Bring back the phone booth

It used to be that a phone call was for two people – and two people alone.

John Kehe

There is a 1930s-vintage restaurant in my Maine town that has done little to update itself over the past 80 years. This is part of its charm, as is the wooden phone booth that sits neglected in this, the age of the cellphone.

Ah, the phone booth. We need it now more than ever. 

For me it symbolizes that phone calls were once private affairs, even if the information being shared was not sensitive in any way. It was simply assumed that a phone conversation was meant for two people, and two people only. In public places this meant resorting to the phone booth – a private chamber where one could converse in peace without being overheard.

Even at home, phone calls used to be regarded as proprietary. Growing up in the 1960s, we had one phone in the house – riveted to the kitchen wall. 

As a kid, I didn’t get, or make, many calls because all my friends lived within earshot and I could just yell out the window if I wanted their attention. I do, however, remember answering the phone, asking for the identity of the caller (always a mystery in the days before caller ID), and then handing the phone to my mom. She’d take it, say “Hello, Mrs. ­­­­­_____ ,” and then, “one moment please,” as she placed her hand over the receiver, turned to me, and directed, “This is for me. Why don’t you go outside and play?”

Flash-forward to what cellphones have done to this idyll. Within the space of very few years, private conversations have become public proclamations, and being overheard seems to be the point. A large part of the problem, of course, is that we now carry our phones with us, and the reflex to answer the device as soon as it rings is a response Pavlov would have appreciated.

But the information that’s divulged! Not long ago I was sitting in Boston’s South Station, waiting for my train. After purchasing a sandwich, I sat down at a table near a man who was on his cellphone. 

Let me paraphrase what the man had to say: “Yes, that’s right. The red and yellow roses. That will be a Visa.” Then he proceeded to recite his card number and expiration date before signing off.

I stared incredulously at the fellow. He glanced at me and asked, “What?”

My response was immediate: I recited his card number back to him, along with the expiration date. 

There is no more privacy, no longer a sense of personal borders or limits. The cellphone has become a megaphone, and I have been privy to details of people’s lives that I would rather be blissfully ignorant of: the woman shopping next to me in the frozen food aisle of the supermarket who was breaking up with her boyfriend while holding a box of Mrs. T’s pierogies, the man on the bus chastising his child, the woman using language I ­haven’t heard since I was in the Navy, the student bragging about cheating on an exam.

To return to phone booths: Why did they disappear? They were ubiquitous in my childhood and could readily serve as cellphone havens today. A Mr. Riley had one in his small, struggling candy store where I grew up. It was wooden, with a folding door. Even at the age of 9, before I had acquired any life experiences, I would have labeled “private,” I would sometimes detach from my friends, close the door, drop in my dime, and call home in peace and quiet. 

And should you think a phone booth has no value today, I saw one on eBay going for $4,750.

Mr. Riley would have flipped.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.