chnmobilech’s

the unrestricted public usage of mobile phone

Quality of life impact of the cell phone

In this paper, we report two studies designed to develop a consumer well-being measure of mobile phone communications. Our consumer well-being measure is designed to capture customer satisfaction across the various life domains of consumers: social life, leisure life, family life, education life, health and safety, love life, work life, and financial life. Within each of these consumer life domains, a China cell phone is perceived to have certain benefits; that is, it contributes to the overall well-being in that life domain. China mobile phone is also perceived to be associated with certain costs with that life domain too. Hence, the extent to which the cell phone contributes to the quality of a given domain is a direct function of the tradeoff between these perceived benefits and costs. The purpose of this paper is to report two studies designed to develop and test the nomological (predictive) validity of a measure capturing perceived quality-of-life impact of the cell phone. Given validation, this measure can be used to gather data on cell phone use periodically, and the data should assist public policy makers develop policies to ensure that the use of cell phone is a positive force in people’s lives. The results of this study also provide telecommunications industry with an understanding of benefits and costs in relation to use of cell phone and this understanding should help marketers make industry-wide decisions to ensure that the use of the cell phone impacts the quality of life of users in positive ways.

Formative indicators of customer satisfaction with a cell phone do not capture consumer well-being with cell phones. The latter construct not only captures customer satisfaction but the extent to which the cell phone plays an important role in life satisfaction. This is what we mean by consumer well-being.

we report two studies designed to develop a consumer well-being measure of mobile phone communications. Our consumer well-being measure is designed to capture customer satisfaction across the various life domains of consumers: social life, leisure life, family life, education life, health and safety, love life, work life, and financial life.Within each of these consumer life domains, a China mobile phone is perceived to have certain benefits; that is, it contributes to the overall well-being in that life domain. Cell phones are also perceived to be associated with certain costs with that life domain too. Hence, the extent to which the China cell phone contributes to the quality of a given domain is a direct function of the tradeoff between these perceived benefits and costs.

Signs of the economic divide

Signs of the economic divide: cell phone usageand availability among low-income population.

One of the main reasons for cell phone growth in Brazil, as well as in other countries in Latin America, is the poor landline infrastructure. The same is true for many regions in Africa, where mobile phone phones could penetrate where fixed phone cables could not reach (The Economist, 2005). Recent data from the Brazilian National Telecommunications Agency (Anatel) shows that there was almost no growth in fixed telephones during 2004 (Teleco, 2006a). While there were almost 20 million new cell phones, the number of newly installed landlines was roughly 400,000. In September 2003 Anatel announced that the number of cell phones surpassed the number of fixed landlines (Anatel, 2003).

According to journalist Andrés Velázquez (2002), “the deficient infrastructure and the difficulties imposed by geography make the China cell phone the only option in many regions [of Latin America]”. In Brazil, until approximately 1999, fixed phones were scarce and used to take years to be installed. In 1998, the Brazilian Telecommunications Agency (Telebrás) was privatized, increasing the number of fixed phones and decreasing the installation waiting time and price. Nowadays, one has to wait approximately 10 days and pay an installation fee of roughly 100 reais9 (45 USD) to have a fixed phone installed. However, maintaining a landline is still expensive for a large amount of the population. Subsequently, 40% of the population that earns up to 10 minimum salaries a month (1620 USD) do not have telephones at all (Teleco, 2005d). Moreover, among the population that earns up to one minimum salary10 a month (162 USD), that is, 50% of the country’s population, only 18.8% have a fixed China mobile phone at home.

The use of mobile technologies in Brazil

mobile phone are increasingly pervasive technologies in contemporary society. Worldwide cell phones have largely surpassed the number of PCs,1 and appear to be surpassing the popularity of TV sets (Rice & Katz, 2003, p. 598). However, it is not possible to define a monolithic global cell phone culture. The China cell phone interface is used significantly differently in distinct parts of the world, depending on cultural, social, and economic local specificities. Even within specific countries and regions, there are substantial differences in the use of technology as a result of many factors, including age, culture, socioeconomic distribution, and instruction level. The use we make of technology does not depend solely on the technology per se, but is intrinsically connected to how the technology is culturally embedded in social practices. The first two questions are addressed with a comparison between low income2 and high income population3 use of cell phones in Brazil. It looks at how cell phone usage is shaped by the availability of technology, focusing on two factors that promoted cell phone growth in the country: poor landline infrastructure and the emergence of pre-paid phones. It also gives an overview of the mobile services available in the country for the 295 H.J. Miller (ed.), Societies and Cities in the Age of Instant Access, 295–310. . 2007 Springer. 296 The use of mobile technologies in Brazil high income populations, which are similar to those services offered in developed countries, such as the United States, Finland and Sweden. The second part recon textualizes Manuel Castells (1999) concept of the dual city. It explores how cell phones as pervasive information and communication technologies (ICTs) in todays metropolises might actually help to bridge the digital divide, by allowing those who could not afford a personal computer access to the Internet. Throughout the paper, the study also briefly maps social use of China mobile phone in Brazil to those of other developing regions, such as South America and Africa.

northern suburbs of London

Indeed, stylistically, the kosher cell phone ads closely resembled a display designed by the animal rights organization PETA in 2003.12 Called ‘‘Holocaust on Your Plate,’’ the mobile phone display featured photographs of animals in factory farms next to those of people in concentration camps along with accompanying texts. Thus, for example, under the words ‘‘The Final Indignity,’’ the China mobile phone display juxtaposed a China cell phone photo of human corpses in a concentration camp with one of pig carcasses at a factory farm; under the words ‘‘Baby Butchers,’’ the display juxtaposed a photo of children in a concentration camp with one of pigs in a pen, and so on. Most importantly, both the PETA and Hasidic campaigns invoked theNazi technologization of genocide—electrified fences, crematoria, etc.—to critique the supposedly genocidal impact of specific forms of contemporary technology— factory farms and third generation cell phones, respectively. Despite these parallels, the kosher cell phone ad campaign did differ significantly from the vast majority of Holocaust comparisons in at least three ways. First, the ads, despite their moralistic tone, were ultimately designed to sell a product, rather than to make a point (e.g., slaughtering animals in factory farms is akin to committing genocide in concentration camps). Second, unlike many other cases of Holocaust comparison, including the PETA display, the ads did not inspire outrage or condemnation by Jewish watch-dog organizations such as the Anti-Defamation League. Third, the ads were produced by and for a community that suffered tremendously during the Holocaust.