Visit Your Local PBS Station PBS Home PBS Home Programs A-Z TV Schedules Watch Video Support PBS Shop PBS Search PBS

Your Take »

What content do you want on your cell phone?

Cell phones are not just for talking while driving anymore. The cell phone carriers grew tired of just charging for anytime minutes, and added camera and videocamera functions, along with web access and texting. Entire cottage industries have sprung up to sell us ringtones, cell games, music and video. The most recent entrants in this field are Big Media companies News Corp. and CBS, with the former launching a European cell content store called Mobizzo and the latter starting a pay service with video news alerts for mobile phones.

What content do you want on your cell phone? News video or downloadable music? Games or special ringtones? Nothing? Share your thoughts in the comments below, and I'll choose the best ones for next week's Your Take Roundup.

12 comments so far, Add Yours

 

How about, OMG, a PHONE that actually performs well.

 

Access to the media I already have on my computer and my TiVo. Honestly, I've already got more to read/watch/listen to than I have time for. Rather than pay $1.99 a download, I'd pay a hefty price ($10/month? $20/month if it's really well executed?) to access all my content anywhere. But cellular carriers are used to charging piecemeal, and it will be hard to break them of that habit.

 

i'd like to have rss feeds on my cell phone. i need to keep track of info when i have a free minute or two in my day. i'd also use those rss feeds for family and close friends to send me time urgent text -- which would activate a vibration on my cell phone.

i need for others to have that kind of cell phone, too, so that we don't live in a society where cell phones ring every other minute in both public and private places.

we need to increase the quantity of serenity in this world, without losing connectedness.

 

None. I just want my cell phone for what is was created: make calls. Send messages. Trully, I'd love having a digital camera that could also make phone calls. Cell phone cameras still aren't as good as I would like to.

 

My family and friends content and context.

 

Cao Kun (from Shanghai, china) said:

March 7, 2006 1:22 AM

Across the globe, there is only one nature in common of what a mobile phone operator works: try its best to grasp bucks as much as possible out of the pocket of a subscriber, along with a series of trail-blazing value-add services, which a subscriber who has signed up for one item of services or two is given mixed feeling of what he or she pays for: Is it worth paying and keeping up with what a mobile phone operator brags.

 

Geraldine said:

March 7, 2006 5:54 AM

I use my phone for business, and I don't need or want it to do anything more than calling and voice mail. Cell phone service is already expensive, and I'm not interested in paying a premium for a fancy phone or extra services. I don't need to be wired all the time. I already have a camera; I already have a computer. I don't need to replicate that functionality in another device.

 

I would like to be able to choose my phone options when I get the phone and perhaps change those options online. The ability of cell phones to connect to the internet (and incur high charges) I find unnecessary and a nuisance since the web buttons are big and easy to hit on accident.

Also, I find it annoying that I have to pay to receive a text message when I have no option about whether or not I want to receive one. Text messaging seems like a scam when compared to e-mail and the advanced technology we have. Did pagers charge for every page received (I'm not quite sure, that was before my time, but it seems like it would defeat the purpose)? Why should we have to pay to send a short message to someone in our service that it would be free, although sometimes inconvenient, to call?

 

Alonso said:

March 7, 2006 12:52 PM

Phones should be phones, cameras should be cameras, PDAs should be PDAs, etc. etc. etc.
I'm tired of all this gadgets that promise to do everything, but don't do anything well.
I use my phone to make calls, my computer to keep my schedule, and my ipod to listen to music. That's it, I'm happy that way.

 

Angela said:

March 7, 2006 2:01 PM

Cell phones can have as many features as the manufacturer wants to put on them as long as the consumer has the choice to take advantage of them or not. And if not, then no penalities for just sticking to the basics.

 

JO BURFORD said:

March 7, 2006 5:10 PM

I HAVEN'T JOINED THE CELL PHONE NATION. SHOULD I BRAG AND TELL MY PRIMARY PHONE IS A LAND LINE ROTARY PHONE CIRCA 1960.

 

I want my cell phone to function efficently and effortlessly when I need it, and to have service in between houses, inside of houses and anywhere else I want to use it, not just when I'm driving down the major freeways. I also want my cell phone to stay together when it accidentally falls to the ground, and to last longer than the current quality control failing three month limit on electronic effectiveness that seems to pervade our modern sensibilities and products.

Sure, games would be nice, but if I can listen to music, I'm not going to be playing games, and if I can actually call someone, and they have service and their battery is charged or their LCD screen can actually be viewed in the sun, I'd be a whole lot happier. However, the ability to hack my DVR onto my phone or even laptop and then using bluetooth to send my media to my phone, is tantalizing, but after trying to watch Austin Powers: Goldmember on a video iPod, I'm not sure how willing I am to fork over the money to pay for "compatibility," when nine times out of ten, some error message will pop up. And not just because I'm on a Mac.

Post a Comment

Ground rules for posting comments: No profanity or personal attacks. Please comment on the subject of the blog post itself. If you do not follow these rules, we will remove your post. Keep it civil, folks!

By This Author

  • @FakeAPStylebook Editors Explain Their Overnight Success on Twitter

    For anyone who has suffered through reading the entire AP Stylebook for a journalism class, there's a cathartic release when reading the dry wit of the @FakeAPStylebook feed on Twitter. It combines parody of the journalism usage bible with funny repartee and the absurd. That mix has brought amazing success to the people behind the feed: more than 40,000 followers...

  • Harold Evans Sees Bright Future for Print-on-Demand Newspapers

    Evans is the editor-at-large for The Week magazine. He has written numerous books, but his most recent is called "My Paper Chase," a fascinating memoir covering his early years as a cub reporter, copy editor and eventually editor and publisher over decades of distinguished work. He connects what happened in those early years to the changes wrought by technology and the Internet, and what he sees as he watches his wife, Tina Brown, co-found and manage The Daily Beast.

  • 4 Minute Roundup: Twitter's Real-Time Search Deals; Bloomberg Rising

    Here's the latest 4MR audio report from MediaShift. In this week's edition, I look at the deals Microsoft made recently with Twitter and Facebook to incorporate tweets and status updates into its Bing search engine. Google quickly announced a deal with Twitter too, but why should we care? Also, Bloomberg bought out BusinessWeek magazine, but the jewel might well be...

Stay Informed

Who We Are

MediaShift tracks how new media -- from weblogs to podcasts to citizen journalism -- are changing society and culture.