Cellular Phone Culture: Hong Kong vs. North America

Introduction

In one decade, the number of cellular phone users in the United States skyrocketed from 34 million to 203 million, and numbers continue to increase as more and more children are given their own phones for personal use (Leo, 2006). The cellular phone has gradually replaced the landline in many countries as the medium of choice for telecommunications. This shift was more gradual in the United States, where landline infrastructure was already pervasive when cellular phone technologies first appeared. In Asia, where landline infrastructure was less extensive than in North America, cellular phone usage plays an even more important role.

While it may be tempting to cite cultural differences as the reason for differential cellular phone use in Hong Kong versus North America, the differences in infrastructure between the two regions account for most of the reasons why cellular phones serve a different sociological function in those two societies.

Background

Although cellular phone usage is embedded within both North American and Asian cultures, the sociological function of the cellular phone in these two societies differs considerably. For example, text messaging (SMS) is popular in Hong Kong but far less so in either Canada or the United States. Similarly, Canadians and Americans rely on landlines for long conversations during the day and may only use their mobile phones after 7 PM when airtime is free. In contrast, Hong Kong users speak continuously on their cellphones without considering the time, due to rate plans that are as affordable and convenient as landline plans. Hong Kong users also text message regularly and collect email on their phones — in short, the cellular phone is part of everyday life in Hong Kong, whereas in North America it is used more as a supplementary convenience.

The reasons for these differences may have little to do with cultural or class differences. Rather, differential cellular phone usage can be traced to two important factors. First, cellular phone infrastructure and coverage in Hong Kong is more comprehensive than in North America, making it more convenient to use cellular phones there. Hong Kong boasts one of the most advanced telecommunications infrastructures in Asia. Chowdhury and Yeung (n.d.) note that Hong Kong has one of the most saturated cellular phone markets in the world. Second, wireless companies in Hong Kong offer consumers far more incentives to leave landlines behind. Coverage is more consistent, billing is more sensible, and wireless services are far more comprehensive than in North America. For instance, Hong Kong users can easily stream live television on their phones, whereas such services are more primitive in North America. The data in this report focus on Hong Kong and Canada.

Technology can, as Heilbroner (1967) points out, determine the socioeconomic order in a society. However, cellular phone usage in both Hong Kong and North America does not seem to reflect a Marxist view of technology. Cellular phones are common in both regions, and their use largely transcends social class now that rate plans have matched landline plans in terms of cost. Consumers in both North America and Hong Kong can use cellular phones in lieu of landlines, eliminating the need to pay two separate bills.

A more likely explanation for usage differences is described by Norman (1988). Norman contends that technological objects sometimes function in counterintuitive ways. Doors without handles require signs telling the user to push or pull, when a strategically placed handle could make that decision much easier. Users can and do work around the annoyances of items like cellular phones, while others demand more advanced, better-designed objects to suit their needs.

Cellular phones became a part of Hong Kong culture far earlier than they became a regular feature of Canadian culture. Hong Kong is one of the most cellular-phone-saturated markets in the world ("Cell Phone Usage Statistics"). Because of their head start in familiarizing themselves with the product mapping of cellular phones, Hong Kong consumers have become more cellphone-savvy than their North American counterparts.

Research Methods

One hundred subjects were interviewed and observed for this research. Half (49%) of the participants were college students born in Hong Kong who had lived in Vancouver for at least two years. The other half (51%) were college students born in Canada. All 100 subjects attend the same university in British Columbia, and all currently own a cellular phone and use a contract plan with one of the local providers, including Telus, Fido, and Rogers. Participants who used only pay-as-you-go plans were excluded from the study.

Interview questions focused on two areas. First, participants' exposure to cellular phones in their households and grade schools was explored. Second, participants' past and current use of cellular phones was examined. Observations of actual cellular phone use were later incorporated with participants' survey responses.

Conclusion

Because cellular phone infrastructure expanded in Hong Kong earlier and more effectively than it did in North America, Hong Kong consumers gained a five- to ten-year lead in savvy cellphone customs. The later entrenchment of cellular phone technologies in North America accounts for the cultural differences in usage and saturation of cellular phones, SMS, and other advanced services. The differences in cellphone use between Hong Kong and North American users can be traced to infrastructure and are not easily explained by Marxist theories of differential use.