The dog whistle of phones in theater article- Page 2

[Zion24]

Posted: 10/3/19 at 10:09pm

LizzieCurry said: "The article itself wanders too much, but I get what she's saying (for part of it). The problem is that when you're bombarding newbies with rules, it can be overwhelming and make them not want to engage in theatre at all. We all have people in our lives who find Broadway to be a fancy thing — not necessarily because of prices — and maybe not for them because they won't fit in. (We've all been to unfamiliar environments where we're afraid we'll do something wrong or strange and be immediately made to feel unwelcome.) And if these newbies do show up, right up front they're being told what NOT to do first, of course it's not going to make the best impression. The problem is laying out the rules AND being welcoming."

but she didnt write that article. she made it implicitly about race, killing the conversation you rightly suggest should be had. not sure we can/should ignore her thesis-- wanting cell phones off during a play = a dog whistle to racists-- to her credit. she should be ashamed. 

re: josh henry. good for him. humiliating people too selfish to make sure their phones are off, including physically snatching their toys away from them-- im all down for it. but the people here suggesting that if i break a theater rule, josh henry can steal/break/destroy my phone- the law dont work like that. i am SURE the phone was returned to the theatergoer after the performance. 

[Zion24]

Posted: 10/3/19 at 11:12pm

once again, the notion that its "against the law to have your cell phone out" is an overstatement, but even if that were so, there is no merit to the notion that the punishment for breaking this law is that you might have your valuable phone simply stolen from you or destroyed. im proudly intolerant of phone usage in a theater, but the punishment should not be, and is not, that the perpetrator pays a thousand-dollar fine through destruction/taking of his or her phone. 

 

Updated On: 10/4/19 at 11:12 PM

[uncageg]

Posted: 10/4/19 at 2:43am

It is not a "notion". It is a NY state law.

Also, nobody is "bombarded" with rules in the theater. There are rules everywhere. Why all of a sudden are they a problem in the theater?

[kaykordeath]

Posted: 10/4/19 at 5:48am

Jaywalking is also against the law in NYC.

Let's see which of these laws is actually enforced first.

[magictodo123]

Posted: 10/4/19 at 6:07am

uncageg said: "It is not a "notion". It is a NY state law.

Also, nobody is "bombarded" with rules in the theater. There are rules everywhere. Why all of a sudden are they a problem in the theater?"

Maybe because newer theater fans are also those who are growing up in the social media age. They are so used to having access to basically anything they want right away, that they think they are also entitled to recording, filming, that the rules don't apply to them? I had someone tell me they believed they were entitled to taking photos and recording the show because they paid to be there. People have no concept of respect. 

[Zion24]

Posted: 10/4/19 at 8:05am

uncageg said: "It is not a "notion". It is a NY state law."

i get that you are not a lawyer but this still doesnt seem like a hard concept: the "law" you are referring to (and can anyone link me to the statute because I couldnt find it...) at most suggests that patrons whose phones go off in a theater can be (i) ejected from the theater and (ii) fined up to $50.

i also dont see any basis for the notion that having ones phone "out" is violative-- the councilman who wrote the bill refers to "talking and talking" on the phone, and it was passed in the days before smart phones. but again, if someone can find the statute id love to see it.

This is from Forbes, but even the previously linked articles make the same point: I"n 2003, the New York City Council took a more radical approach, and voted to override Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s veto of its bill banning the use of cell phones in Broadway theaters. Violators can both be fined up to $50, and removed from the venue." 

I doubt anyone has ever been fined anything, but even if so, that is pointedly NOT the same thing as a law allowing Joshua Henry to take your phone and destroy it. short of eminent domain situations, i am hard-pressed to think of any laws that would allow for permanent confiscation of property unless it is evidence, and even then, property is often returned once it is no longer needed.

dont get me wrong, i could get on board with a draconian "leave your phone on at your own risk" law that allows ushers to snatch and destroy. no such law exists. 

