Help Slate set some ground rules for cell phone etiquette.

Innovation, the Internet, gadgets, and more.
March 9 2010 4:44 PM

Can You Text Me Now?

Help Slate set some ground rules for cell phone etiquette.

See a Magnum Photos gallery on the ubiquity of cell phones. 

Imagine you've just sat down to dinner with your spouse. Let's say it's a weeknight and there's nothing particularly special about this meal—you're at your own dining room table, neither one of you has slaved in the kitchen all day, and you don't have anything especially important to discuss. Halfway through dinner, your phone buzzes with a text message. Do you reach for it? And if so, do you reply?

I'm asking because I got into an argument over this scenario on Twitter last week. The discussion was sparked by the New York Times' Nick Bilton, who, in an online chat with ABC's Diane Sawyer, argued that texting in company is becoming more and more socially acceptable. Bilton, who is 33 and is both a user interface designer and a journalist, says that he wouldn't check his phone if he were at lunch with his boss, but he has no problem doing so when he's eating with tech-savvy people his own age. Bilton even texts while at dinner with his wife—sometimes so intensely that she has to (jokingly, I assume) text him to get his attention.

Illustration by Robert Neubecker. Click image to expand.

I was surprised. My wife and I are around Bilton's age, and I'm thoroughly addicted to e-mail, IM, and everything else on my phone. But in my house, texting at dinner would be considered a grave slight. Indeed, reaching for the phone while my wife and I are chatting is a no-no. And it's not just a special concession we make for each other—I don't like to send text messages when I'm having a face-to-face conversation with anyone.

Advertisement

When I made this point on Twitter—that people should never look at their phones at dinner and that they should at least ask permission if it's an "emergency"—several techies thought I was nuts. Some had good excuses: Brian Lam edits Gizmodo, the fast-paced gadget blog, and he's always on alert for breaking news. "If I couldn't check e-mail at dinner, I often wouldn't be dining out at all," Lam tweeted. Others told me I was sticking to an outmoded social convention. It used to be considered gauche to watch TV during dinner, but now it's pretty standard—shouldn't we be as permissive with phones? In an e-mail, Bilton suggested that looking at your phone while you're hanging out with other people can actually foster good conversation—you could share photos with your pals or show off a funny video you saw online. In that case, the Internet becomes a sort of active participant in the conversation, not a distraction.

I do agree with Bilton, Lam, and others that phone etiquette depends on the social setting. But that's exactly what makes this issue so fraught: There's no consensus on exactly what's appropriate and when.

That's where you come in, dear readers. Perhaps the best way to solve the problem of the Internet's intrusion into our daily lives is to use the Internet's power of collaborative thinking. Let's work together to come up with a concise, easy-to-understand, and logical rule that anyone could apply in any social situation to determine when to reach for the phone and when to keep it hidden in the deepest recesses of one's pocket or purse.

Now, this won't be easy. Any potential rule must cover a wide variety of situations. Let's tweak my above scenario: What if, instead of sitting down at the dinner table, you and your partner plopped down on the couch to eat cold pizza while watching a rerun of Law & Order? Would it be OK to check your e-mail then? If you say yes now and said no before, why—what changed your mind?

The rules change again when you leave the house. Now you and your significant other are at a neighborhood diner. Can you check your phone here? How about if you're at McDonald's? What about a white-tablecloth joint? Or say you're taking a long walk in the park together on a sunny day. What's acceptable in that setting?

Now let's replace your spouse with other people. You're at the movies on a second date, and as you wait for the theater to go dark you get a text from a friend asking how the date is going. Do you reply? How about if the text comes during the movie?

TODAY IN SLATE

Foreigners

More Than Scottish Pride

Scotland’s referendum isn’t about nationalism. It’s about a system that failed, and a new generation looking to take a chance on itself. 

What Charles Barkley Gets Wrong About Corporal Punishment and Black Culture

Why Greenland’s “Dark Snow” Should Worry You

Three Talented Actresses in Three Terrible New Shows

Why Do Some People See the Virgin Mary in Grilled Cheese?

The science that explains the human need to find meaning in coincidences.

Jurisprudence

Happy Constitution Day!

Too bad it’s almost certainly unconstitutional.

Is It Worth Paying Full Price for the iPhone 6 to Keep Your Unlimited Data Plan? We Crunch the Numbers.

What to Do if You Literally Get a Bug in Your Ear

  News & Politics
Weigel
Sept. 16 2014 7:03 PM Kansas Secretary of State Loses Battle to Protect Senator From Tough Race
  Business
Moneybox
Sept. 16 2014 4:16 PM The iPhone 6 Marks a Fresh Chance for Wireless Carriers to Kill Your Unlimited Data
  Life
The Eye
Sept. 16 2014 12:20 PM These Outdoor Cat Shelters Have More Style Than the Average Home
  Double X
The XX Factor
Sept. 15 2014 3:31 PM My Year As an Abortion Doula
  Slate Plus
Slate Plus Video
Sept. 16 2014 2:06 PM A Farewell From Emily Bazelon The former senior editor talks about her very first Slate pitch and says goodbye to the magazine.
  Arts
Brow Beat
Sept. 16 2014 8:43 PM This 17-Minute Tribute to David Fincher Is the Perfect Preparation for Gone Girl
  Technology
Future Tense
Sept. 16 2014 6:40 PM This iPhone 6 Feature Will Change Weather Forecasting
  Health & Science
Medical Examiner
Sept. 16 2014 11:46 PM The Scariest Campfire Story More horrifying than bears, snakes, or hook-handed killers.
  Sports
Sports Nut
Sept. 15 2014 9:05 PM Giving Up on Goodell How the NFL lost the trust of its most loyal reporters.