Ha Pes (HPs) in Asia
Mark McLelland introduces his article Socio-cultural Aspects of Mobile Communication Technologies in Asia and the Pacific: a Discussion of the Recent Literature by pointing out what I like to call the westnocentric mindset that all people use technologies the same way; however, people all around the world utilize technology differently, depending on several factors such as their culture, educational and economic backgrounds. He mentions how students in the current generation were not as familiar with the uses of telephones in the early days and how he wanted to teach them how the functions of mobile technologies differ across geographical settings and cultures (particularly Asian-Pacific Mobile Communications, due to his specialized knowledge in this area). McLelland also notes the problems associated with Asian-Pacific mobile communication studies including unfortunate lack of research in this area (for example, technologies develop so quickly that the data collection and study processes are having trouble keeping up). He examines the quality and usefulness of related sources such as Rao and Mendoza's Asia Unplugged: the Wireless and Mobile Media Boom in the Asia-Pacific and notes that this particular handbook is okay for finding statistical data, but lacks a more social/cultural qualitative study. On the other hand, he remarks that Castells et al.'s text The Mobile Communication Society provides a more integrated study of mobile telephony and cultural studies in general and does not omit qualitative or quantitative research on these subjects. (Neither does Castells et al.'s text conform to westnocentrism). McLelland attempts to do the same thing in this brief study, although he has very little information to work with (in all Asian-Pacific regions). Another reliable source (which is said to be the “only comprehensive analysis of mobile telecommunications in Japan” so far (127)) is Ito et al.'s Personal, Portable, Pedestrian: Mobile Phones in Japanese Life, and it refers to mobile technologies as keitai, which has Japanese cultural meanings attached to it. McLelland discovers in this article that young Japanese women are the major force behind consumerism regarding communication technology. He also reports that Japanese and Korean cultures alike engage in the idea of customization and fashion, whereas Chinese cultures tend to mark their mobile telephones as status symbols. McLelland summarizes research found in Castells et al.'s text about SMS (text messaging) was revolutionary regarding anti-Estrada affairs in the Philippines as well as how text messaging impacted China during the SARS outbreak; he remarks (from Pertierra's text) how cellphones have allowed migrant workers from the Philippines to communicate with their families across borders, and how Filipino/as use the text messaging application more than any other culture due to its private nature. Teenagers often text for this reason also. An example McLelland finds in Okada's text is how young Japanese schoolgirls sent SMS messages to their friends pagers, which led to poke-kotoba (pager-lingo) or better yet, a private language, separate from their parents (I'd like to think a new type of pig latin) (132). Privacy in texting also encourages Chinese people to send a proverb or romantic line to their partner. McLelland finds from Paragas studies on Filipinos on cellphones regarding public spaces and travel that people from this region tend to keep conversations short and sweet and they also use them as a form of security in the case of emergencies; on the other hand, areas in Japan regard the use of cellphones in public spaces as a bit disorderly and that the physical noise is not as problematic as keitai conversations, which “disrupt the order of urban space through confusing the boundaries of private and public,” (131). McLelland ends with stating how the youth culture is a driving force for the mobile communication market (their extensive use of SMS, paging, and i-mode), how the use of cellphones is impacting language, political/socioeconomic situations, and the definition of time and space.
