Slashdot Mirror


Why No One Answers Their Phone Anymore (theatlantic.com)

An anonymous reader shares an excerpt from a report via The Atlantic, written by Alexis C. Madrigal: No one picks up the phone anymore. Even many businesses do everything they can to avoid picking up the phone. Of the 50 or so calls I received in the last month, I might have picked up four or five times. The reflex of answering -- built so deeply into people who grew up in 20th-century telephonic culture -- is gone. There are many reasons for the slow erosion of this commons. The most important aspect is structural: There are simply more communication options. Text messaging and its associated multimedia variations are rich and wonderful: words mixed with emoji, Bitmoji, reaction gifs, regular old photos, video, links. Texting is fun, lightly asynchronous, and possible to do with many people simultaneously. It's almost as immediate as a phone call, but not quite. You've got your Twitter, your Facebook, your work Slack, your email, FaceTimes incoming from family members. So many little dings have begun to make the rings obsolete.

But in the last couple years, there is a more specific reason for eyeing my phone's ring warily. Perhaps 80 or even 90 percent of the calls coming into my phone are spam of one kind or another. [...] There are unsolicited telemarketing calls. There are straight-up robocalls that merely deliver recorded messages. There are the cyborg telemarketers, who sit in call centers playing prerecorded bits of audio to simulate a conversation. There are the spam phone calls, whose sole purpose seems to be verifying that your phone number is real and working.

22 of 429 comments (clear)

  1. I don't understand why you tolerate it by VMaN · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I just don't understand how you can have spam calls like that and be ok with it. Is it an american thing?
    Do people think that proper laws to outlaw that behaviour is some sort of free speech issue?

    1. Re:I don't understand why you tolerate it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I just don't understand how you can have spam calls like that and be ok with it.

      We DO have laws against these sorts of spam calls in the US. We also have laws against people sending email spam too. Actually managing to enforce these laws is a different matter entirely.

      Is it an american thing? Do people think that proper laws to outlaw that behaviour is some sort of free speech issue?

      Umm, what? Criminals are going to break the law...that's what criminals do. The problem is enforcement of the laws that already exist.

    2. Re:I don't understand why you tolerate it by VMaN · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > We DO have laws against these sorts of spam calls in the US. We also have laws against people sending email spam too. Actually managing to enforce these laws is a different matter entirely.

      No, it's really easy when it comes to phone calls - Got an illegal spam call? Report and person gets a hefty fine. Can't identify caller? Move punishment to the company that provides the call. Done.
      There is no reason for someone dialling YOU to be anonymous to your telcom provider.
      And no, there is no reason to make exceptions for any category of calls, be it political or non-profit.

    3. Re:I don't understand why you tolerate it by Type44Q · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I just don't understand how you can have spam calls like that and be ok with it.

      I try to make the most of it: I ask them all about the area that their number shows them to be calling from ("Bruce" with an Indian accent apparently resides in Idaho).

      I'll string them along for as long as I possibly can, giving them ever-varying versions of my "social security number" as I "struggle to remember it," etc, etc, until they give up in frustration.

      The skies the limit, here; this is a sport with few rules.

    4. Re:I don't understand why you tolerate it by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      > We DO have laws against these sorts of spam calls in the US. We also have laws against people sending email spam too. Actually managing to enforce these laws is a different matter entirely.

      No, it's really easy when it comes to phone calls - Got an illegal spam call? Report and person gets a hefty fine. Can't identify caller? Move punishment to the company that provides the call. Done. There is no reason for someone dialling YOU to be anonymous to your telcom provider. And no, there is no reason to make exceptions for any category of calls, be it political or non-profit.

      That would work real well when it is sone off shore call center using VOIP and spoofing phone numbers. Spammers / scammers seem to like to use the same area code and first 3 digits to make calls appear local. My solution is to simply let al calls go to voicemail unless I recognize the caller. I get very few spam voicemails.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    5. Re:I don't understand why you tolerate it by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yup, the only real issue is the reluctance to hold the telecoms accountable.

      Ya, but I'm sure Ajit Pai will get right on that. :-)

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    6. Re:I don't understand why you tolerate it by hawguy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > We DO have laws against these sorts of spam calls in the US. We also have laws against people sending email spam too. Actually managing to enforce these laws is a different matter entirely.

      No, it's really easy when it comes to phone calls - Got an illegal spam call? Report and person gets a hefty fine. Can't identify caller? Move punishment to the company that provides the call. Done.
      There is no reason for someone dialling YOU to be anonymous to your telcom provider.
      And no, there is no reason to make exceptions for any category of calls, be it political or non-profit.

      Aside from the political and charity calls, the vast majority of the remainder are from call center operations outside of US jurisdiction. The operate from Canada, India, etc .. any where with good internet connectivity ( VoIP service ) and simple pick currently unassigned phone numbers to spoof (some of the really evil ones
      will use the number they are calling for the caller id).

