Should cell phones be banned at concerts?
Displaying poll results.10116 total votes.
Most Votes
- When will AGI be achieved? Posted on April 24th, 2025 | 13189 votes
Most Comments
- When will AGI be achieved? Posted on April 24th, 2025 | 49 comments
Re: (Score:1)
I'm sure you could come up with some userscript to filter that out.
Re: (Score:2)
Social Fixer would filter that with no issue or problem at all.
Re: (Score:1)
I find the wall of screens i see in the audience irritating... but I don't want to ban everything I don't like. We need to pick our battles.
See, that's how we're different. I want to ban everything you do like.
Re:Irritating (Score:5, Insightful)
In the past decade, people would hold up their lighters. Even in the early 2000s, people would hold up their flip phones, not to record, but to just kinda shine that light. It's the American Gods idea of worship. Now kids and adults record little clips to keep with them, while also kinda in-directly doing the lighter thing. It's all worship or praise of the artists in some way. Nothing has really changed except the means.
Re: (Score:2)
In the past decade, people would hold up their lighters. Even in the early 2000s, people would hold up their flip phones, not to record, but to just kinda shine that light.
Back then the crowd held up lighters or shone flip phone lights only for the bands epic or slow & fluffy love songs, which were just a couple songs in the entire set.
Nowadays the stupidheads are recording the whole-bloody-concert on phone-cams that still don't produce good video in low light! It is distracting for the people who wan
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What?!?! You mean it's possible to not like something that someone else is doing and just move on with your life rather than lobby for a law restricting them from annoying you? Whodathunk?
Not allowed doesn't have to mean a law has to be involved. Individual venues could come up with rules, or the artists could make cell ban part of the negotiated contract.
Cell phones are indeed annoying during concerts, movies, and other events. However, I wouldn't want a hard ban because of the off chance of an emergency. Imagine if no one had a cell phone available during the Las Vegas shooting, for example. Ushers should escort people using cell phones except in an emergency situation.
Re: (Score:2)
And how do ushers quickly and, with any sense of accuracy, determine if it's an emergency situation?
When my Father was dying of leukemia, and later my Mother dying of Alzheimer's, there were many times we had to always be reachable, even if it was just to get a text that said, "Had to go to the hospital, in room 451. No need to hurry."
Is that an emergency use? Well, if it said, "Situation severe, need you ASAP," it is, but I'd have to check it to find that out, wouldn't I? And that's how I find out if it
Re: (Score:2)
And how do ushers quickly and, with any sense of accuracy, determine if it's an emergency situation?
When my Father was dying of leukemia, and later my Mother dying of Alzheimer's, there were many times we had to always be reachable, even if it was just to get a text that said, "Had to go to the hospital, in room 451. No need to hurry."
Is that an emergency use? Well, if it said, "Situation severe, need you ASAP," it is, but I'd have to check it to find that out, wouldn't I? And that's how I find out if it's an emergency or not.
My idea was more general and not meant to be specific enough to create policy. Personally, if there is an expectation to be reachable for a medical reason I'd err on the side of caution. Of course concert goers should use common sense and common courtesy; if you need to check a text message or talk on the phone, it'd be best to move to where that activity would irritate the fewest people (within reason).
Re: (Score:2)
Why does your personal emergency have to override someone else's established rules? If you need to be contactable at all times, then you could trivially avoid voluntarily going to places which puts your requirement at odds with the local rules.
I'm pretty sure the person you replied to intended "emergency" to be a situation which affected all in attendance, such as a fire, a bomb, a heart attack etc etc rather than a personal emergency.
Re: (Score:3)
Try spending something like 5-10 years in a situation where you're basically on-call 24/7 due to ill parents. Yes, it happens. I've been there. One parent dying of leukemia, then the other dying of Alzheimer's.
If I took what you were saying as a rule, I'd have spent a decade avoiding such events. If it were before cell phones, there were many things I would not have been doing, but, as it was, being able to go to a concert or play was a major stress relief from having to spend most of my non-work time t
Re: (Score:2)
Most of the events where I go, I don't deal with people holding phones up, maybe because I'm often going to other types of events. Glad to know they don't tend to be so hard-and-fast on such issues.
Re: (Score:2)
Imagine if no one had a cell phone available during the Las Vegas shooting, for example.
Yea, it would be like every bad thing that happened prior to 1998 - any cop within earshot would have gotten on their radio and called for backup, and anyone in earshot who had access to a landline phone would have dialed 911... and the result very likely would have been identical.