In the article The age of the thumb:A cultural reading of mobile technologies from Asia, Genevieve Bell dives right in to remark off China's outstanding use of cellphones by describing how they are one of the world's largest markets and how they have become part of the new “age of the thumb (muzhi shi dal)” in this area, meaning that their extensive use of text messaging might just find its way to mastering the world record against Europe and the US and dramatically impact their history and culture (67-68)...(Watch out for China! The Thumb tribe is becoming the new Dance Dance Revolution (DDR) champions, only this time, it is their fingers tapping away at their cellphone keypads!). Unlike US cellphone services, China Mobile has provided a novella feature on its phones that allows its users to text more Chinese characters to one another (up to 240 characters may be used!) (68). I think it's an interesting fact that the author notes how cellphones are beginning to outnumber citizens in Singapore, and how the adoption rates are taking lead in the race of social mobility (68). Bell draws on the research of George Marcus, Appaduri and Miller on ethnographic and cultural studies involving 'consumption', 'consumerism', behaviors, and 'material culture' (69). She traces how these mobile devices are being “'deployed', 'consumed', 'regulated', 'rejected' and 'naturalized' in urban Asia” (69). Bell calls attention to the differing cultural definitions of social mobility (for example, how domesticity is connected to cell phone usage in America). Bell compares cellphone usage in America to Asian countries and notes how cellphones serve several cultural functions in Asia whereas Americans focus on 'innovation', 'production' and 'consumerism' of these mobile technologies(70). She then gears the rest of the article around discussing cellphones as cultural objects in Asia. She notes how the name 'cellphone' changes in different parts of Asia: they are referred to as hand phones in Singapore and Malaysia, as shouji (or hand machines) in China and HP (hand-phones in shorthand) in Indonesia (71). Cellphone habits in China include the notion of 'keeping in touch' and what Preitz (2005) comments on as a device that permits 'intimate discourse' (72). Bell reports the accounts of several interviews she had with Asian families on how they use their cellphones and found that they are mainly used for safety and security reasons within the family structure. She also found that cellphones in Asia were used for business, travel and work-related activities; more specifically, Koreans typically used their phones to organize their contacts (one man separated his list of 500 contacts into 8 folders with 8 ringtones) (74). Bell talks about how speed texting is rewarded and goes into detail on the extreme amount of SMS messages being sent in Asia, particularly on white elephant topics like sex and politics; she also discusses how SMS messages help nagging wives to communicate less annoying, more crafty messages to their husbands like the Surabayan lady who sent her husband a text msg asking him to bring her food which was actually meant for him to come home. Bell also notes how Asians praise cellphones multi-functional nature-- stating that they are “pagers, notice boards, answering machines, fridge front doors, and bedside tables” (76). The only negative thing she mentions is how some people are too lazy to text, or feel as if they text too slow, or that the letters are too small for elders. Bell then reports how cell phones are not only used for entertainment purposes, but for informational purposes also. For example, they may be used to keep up with sports stats or as religious media (reminders of salat or prayer time common in Malysia. Another view of cellphones in Asia is how the media projects them as tools aiding in activities like divorce and the destruction of family life, SMS (Some More Sex...where cellphones substitute Viagra lol) and even political rivalries, causing anxiety and great needs to be regulated. Bell also explores how people in Asian cultures customize their phones, which in essence, reveals part of their identities (the example of the Asian brothers hacking their parents phones only to place their photos on them is touching). Another example I found interesting is how certain combinations of numbers have distinct cultural meaning and how the man from Beijing paid over $200,000 to purchase a cellphone with lucky numbers 133 3333 3333 (83). Bell ends with defining what cellphones are as it relates to the Asian culture, and she states that they are not just technological tools, but that they are social and cultural tools also.
Both articles explore how cellphones are utilized in Asia. One of the main differences in these articles is how McLelland seems to devote his entire introduction on the lack of research on Asian-specific mobile technological studies and how he uses what he considered to be reliable sources to expand on in his article. On the other hand, Bell does not recognize the lack of Asian studies on cellphones, but she attempts to become one more reliable source. Her article is more qualitative, and it entails more meaty information than just plain statistics McLelland complains about in his article. I think it was interesting too how Bell ended her article with a definition of cellphones instead of doing this in her introduction. I was also a bit unsure on who to believe when McLelland stated that the Philippines had the most extensive use of SMS messaging, but Bell claimed China took lead in this activity. However, I do believe that Asian regions in general produce interesting studies on how they are utilizing such technologies. Not to be westnocentric :-D , but even after reading both of these articles, I still believe that the way Asians use their phones is not entirely different from the way most people use them. There are many overlapping uses of them (such as the youth culture driving the mobile communication market and how families use them for safety and security reasons), even though some functions and features are culture specific (like the focus of speed-texting, fashion and status symbols, referring to them as names other than 'cellphones' and the belief in lucky numbers). Quite frankly, cellphones in Asia are an interesting study and I am looking forward to reading more ethnographic research about them in the near future.