We All Put Our Privacy on the Line With Caller ID

I’ve applauded all the major technological advances in modern times, including the VCR, the microwave oven and, of course, the greatest invention ever--the remote control TV channel changer.

But--and call me old-fashioned if you will--I don’t like Caller ID, touted by the phone companies as a breakthrough in the art of reaching out and touching someone.

Within the next year, Caller ID will likely be coming to your town. The only real question, according to people on both sides of the issue, is what strings will come attached to it.

Already operative in other parts of the country, Caller ID works like this: If you sign up for the service (and it’ll cost several dollars a month plus a one-time outlay for additional equipment), the caller’s phone number will show up on your phone.

Terrific. Now you can screen all those unwanted calls from perverts, salesmen and nosy in-laws, assuming you have memorized all their numbers. The phone company is selling Caller ID as a way of determining whether or not you answer your phone.

At first blush, that sounds fine. I’m all for Telephone Receiving Empowerment.

But what about when you’re the person making the call? Do you want your phone number displayed every time you call someone? What if you’re thinking of buying a new car or scouting around for homeowner’s insurance, and you want to call a dealer or agency for some preliminary information? Do you want your home number showing up on their phones?

There’s a huge business in this country built around businesses and God-knows-who-else trading unsuspecting customers’ phone numbers. They used to get them off things like credit cards. Now, they’ll just get them off their telephones. Imagine what a home improvement store or an electronics company could do with your number.

Picture yourself as a human chain letter.

The phone company argues that Caller ID will reduce obscene calls, because no creep in his right mind would call if he knew his number would be flashed.

Sounds logical, but this is a good time to mention one of those strings I referred to earlier. Even if Caller ID is approved by the Public Utilities Commission, state law currently requires that the phone companies make it possible for any caller to block an outgoing call by dialing a three-digit number. That means any pervert could ensure that his phone number wouldn’t show up when he makes his obscene call.

The phone company would argue that that same blocking feature also protects you from the aforementioned network of businesses. But we’re already protected by not having Caller ID, so why should we have to remember to punch in a code to ensure future protection? Are you going to remember to do that every time you call the hardware store, the pizza parlor, the florist shop?

California Common Cause opposes Caller ID and wants, in addition to the existing per-call block, the added feature of per-line block. That would give you the right to have all your outgoing calls blocked, thus guaranteeing that your number wouldn’t show up on the other end.

Interesting, isn’t it, that the phone companies support per-call blocking but oppose per-line blocking?

They say per-line blocking would undermine the effect of Caller ID, but what they really mean is that no one would sign up for Caller ID if they figured that everybody is automatically having their calls blocked, anyway.

The phone company says Caller ID will shield you from calls, but couldn’t it do just the opposite? Forgetting about the obscene caller who just blocks his calls or calls from a pay phone, doesn’t Caller ID expand the potential for strangers to call you, inasmuch as your phone number is now going out to everyone you call?

Common Cause says 40% of Californians have unlisted phone numbers. The phone companies are happy to take their money for that privilege. Now, those unlisted numbers would be meaningless unless their holders remember to dial the extra three numbers.

Sure, there are times when I’d love to be Carnak the Magnificent and know who’s on the other line before I pick up the phone. But this all sounds too Big Brotherish to me.

“The rights to privacy should be balanced equally between the person placing the call and the person receiving it,” said Linda Bonniksen, a Pacific Bell spokeswoman in Orange County. “Today, the caller has all the rights.”

To which Kim Alexander, a policy analyst with Common Cause, says: “It’s nice that they want to provide you with that kind of power. Unfortunately, Caller ID doesn’t do that. That’s where they’re misleading people. I don’t know the phone numbers of all the people in my Rolodex or phone book. If my phone is ringing and a number comes up I don’t recognize, am I going to let it ring and not answer it? What if it’s my sister calling from a pay phone and her car has broken down?”

What’s the harm, you might say. If a person wants to get suckered by Caller ID, let ‘em pay the extra bucks a month.

Here’s the harm: When someone gets Caller ID, they’ve made a choice for you too. They’ve decided your number now belongs to them.

But look on the bright side: Maybe it’ll be the start of a beautiful relationship.