Taken For Granted: The Infusion
of the Mobile Phone in Society
Rich Ling

Telenor and University of Michigan | [e-mail]

 

It is sometimes interesting to look at the parallels between the development of the mobile phone and the automobile. In the century since the late 1800s the automobile moved from being a odd contraption on the edge of society to being a taken-for-granted factor in everyday life. In the late 1800s none of the major elements of today’s automobile culture were in place. Cars were rickety contrivances. There were rarely cabs for the passengers, cars needed constant prodding and maintenance, and they were more often seen as the hobby of determined tinkerers or eccentric millionaires than as an item of daily necessity. As if to ensure cars’ marginaliza-tion, the roads were poor, and there were few gas stations and even fewer automobile-repair shops. If you were an early user, it was almost in spite of their usefulness. Society was clearly oriented toward other forms of transportation. This had consequences for the way that people organized their lives. Work, shopping, and schooling were often within walking distance. Daily activities did not require the individual to move about to the degree that we often see today. Neither the automobile nor the culture of the automobile had gained the purchase that they have today [ 1].

If we fast-forward 100 or 130 years, we see the difference. There are parking lots, paved roads, service stations, and all the standard automobile-related features of life. While there are often downtown areas in the towns and cities, the automobile has also spawned strip malls and shopping centers. It is often easier to drive a few hundred yards from one strip mall to another (and belch out the consequent pollution), since walking involves detouring around multilane streets that are more car than pedestrian friendly. In addition, there is a whole sector of society that is oriented toward servicing the automobile and the passengers within. There are not just “filling” stations but service areas where the nutritional needs of both the car and the passengers can be attended to and where we can also buy music, kitschy art, and reading material.

Unlike the early motorists, our lives are in many ways defined by access to the automobile. We need it to get to work, to deliver the children to after-school activities, or to go shopping. Serious courting takes place in the car. Our vacation habits are often tied to driving, automobile-friendly hotels, and automobile-accessible sights and locations. The cars we drive are, for some more than others, a reflection of

who we are and what we want to be. If we do not need it directly, then the wares that we purchase in the shop were delivered using the automobile/truck-based system. Perhaps the most telling indication is that it is difficult to think of carrying on our daily life in the absence of the automobile.

All of this has resulted in an over reliance on the automobile. In effect, we have a system of reasoning that assumes access to and use of the automobile. It has moved from being a somewhat risky curiosity to being a central part of everyday life. It can be said that, with our willing acceptance, the automobile has restructured society in its own image. Bringing this back to the mobile phone, we can ask if we are in the process of developing a similar logic on that front.

[ 1] The inspiration for this article arose out of a discussion with my colleague Jonathan Donner as well as the insightful comments of James Katz.

The Structure of a Mobile Society

The ownership of the mobile phone is not—at least not yet—ubiquitous. The landline telephone has been a part of the scene and indeed has established its own logic. We have ordered Chinese takeout, swapped numbers with potential boy/girlfriends, and then sat by the landline phone awaiting their call.

Following the example of the automobile, however, we can speculate that the mobile tele-