      So what you have is a situation with many, many technical workarounds and very little legal recourse. There isn't an international treaty that bans unsolicited phone calls , just like their isn't on that bans unsolicited email. Its all local or national which is simply avoided by working from outside the jurisdiction.

      If the telcos were on the hook for unidentified spam callers, they'd wouldn't allow it to be so easy to spoof caller iD.

    7. Re: I don't understand why you tolerate it by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Insightful

      As others have pointed out how would you punish a company overseas? They are beyond jurisdiction of your country's laws.

      Solution: Don't allow non-conforming companies to connect to the American telecom network.

      Why should MY phone company (T-Mobile) be allowed to let a foreign company connect to their network and spoof a LOCAL number?

      If T-Mobile pays a fine every time that happens, they will find a technical solution really quickly.

    8. Re: I don't understand why you tolerate it by orlanz · · Score: 3, Informative

      We do punish the companies and many times the individuals behind them. The fines are ridiculously high compared to the income. This is why there is very little domestic spamming. But there is an idiot born every minute who will be the fall guy for the off shore party.

      The underlying problem is the lucrativity of the US market and the slow pace the human part of the system moves to catch these offenders. How do you catch an off shore company that springs up, makes a few million calls, and then closes shop; all in less than a month? They are only around till they get paid or start showing up in the complaint registry. Plus they don't need to maintain contact with the sucker; just offload the verbal contact at pennies on the dollar to legal businesses such as timeshares/travel agencies/money laundering scammer/etc.

      If only a few receipants respond, they made their investment. By the time the user complains and enough do and the investigation starts, the originator has moved on leaving fall guys behind.

      Look at the Florida case. 100 million calls over just 3 months. That's how long it took the legal system to pin him. BTW, that is ridiculously fast! Less than 2% of the calls were even interacted with. 98% weren't even picked up; yet the guy minted. He now has a $120 million fine! Many times more than his revenue. Identity tarnished for life.

      But he was just the domestic forwarding agent, using simple off the shelf free software. He accounted for less than 3% of all robocalls! And none of the off shore companies who actually scammed the recipiants were traced nor held accountable. They moved onto another sucker.

      I think the way to stop this is to pollute the system. Pick up, give false information, and move on. Eventually their DBs will have such pointless information that they will be worthless. A few suckers' info that is valid won't help if you can't tell who they are in the table.

    9. Re:I don't understand why you tolerate it by Notabadguy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The skies the limit, here; this is a sport with few rules.

      It is a sport that most of us don't want to play.

    10. Re:I don't understand why you tolerate it by dcw3 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yup, the only real issue is the reluctance to hold the telecoms accountable.

      Ya, but I'm sure Ajit Pai will get right on that. :-)

      As much as I'd like to string up that jackass, the FTC, not the FCC is who runs the national do not call list.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
  2. The phone companies could fix this! by MikeDataLink · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I never answer calls anymore. 95% of the calls I get are scammers and spammers. And the caller ID is always spoofed to something that looks similar to my own number.

    I've even had people call me claiming my number is spamming them!

    The phone companies should be held liable for not fixing caller ID spoofing. There are numerous ways to do this. Caller ID spoofing is needed for corporate main numbers and the like. Those could be registered just like SSL certs. There is no reason a random device should be allowed to spoof.

    --
    Mike @ The Geek Pub. Let's Make Stuff!
    1. Re:The phone companies could fix this! by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      When looking for a new job I always put on my CV/profile not to call me during office hours. It's a great way to filter crappy recruiters who don't read beyond keyword matches.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  3. I get the causes, but the results are corrosive by swb · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm 51 and definitely from the generation that always answered the phone.

    I notice as my fellow employees get younger there is much less use of voice calls, with instant messaging and emails being preferred instead. The problem is that these communication methods often seem really inefficient and are as easy to ignore or under-respond to as a phone with a ringer on silent.

    We've had problems crop up with clients and you'd never know what the nature and magnitude of them is when you get short texts like "Do you know about the issue at MZR?"

    Does either response provide any value? I can answer "Yes" without actually knowing because the dumb text made it seem like there was one. I can answer no and what value does that add to the person asking?

    Had they just fucking called we both would have been able to quickly sort out who knew what and who was going to do anything about it.

    1. Re:I get the causes, but the results are corrosive by Jahta · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'm 51 and definitely from the generation that always answered the phone.

      I notice as my fellow employees get younger there is much less use of voice calls, with instant messaging and emails being preferred instead. The problem is that these communication methods often seem really inefficient and are as easy to ignore or under-respond to as a phone with a ringer on silent.

