The citizens of the global village are expected to be mobile, freely transient over space, and always connected, wired to the world-wide communication chain anywhere anytime. Thence, mobile phones have become part and parcel of our everyday life. Many consider cellular phones as perfectly proper, if not essential, as a round the clock business and personal tool, others question such unrestricted usage. All have their justifications.
The basis of mobile phone’s popularity, surely, has always been the uninterrupted scope for being “connected.” What cell phones have given us is freedom to roam while being within the secure bond of modern communication. The manufacturers and service providers of mobile communication devices have enhanced the portability of communiqué to the degree of virtual extremity. And, we, the users, have embraced this advancement and have magnified our professional and social life to freely reach both sides of the meridiem. Unrestricted mobile communication has enabled us to live life to the practically fullest.
The flip side of the coin presents a different picture. While cell phones keep us connected, they remain as the autonomous usher of intrusion, to privacy and solidarity of individuals. It is also common, everyday, to see the decorum of distinguished environments being violated by ringing cell phones and people talking over them. So, mobile communication devices, which are meant to be ideally personal communication devices, are often the means of public disturbance.
The unavoidable human tragedy is all our endeavors end in toxic byproducts. The best innovations have all too frequently caused the worst incidents. Mobile phones are beneficial, no doubt, but have been inarticulately used, if not abused, to the point of attrition. Thus, the reasonable conclusion, of the argument for and against the unrestricted usage of mobile phones, to be made is that the goodness of it is subjective and is reflective of the likeness of the users’ intentions.
|