Not saying that cell phones don't have a use during emergency situations, rather that large, outdoor public venues are a bad example.
Silenced. (Score:2)
Then anyone caught using a phone should be escorted out.
Re: (Score:1)
It's not about the noise. Concerts are supposed to be Noisy,
It's about that douche who won't put down his phone, blocking other's views that they paid money to see live.
I tend to shout "PUT DOWN YOUR PHONE", so I can see the show.
Re:Silenced. (Score:5, Interesting)
I used to attend lots of concerts. Lately, they are being ruined by the cellphone crowd. Folks that dick around with Facebook during the entire concert. People who try to record the show shining their bright screens in my eyes. People who aren't watching the show and instead are texting, again with distracting screens. The fucking "selfie" bunch is also very irritating. No one can tell you're at the concert so just do it at home. Your photos with bleached teeth and phony smiles taking up the whole screen are bothering the rest of us sitting behind you.
We've had several concerts ruined by these self-absorbed idiots that don't consider those around them. It seems to be all age groups.kk
I'm going to fewer concerts as a result. It's just so disappointing.
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty much. Also, you spend 15 minutes finding the perfect head arrangement so that you see the singer, drummer and guitarist. Then comes a famous song and every idiot holds his phone over his head, and you don't see anything anymore.
Re: Silenced. (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
It's not about the noise. Concerts are supposed to be Noisy,
It's about that douche who won't put down his phone, blocking other's views that they paid money to see live.
I tend to shout "PUT DOWN YOUR PHONE", so I can see the show.
It's also about the bright light your screen produces.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not about the noise. Concerts are supposed to be Noisy,
Depends on your taste in music, a 'phone beeping would be horrible in the middle of a Bach Fuge.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Silenced. (Score:1)
I've only been to half a dozen concerts from big name rock bands, and your comment is exactly why I don't enjoy it. The cell phones don't bother me because taking picture is silent. I'm at a music concert to hear the music. I despise hearing all the off key people around me singing along with the band. They can do that in their cars or showers. I want to hear the band! They ruin it for everybody else because we have to hear the amateurs singing along. The worst one was Billy Joel because it was quieter and
Re: Silenced. (Score:2)
Ohh, can we call them the Cone of Silence?
Re: (Score:3)
Does that include on-call emergency people, including doctors or police?
Does that include the person with a dying parent who needs to stay reachable at all times and gets a text and needs to check it immediately to see if it's something like, "Not going to last much longer, at the ER now," or, "At hospital, not urgent, room 451."
How would that person know, without using their cell to check, if it was an emergency or not? And how would an usher or someone, in similar cases, be able to clearly determine whet
Re: (Score:2)
Does that include on-call emergency people, including doctors or police?
Does that include the person with a dying parent who needs to stay reachable at all times and gets a text and needs to check it immediately to see if it's something like, "Not going to last much longer, at the ER now," or, "At hospital, not urgent, room 451."
How would that person know, without using their cell to check, if it was an emergency or not? And how would an usher or someone, in similar cases, be able to clearly determine whether there was a serious, urgent, or emergency need or not?
Yes. Maybe it you NEED to be that reachable you might need to skip the concert.
I grew up at a time before portable phones, so my thoughts on the matter might be a little old fashioned.
Re: (Score:2)
Speaking as someone who was "on call" 24/7 for 10 years, due to one parent dying of leukemia, followed immediately by dealing with the other parent with Alzheimer's, people in such high stress situations NEED to be able to get a break and escape even more than people not in such situations. Skipping such concerts and other activities during such times means not taking a break and getting that bit of an escape for a short while that is needed for their sanity and stress relief.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
On my 19th birthday I went out sailing with my girlfriend - well before the cell phone era. A wonderful day only to end when I got home and found out my grandmother had died soon after I picked up my girlfriend and neither my parents nor hers could get ahold of us. While it was a wonderful day, the memory of it is always overshadowed by what I didn't know at the time was going on and I'd have much rather been with my family and gone out sailing one day in the next few weekends.
Several years earlier we wer
Re: (Score:2)
Voluntarily being available and being on-call for your work as emergency personnell are apples and oranges. People who are on-call for work aren't on-call 24/7 for a decade, so the comparison is textbook false equivalence.
That said, I think it's pretty noble that you put your life on hold to care for your parents.