      We've had problems crop up with clients and you'd never know what the nature and magnitude of them is when you get short texts like "Do you know about the issue at MZR?"

      Does either response provide any value? I can answer "Yes" without actually knowing because the dumb text made it seem like there was one. I can answer no and what value does that add to the person asking?

      Had they just fucking called we both would have been able to quickly sort out who knew what and who was going to do anything about it.

      Well my solution is that I only answer if I recognise the incoming number (family, friends, co-workers and the office). If I don't recognise the number, I let it go to voicemail; if it's important the caller will leave a message and I'll call them back promptly. This way I talk to the people that are important and filter out the rest.

    2. Re:I get the causes, but the results are corrosive by neilo_1701D · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Well my solution is that I only answer if I recognise the incoming number (family, friends, co-workers and the office). If I don't recognise the number, I let it go to voicemail; if it's important the caller will leave a message and I'll call them back promptly. This way I talk to the people that are important and filter out the rest.

      This. 100% this. If you're in my phone's contact list and your name appears on the screen, I'll answer if I can.

      If you leave voicemail, I'll listen.

      If neither of these are true and I have time enough to be curious, the number goes into google to see if it's a hit on any of the "who called me" sites. Otherwise, I use the "block caller" function and I never hear from that number again.

  4. Phone spam is the reason by bobstreo · · Score: 3

    My solution?

    If you're not in my contact list, I'm not answering.

    If it's important, leave a message.

    If you call me more than twice and don't leave a message, your number is blocked...

  5. It's because we have a choice by ErichTheRed · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm older (43) and still tend to answer the phone. But, one thing I do see is that people who don't like talking to people feel they don't have to anymore. There's other non-voice options.

    This is especially true in workplaces, where the younger crowd is finally starting to reach the supervisory levels. In tech shops it's all Slack, Teams, IM of one form or another, texting, etc. I actually find myself preferring this, even though I know it's not normal.

    I'm not an antisocial nerd, but I'm also not a type-A salesy extrovert either. Talking to people on the phone means uncomfortable small talk, having to manage the conversation, etc. Sending a to-the-point message is much more useful to me. I know extroverts probably love the small talk aspect, but it's something I can live without if I can get my information without it.

  6. Texting? by jenningsthecat · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Texting is fun, lightly asynchronous, and possible to do with many people simultaneously.

    I find texting to be a distracting pain in the ass, and if a text thread goes beyond a few messaged in the space of an hour, I'm either placing a call or dropping the thread. Texting is a thoroughly inefficient way of communicating when compared with two-way speech, even if you don't consider that it's WAY harder to text and do something else than it is to talk and do something else.

    ... words mixed with emoji, Bitmoji, reaction gifs ...

    I hate those damned things - they're un-subtle, annoying, tacky, and cheesy. Fortunately, I only get stuck with Emoji - I had to look up the other two for this comment. And if THEY start showing up, I'm going back to a flip phone.

    Texting definitely has its uses, and I appreciate what it brought to the party; but it is in NO WAY a substitute for talking, and any graphic elements beyond specific and personal pictures and videos are the ugly garden trolls and velvet paintings of the smartphone world. Now get off of my lawn, dammit!

    --
    'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
  7. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  8. yes free speech is the feeble justification by goombah99 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Our DO Not Call law inserted two exceptions beyond emergency calls
    1. Politicians and polling people can call you unsolicited
    2. Anyone you had a previous bussiness relationship or contact with can call.

    The last one is really abused. Say you start to buy an electric fur lined shaving mug on etsy but then change your mind at the "confirm this purchase" step. You just had a bussiness relationship where you provided contact info.

    Next they sell your info to some broker who sells it to 1000 other people who are now considered "affiliates" of the original transaction. SO they have standing to call on the do-not-call list.

    The final problem is that phone companies all want to monetize their role in preventing you from dreading the phone ringing. Just as Ring tones were not free but were costless to provide, they want to charge you for allowing you to benefit from their curated blacklists. And they want to sell free passes one the blacklists (whitelisting) to people who pay them. They could do this for free as it's nearly costless.

    SO basically the phone companies are working hard to make you hate your phone.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  9. Re:This has got to be a Planet USA shit. by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    In Europe caller pays, always. Also, in Europe we (usually, but depends on the country) have a no-spam-call list service, and whoever calls a number on that list gets fiercely fined.

    I’m guessing the caller pays is a bigger deterent as it woukd be tough to find, let alone fine, some non-EU soammer in a third world call center. OTOH, getting billed for thousands of calls would greatly impact or wipe out any profit; or EU telcos simply do not connect calls because they can’t get needed payment data. Alternatively, I’d imagine language to be another barrier as there is no assurance the person called speaks the caller’s language, whereas in the US you are pretty certain of getting an English speaker most of the time.

    --
    I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.