Pixel Tracker

Wednesday, March 20 , 2019, 11:26 am | Fair 59º


Mark Shields: Banning Cell-Phone Calls from Airplanes — An Idea to Unite America

We finally have good news from and for our broken, polarized and dysfunctional capital city. One modest proposal from a small independent federal agency — with about half as many employees as the White House — has miraculously brought together in common cause beef-eaters and vegans, Fox News conservatives and MSNBC liberals, and even dog people and cat people.

By a 3-2 vote, this independent agency, the Federal Communications Commission, which is responsible for regulating communications by radio, television, wire, satellite and cable, moved to begin the process of lifting the ban on making phone calls from airplanes. The prohibition was first imposed some 22 years ago, when cell phones were as big as men's size 10 shoes, because of a fear that calls from planes would disrupt cellular networks on the ground, possibly even interfering with the aircraft's safe operation. But technological improvements have eliminated any mechanical need for keeping the ban.

In a rare example of popular spontaneous combustion, a genuine grassroots movement emerged in fierce opposition to the possibility of passengers on U.S. commercial airlines being subjected to even half a cell phone conversation. After a generation of being victimized by airline cost-cutting measures, from shrinking seat sizes and legroom to each ticket holder's overhead luggage space being confined to the dimensions of a Volkswagen Beetle's glove compartment, passengers were already sullen. The prospect of having to listen to some loudmouth's bragging  — 6 inches from their ears — about closing the biggest deal in New Jersey transformed them into rebels.

Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., after introducing with his colleague Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., the Commercial Flight Courtesy Act, which would permit silent texting and email but prohibit any phone calls, spoke for legions: "When you stop and think about what we hear now in airport lobbies — babbling about last night's love life, next week's schedule, arguments with spouses — it's not hard to see why the FCC shouldn't allow cell phone conversations on planes."

Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ore., chairman of the House Communications and Technology Subcommittee, observed that "allowing cell phones on planes sounds like the premise of a new reality show: cage-fighting at 30,000 feet." An unlikely ally, Veda Shook, president of the labor union Association of Flight Attendants, backs Walden's position, arguing: "We're trained to de-escalate. Why would you put something in the environment that can escalate? On an airplane, there's no such thing as a quiet car."

In fairness to the FCC, chairman Tom Wheeler (whom I have known and liked for 40 years) testified, "I do not want the person in the seat next to me yapping at 35,000 feet more than anyone else." But he argued the ban is out-of-date and no longer a factor. Still, he applauded the announcement by Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx that he would look into using his statutory authority to ban in-flight calls.

If the FCC united multitudes in opposition to its green light to lift, from a safety perspective, the prohibition of in-flight phone calls, the commission recovered nicely by unanimously pushing the repeal of professional football's blackout rule, which for 40 years has prevented hometown fans from seeing their team's games on TV unless every seat in the stadium is sold. The repeal would put an end to team owners using this form of blackmail to sell seats.

So let us give the FCC the credit it has earned by acting boldly to unite — even if it is in opposition — our badly disunited country.

Mark Shields is one of the most widely recognized political commentators in the United States. The former Washington Post editorial columnist appears regularly on CNN, on public television and on radio. Click here to contact him, or click here to read previous columns. The opinions expressed are his own.

Support Noozhawk Today!

Our professional journalists work tirelessly to report on local news so you can be more informed and engaged in your community. This quality, local reporting is free for you to read and share, but it's not free to produce.

You count on us to deliver timely, relevant local news, 24/7. Can we count on you to invest in our newsroom and help secure its future?

We provide special member benefits to show how much we appreciate your support.

I would like give...
Great! You're joining as a Red-Tailed Hawk!
  • Ask
  • Vote
  • Investigate
  • Answer

Noozhawk Asks: What’s Your Question?

Welcome to Noozhawk Asks, a new feature in which you ask the questions, you help decide what Noozhawk investigates, and you work with us to find the answers.

Here’s how it works: You share your questions with us in the nearby box. In some cases, we may work with you to find the answers. In others, we may ask you to vote on your top choices to help us narrow the scope. And we’ll be regularly asking you for your feedback on a specific issue or topic.

We also expect to work together with the reader who asked the winning questions to find the answer together. Noozhawk’s objective is to come at questions from a place of curiosity and openness, and we believe a transparent collaboration is the key to achieve it.

The results of our investigation will be published here in this Noozhawk Asks section. Once or twice a month, we plan to do a review of what was asked and answered.

Thanks for asking!

Click Here to Get Started >

Reader Comments

Noozhawk is no longer accepting reader comments on our articles. Click here for the announcement. Readers are instead invited to submit letters to the editor by emailing them to [email protected]. Please provide your full name and community, as well as contact information for verification purposes only.