 

[magictodo123]

Posted: 10/4/19 at 8:14am

JDonaghy4 said: "uncageg said: "It is not a "notion". It is a NY state law."

i get that you are not a lawyer but this still doesnt seem like a hard concept: the "law" you are referring to (and can anyone link me to the statute because I couldnt find it...) at most suggests that patrons whose phones go off in a theater can be (i) ejected from the theater and (ii) fined up to $50.

i also dont see any basis for the notion that having ones phone "out" is violative-- the councilman who wrote the bill refers to "talking and talking" on the phone, and it was passed in the days before smart phones. but again, if someone can find the statute id love to see it.

This is from Forbes, but even the previously linked articles make the same point:I"n 2003, the New York City Council took a more radical approach, and voted to override Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s veto of its bill banning the use of cell phones in Broadway theaters. Violators can both be fined up to $50, and removed from the venue."

I doubt anyone has ever been fined anything,but even if so, that is pointedly NOT the same thing as a law allowing Joshua Henry to take your phone and destroy it. short of eminent domain situations, i am hard-pressed to think of any laws that would allow for permanent confiscation of property unless it is evidence, and even then, property is often returned once it is no longer needed.

dont get me wrong, i could get on board with a draconian "leave your phone on at your own risk" law that allows ushers to snatch and destroy. no such law exists.

"

I've never seen anything as dramatic as asking people to leave the theater, but they have been approached after a performance and asked to delete whatever they recorded. That's pretty much all I've seen so far. 

[kdogg36]

Posted: 10/4/19 at 8:14am

LizzieCurry said: "Wait, the production doesn't want its ushers going up and down the aisles during the show to stop phones so they're basically leaving it to Alex Brightman to tweet a twice-weekly chastisement? JFC."

It would be entirely illegal for a stranger to park in my driveway, but if I decide to punish the owner by going out and messing up the car with a hammer, I'm still going to be responsible for that damage. Illegal misuse of an object doesn't give the victim a right to destroy it.

[magictodo123]

Posted: 10/4/19 at 8:27am

LizzieCurry said: "Wait, the production doesn't want its ushers going up and down the aisles during the show to stop phones so they're basically leaving it to Alex Brightman to tweet a twice-weekly chastisement? JFC."
 

I was an usher in several capacities (Broadway, off-Broadway) so I can speak to this. Ushers are kind of like actors in terms of their positions before, during, and after the show. There are different tracks and positions that they take. At the beginning of the show everyone is on. All ushers are typically in the house, keeping an eye on the audience and making sure all phones are put away to the best of their ability. Their posts only go so far. At some point, the head usher will flash a light that indicates the changing of usher positions. This is referred to as "early' and "late". Those who leave early may leave as soon as the "flash off" happens. Then there are those who stand in the house in places that are less distracting to the audience, but also in a place where they can reach someone with a phone if need be. Having ushers in the orchestra, especially towards the front, is very, very rare. The only time I came close to the front was when I ushered for Michael Flatley Lord of The Dance at The Lyric and I was about half-way down in the orchestra (although...actually...we might have been closer to the front than that...I can't remember). Bottom line is, there are very rarely ushers to cover audience members in every area of the theater. There are those who wait at the top of the stairs for late comers, those who do stay in the house but there are specific places where they stand. At intermission, there are a select amount of ushers who are still in the house who actually leave at that point. This doesn't leave very many ushers in the house to keep an eye on several hundred audience members. Towards curtain call you might see ushers moving towards the front of the orchestra to make sure no one records or photographs curtain call, but otherwise, ushers aren't there. Wouldn't you be distracted by someone standing very close to the stage watching the audience? So they're as close as they can be while trying not to be a distraction. 

[Islander_fan]

Posted: 10/4/19 at 10:23am

Either I’m misreading your post or things have changed since you ushered. Are you saying that the number of ushers on the late shift becomes smaller post intermission because more ushers leave then? If that is the case then that isn’t correct. At least anymore.

If you’re on the late shift you’re there until the show is over and the audience clears out. And, it should be noted that if the production doesn’t want something like ushers going down the aisle stopping phone usage of any kind, they are able to make that request and we as front of house are instructed to honor said request.