Re: (Score:2)
>
That said, I think it's pretty noble that you put your life on hold to care for your parents.
Sometimes it's the only choice - other than leaving them alone to stumble around and die alone.
Its important (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Given how bad most singers these days sound without auto tune and a shit ton of other electronics enhancing them, why pay all that money for what is now essentially someone lip syncing.
You need to go to better concerts. :)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What genre do you like?
Recently saw Hundred Waters ( https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2F... [wikipedia.org] ) and it was pretty amazing. No auto-tune necessary ;-)
Re:Its important (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
What do you mean, "ban"? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:What do you mean, "ban"? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: What do you mean, "ban"? (Score:2)
Sounds like an excellent way to have your phone stolen.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree. It would be great to have a general switch off policy at concerts, restaurants, schools, etc. I would also aim for a "no flash" zones at Christmas events and comparable settings where flashed disturb the atmosphere for everyone else.
Banned? That's going a bit far (Score:4, Insightful)
Look, I hate the distraction caused by people recording concerts on their phones too. But I can think of legitimate reasons to have a phone at a concert that don't disturb other people. People could use it to call for a ride when the concert is done. They could have the screen dim and held at waist level while they're at the edge of the crowd trying to text a friend they got separated from so they know where to meet up. They could be on call IT workers who may need to leave the concert early if they get an emergency message they check in the bathroom so they don't disturb others.
Banning phones completely ignores the actual problem. The problem is not phones at concerts. The problem is people with no manners who either don't know or don't care that what they're doing detracts from a lot of other peoples enjoyment of the event. Removing phones does not remove these people. There were jerks at concerts before cell phones with cameras and video/audio recording capabilities became widespread.
I don't know what the solution to dealing with these people is, but this isn't it. Banning cellphones is just treating a symptom, not the problem.
Re:Banned? That's going a bit far (Score:4, Interesting)
Oh, and after reading the comment above mine I realized there are multiple interpretations of "ban". My interpretation in my post was that "ban" means not being allowed to even carry a cell phone into the concert. I'm fine with bouncers kicking people out of concerts because they saw them holding up a cell phone. That's basically analogous to enforcing a terms of service agreement.
Re: You don't need to (Score:1)
Just have the stage bathed in infrared light.
Now they just get a white screen.
Fuck their eyesight, they already paid to go to an event that is going to deafen them. What's one more sense gone to these senseless morons?
Enforcement? Sure, with a naked audience! (Score:3)
Sure it's a great idea to ban phones at concerts. Easy to enforce, too. The entire audience just leaves their clothes at the door. Eyeglasses, too, just in case someone is trying to get cute.
Also cure the performers stage fright. They won't have to imagine the audience is naked if they have no clothes!
Actually I'm kind of confused. Is this another desperately stupid poll from Slashdot, or is someone actually putting such a crazy idea on the table?
Anyway this world full of smartphones is now our world. Live in it. Even if you're a crazy and insanely greedy concert promoter.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I love that each side of the issue firmly believes their rights are far more important than the other sides. So much so that compromise is off the table.
I have often stated that my rights end when they start infringing on yours; your rights end when they start infringing on mine.
As one old fuddy duddy to another (Score:2)
As an old fuddy duddy I don't much like it either. Maybe you're a youngster and I shouldn't have presumed so much, but I'm just saying that's the way things are these days, and everyone should get on with their lives.
However I do think the main motivator for the people who want the ban is to create artificial scarcity so they can boost sales of the non-live music. I suspect they also want to control things so they can jack up the ticket prices. I also strongly believe they are shooting themselves in the fee
Hats (Score:1)
"No person attending any performance at any theater, hall or opera house, or any such building where theatrical or other performances are given, when an admission fee is charged, shall wear upon his or her head any hat, bonnet or covering for the head which may obstruct the view of any person or persons during the performance in such theater, hall, opera house or other building where such performance is given;..."
Hats were once a real problem at performances, especially those hats that women wore with foofy
Re: (Score:2)
I don't care, but it's stupid to ban this (Score:2)
Other (Score:1)
I don't want the fed passing more laws. You can't legislate courtesy.
Other: The artist's prerogative (Score:4, Insightful)
It should of course be up to the artist and venue to decide, case by case basis. You can not generalise. If cell phones are appropriate or inappropriate depends on what kind of performance it is: what style of music, what kind of amplification (if any) and what kind of venue there is.
