Caller ID Phone Service
I do not understand the motivation of “Caller ID Is Coming: Beware!” (editorial, Feb. 29). Why do I have to be beware? The need to beware assumes that I have something to hide, or that the other party is “out to get me.”
How pleasant it would be if I were to call a large company that I do business with and hear, “Hello, Mr. Jahncke, I see that you have purchased .J.J. in the past, what can we help you with today?” This would be only one of several possibilities that would be enabled. As far as accumulating a “database of callers,” if Caller ID would help a company improve its service, I am all for it. I don’t have anything to hide. I think it is about time that I am given the tools to “see who is calling me” before I answer the phone. I have had that capability when I answer the door, or before I open a letter. At last the phone will have that capability.
ROBERT JAHNCKE
Fullerton
* Your commendable editorial overlooks one of the greatest threats to privacy posed by Caller ID. The public’s blocking option will not work against those most likely to commit the abuses you decry--the 800 and 900 numbers. Until the PUC-ordered ads appeared, I did not know that my phone identity is automatically revealed, and I shall now restrict my use of that service.
We now pay 30 cents a month extra because our number is unlisted; I wonder how long it will be before the phone companies institute a charge for blocking.
IRWIN ROSTEN
Los Angeles
* Your editorial misses the point, and also fails to point out that California is the last state to get Caller ID. The feature has worked pretty well in the many states that have had it for several years.
If you choose to block your phone number, fine, but don’t expect to get through to my private residence. An adjunct capability, called anonymous call rejection (sometimes provided by the phone company, or by special blocking customer equipment) will keep anonymous callers away from my home. I won’t even know they called--so much for crank calls and obnoxious solicitors!
By the same token, when I call a business I will have to option to precede those calls with per-call blocking, because I don’t believe I have to reveal any number to a merchant when I’m letting “my fingers do the walking.”
There are always arguments on both sides of a complex privacy issue. To me, though, it’s clear that the rights of the private residence receiving calls are superior to those placing calls.
WALLACE B. ROBERTS
San Clemente
* Your article on the privacy implications of Caller ID (Feb. 25) accurately points out that Californians will be able to block their phone numbers from being shown on the display screens of recipients’ phones. Callers can choose to block their numbers from being transmitted all the time (called complete blocking), or just block on a per call basis (called selective blocking). Thanks to the California Public Utilities Commission, these blocking options will be free.
But your article--and now the editorial--is not correct in stating that the CPUC initially required the most stringent form of blocking for all households. Rather, the CPUC required that those households with unlisted or unpublished numbers automatically be given complete blocking, which from a privacy standpoint makes perfect sense. These phone customers--nearly 50% of all households in California--pay a monthly fee to ensure their telephone privacy and therefore would want the most effective blocking option to retain the privacy of their unlisted numbers. It is this default blocking requirement that the Federal Communications Commission overruled, and which the court recently upheld.
BETH GIVENS
Privacy Rights Clearinghouse
University of San Diego
* An overlooked concern with Caller ID is what happens when someone you know calls you from a phone number that you don’t know--like a friend’s home or business? Will recipients who are wary of answering calls from numbers they don’t know get paranoid about receiving strange numbers? And what about the family members who are placing these calls--when their recipients don’t answer because they don’t recognize the number, will this cause undo stress and panic?
ANDY PEARLMAN
