I said - no reason to believe the US will even consider this for years - but if they considered it and enforced it - remember - the law would only >>lift restrictions for cell phone jamming
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
last try
Like I said - no reason to believe the US will even consider this for years - but if they considered it and enforced it - remember - the law would only - lift restrictions for cell phone jamming - for movie theatres. Then it is completely in the hands of the theatres as to how they want to handle it.
In today's society - I am sure if a theatre wants to implement something like this - they communicate it openly. I'll go and I am sure a majority of the publis would still go. However those of you that need 24-7-365 access can simply choose another theatre. In some places, this would not be an option - but how stupd could a theatre be to implement this if they are the only reasonable theatre available to a military base? So relax military man and grow up. you hav much to learn.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
if your phone rings at all in public, you're rude
Why should anyone have their thoughts interrupted with your ring? Anywhere?
Moreover, if I'm in a cafe or other public place, and for some reason, I MUST take a call, I go outside, and make sure there's nobody close by who's bothered.
Remember consideration? So few people seem to. Let's bring it back, huh?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Some people get really irritated when people talk on their cell phone in a variety of public places. I think as long as they don't increase their volume above what they would use to talk to someone sitting next to them, it's not a bother - would I be annoyed if they were talking to a friend sitting next to them? If the answer is yes (ie, theatre), then I'm annoyed if they talk on their cell phone. If no, it's their business. The people who talk like they're having to shout across the room to talk on the phone irritate the hell out of me.
And no, I don't use my cell phone much in public. I'm a "phone as a tool" kind of person who really sees it as a way to convey a message and say good-bye.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not a movie goer anymore
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
There is more than one problem here!
and it's not so much that the cell phone jamming is not a bad idea but it is the fact that if the show uses wireless microphones the jammers may cause them to not function properly because of the frequenies being jammed
[ link to this | view in chronology ]