A very good example of this would be any Scott Rudin production. He doesn’t want latecomers being seated at any time, so, anyone that ushers at any of his shows has to
Honor that request. Most likely a better example than Beetlejuice since it’s more well known amongst theatre fans.

[Kad]

Posted: 10/4/19 at 10:57am

...anecdotally, as someone who worked as a house manager for a large off-Broadway company for several years, I will say that older folks were just as likely to be on their phones or have their phones go off during a show as anyone else. The fact this is being framed as a "young people" problem is silly. 

[cryan71]

Posted: 10/4/19 at 11:07am

I guess keeping one of these in your pocket is an idea to stop texting

https://www.thesignaljammer.com/products/Cell-Phone-Blocker-Mini.html

[Islander_fan]

Posted: 10/4/19 at 11:52am

cryan71 said: "I guess keeping one of these in your pocket is an idea to stop texting

https://www.thesignaljammer.com/products/Cell-Phone-Blocker-Mini.html"

Except for the fact that cellphone jammers are not legal at all. 

And, Kad is right. I can't tell you the number of older people who have smartphones, think that they turned them off, only to be wrong. It's not just the younger set. 

[uncageg]

Posted: 10/4/19 at 1:05pm

JDonaghy4 said: "uncageg said: "It is not a "notion". It is a NY state law."

i get that you are not a lawyer but this still doesnt seem like a hard concept: the "law" you are referring to (and can anyone link me to the statute because I couldnt find it...) at most suggests that patrons whose phones go off in a theater can be (i) ejected from the theater and (ii) fined up to $50.

i also dont see any basis for the notion that having ones phone "out" is violative-- the councilman who wrote the bill refers to "talking and talking" on the phone, and it was passed in the days before smart phones. but again, if someone can find the statute id love to see it.

This is from Forbes, but even the previously linked articles make the same point:I"n 2003, the New York City Council took a more radical approach, and voted to override Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s veto of its bill banning the use of cell phones in Broadway theaters. Violators can both be fined up to $50, and removed from the venue."

I doubt anyone has ever been fined anything,but even if so, that is pointedly NOT the same thing as a law allowing Joshua Henry to take your phone and destroy it. short of eminent domain situations, i am hard-pressed to think of any laws that would allow for permanent confiscation of property unless it is evidence, and even then, property is often returned once it is no longer needed.

dont get me wrong, i could get on board with a draconian "leave your phone on at your own risk" law that allows ushers to snatch and destroy. no such law exists.

 

I get that neither of us are lawyers. The law bans "the use" of phones in theaters. You  didn't search hard enough. I found it. At the time it went into effect, phones weren't quite as advanced. But it uses the word "use". I would assume that includes talking, texting, pictures, Instagram, etc. Any use of the phone.

"

 

[soundman245]

Posted: 10/4/19 at 5:38pm

Josh Henry personally return the phone to the theatregoer at the end of the performance. One aspect of that story that isn't well understood is that it was a very small theatre, and a very serious show about someone who was wrongly accused of a crime.  There were two seating sections right on the stage, to either side of the acting area. This audience member was using a phone in the first row of one of those onstage seating sections, in full view of the rest of the audience.  Henry did not have to leave the stage, he just snatched the phone while doing his standard movements, and tossed it under the seating riser.  It was retrieved after the show and Henry returned it.

[Zion24]

Posted: 10/4/19 at 6:20pm

uncageg said: i get that neither of us are lawyers. The law bans "the use" of phones in theaters. You didn't search hard enough. I found it. At the time it went into effect, phones weren't quite as advanced. But it uses the word "use". I would assume that includes talking, texting, pictures, Instagram, etc. Any use of the phone.

"
one of us is a lawyer, and there is no basis for anyone to confiscate/destroy/abscond with a cellphone as a result of the statute in question. 

and i think the reason that there is no record of that law ever once being enforced is because it was drafted without any understanding of what a smart phone is. i would be THRILLED if theaters fined patrons $50 for phone use! its just not gon happen. 