If it is a concert of classical music with acoustic instruments: Yes, cell phones should be kept off and in the pocket or you are seriously disrespecting the performance and the other audience members.
If it is something like a Katy Perry concert or a loud rock band where, admit it: the fidelity of the music is not the biggest importance here: By all means, you should film it. Wave your phones in the air. Whatever. It's a party!
For when it should be banned, there should be a standard wireless protocol which venue organisers could use for making cell phones within the venue to put themselves into silent mode, low radiation and/or to disable the camera automatically.
Then there wouldn't be a need for additional manpower for enforcement of bans, long lines to cell-phone lockers before and after concerts, or of radio-absorbent paint in movie theatres. etc. Patients would not need to be called back to perform a MRI again because the first one had been disturbed by a cell phone signal.
And... emergency calls would still always be possible.
Seriously, Telecom Industry: Get this done already!
Peter Framption First 3 Songs (Score:1)
I think it's Peter Frampton who allows use of phones for any reason during his first 3 songs. After that they must be kept put away or you will get "asked" to leave.
I don't support (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I have attended many concerts since 1976 (Jethro Tull at Shea Stadium). I can recall them just fine (well, most of them) without having to watch a grainy, badly lit video clip. The annoyance factor of someone near me using a phone to record a concert far outweighs any alleged benefit. Now cut your hair and get off my lawn.
Ban 'em! Here's why... (Score:1)
Say to the audience to switch off their phones. (Score:2)
I haven't a Facebook accound but a landline and an answering machine.
Now get
Don't Care (Score:1)
Re: Why not allow concertgoers the option instead? (Score:1)
Most venues are large enough to allow a section for cellphone users and another for no cellphones and a third for the clothesless people. Like the old smoking and non smoking sections
Silenced, yes. (Score:2)
Banned, no. There are too many circumstances in which a cell phone recording is very important, as long as it is decent quality. Do not let recording interfere with enjoyment and ABSOLUTELY do not let recording interfere with other people's enjoyment.
Rick Parfett's final concert was not officially recorded. The poor recordings that fans made are the last recordings of him live in concert. Possibly the last recordings of any kind at all. I don't know if any of his girlfriends or exes ever watched them, but I
Banned, no. Restricted, yes. (Score:2)
I don't care whether someone brings a phone in to the concert or not. What I do object to is dozens, if not more, asshats in front of me recording with their phones over their heads blocking my view of the stage. Those people should have to store their phones firmly wedged up their rectum until the end of the concert. I came to see the band on stage, not the back of your phone.
It depends. Or maybe not. (Score:2)
If you are concerned about people being distracted, then I wouldn't care: those are idiots.
If you are concerned about people disturbing the others, then I would require a mandatory switch off (not airplane mode as alarms would still ring).
If you are concerned about people recording the performances, then go on with banning.
Ban cell phones... (Score:2)
Disable the annoying parts but allow the comms (Score:2)
Just use the Trent Reznor Camera Policy (Score:4, Interesting)
Many years ago Trent Reznor went counter to the industry and stopped banning cameras and recordings. The idea is that the recordings didn't hurt business, and they did not. He continued to sell out tours for years. It also had the unintended effect that since so many people had their own recordings, we could share them, so not everyone had to record everything all the time. The culmination is "This is on us" which is about 10+ gigs of concert footage available as torrent.
So if you allow cameras and allow people to share/disribute (for free) what they record the number of people holding up phones goes down. The receiving don't really compete with professionally recorded concert Blu-rays either (in quality or sales).
If cell phones bother you... (Score:3)
I kinda like them (Score:2)
I visit several concerts each month and as cellphone cameras have gotten better, I increasingly fine myself looking at other people's cellphones, which often offer a better view than the real thing. Also, I find myself watching cellphone concert recordings at YouTube quite often. Let's just keep them around; they much less annoying than people getting annoyed by them lead themselves to believe. The problem is usually mostly in their minds, like with most thing conservative.
Why? (Score:1)
No, but we need a cultural shift (Score:2)
Banning means a means of enforcement to take the phones away. I don't think this is a good idea. I puts too much on concert security, it puts peoples phones at a tightened risk of being stolen. It means that parents might not be able to get that text from the babysitter.
But how many badly recorded videos from 50+ feet away do we need of a given event?
The Grateful Dead had it right. Encourage the tapers, let them plug in. Let them plug their phones into the board feed and they can capture the full 4k v