BCT Editorial – 4/29/08

This page was last updated on April 29, 2008.

Silence, please; Editorial; Beaver County Times; April 29, 2008.

This editorial is interesting for a few reasons.

First, even though Times editorials frequently tell us we need to enact laws because someone else did (auto emissions and smoking on private property are examples), even Third World countries, this editorial maintains we should go against the European Union if the EU allows cell phone use on planes.

Second, the editorial wants the FCC ban turned into law simply because the Times editorial board believes the use of cell phones on airplanes is annoying. Nowhere does the editorial mention potential flight safety or technical concerns. At least this editorial was honest. The editorials lobbying for smoking bans on private property use alleged health concerns as a red herring. I expect the editorial board will note this tactical error and future editorials will talk about flight safety issues. Unfortunately for the Times editorial board, “the cat’s out of the bag.”

Third, the editorial said “the airlines don’t want” the ban lifted, but failed to note the airlines offer their own additional-charge in-flight phone services that would evaporate if passengers were allowed to use their own cell phones and service providers. The airlines don’t care if passengers use phones during a flight; they just want the passenger calls to go through an airline service so the airline can collect an additional fee.

What’s my position? Though people using phones on planes annoys the heck out of me, I don’t believe the government should ban the activity unless there are valid flight safety concerns. Unless there are valid flight safety concerns, the decision should be up to the airline and its customers.