 

[uncageg]

Posted: 10/7/19 at 8:26pm

Well ok. You could have stated that at first instead of assuming I was not and made your point. Your response really didn't address my comment though.

But honestly, if you blatantly break the rules then expect to possibly pay the consequences. Be it an actor or musician stopping the show or your phone being taken from you. It's a phone. Nobody got hurt and a message was sent. If this is the way it has to be handled because people don't follow rules or laws then maybe it has to happen until they finally stop. Which I don't see happening!

Updated On: 10/7/19 at 08:26 PM

[uncageg]

Posted: 10/7/19 at 9:27pm

This article also includes footage of Henry taking the phone and sliding it under the bleachers.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/06/theater/theater-etiquette-cellphone-anne-sophie-mutter.html

[ModernMillie3]

Posted: 10/7/19 at 10:00pm

Amazing. I hope more and more actors start doing this, and no, the weird argument of "it totally took me out of the show!" aren't valid when the person IN the show is taken out of their show by this illegal behavior. Good on Joshua!!

[Islander_fan]

Posted: 10/7/19 at 10:35pm

For **** sake, you’re acting like the whole cell phone law should be up there up there with murder as a major crime. If anything came of it it would just cause the patron fifty bucks or being shown the door. Neither of which would occur:

Now, I’m sure that there are many here that are all in favor of folks experiencing a Broadway show for the first time. Yes, we want to be accommodating to them because the majority of those who attend are visiting or have grown up in NY yet never saw a show before.

In order for us to be accommodating we would never take away someone’s phone. If I’m doing a shift say at Come From Away, a show with no pre show announcement, I would make a general announcement to those in the section that I was seating about turning off your phone. By virtue of taking away ones phone Or forcing them to use one of those Yondr pouches we are going against our goal of making people feel like they are having a good experience and wish to return.

[ModernMillie3]

Posted: 10/7/19 at 11:07pm

You are an usher who does not think people should show cast/crew/patrons respect and not have their phones out or available for use? You are in the wrong profession, in my opinion. 

[Islander_fan]

Posted: 10/8/19 at 12:38am

Don't put words in my mouth, I never said that. I never once said that patrons on their phones is a good thing in any form or fashion. I did, however state (and if memory serves on more than one thread) that the taking away of phones, use of Yonder pouches, is not only the wrong path to go down but one that the owners (Shubert, Nederlander etc) would never  go down. And, before I continue, Yes, Yondr pouches are being used at Freestyle Love Supreme and were in use for several of the concerts that were recently done at The Lunt. The big difference is that it was the production of those shows that footed the bill on the pouches, not Nederlander and Shubert respectively. 

This message board is filled with users who have the ability to do rush lines, see shows left and right and in some cases, re visit shows. However, in terms of the population of theatre goers, they are in the minority. The majority of people that do, however, go to see shows on Broadway are those who are tourists and second to that, those who are from the NYC metro area who may only end up going to a Broadway show a couple of times a year if that. We all love theatre on here and we love the notion of someone experiencing their first Broadway show and we want to make it an enjoyable and memorable one. Yanking people's phones from them as they enter is the exact opposite environment we wish to create. 

You also need to understand that what you're proposing and in favor of has major moving parts that make what you think should happen a mere pipe dream. 

[ModernMillie3]

Posted: 10/8/19 at 4:05am

Hm, you seem to be confused regarding those pouches. Your phone is always with you, therefore, your argument is invalid because you don't know what you are even talking about. It will happen, it is the future because people (employees and patrons) have HAD it. 

[Dublin2]

Posted: 10/8/19 at 4:23am

 Yanking people's phones from them as they enter is the exact opposite environment we wish to create. 

No one proposed that. What Mr. Henry did was met with huge applause and an apology from that man after the show. Everyone in the room knew how disrespectful he was being, it was nice he realized it too.  

[magictodo123]

Posted: 10/8/19 at 5:44am

Islander_fan said: "Either I’m misreading your post or things have changed since you ushered. Are you saying that the number of ushers on the late shift becomes smaller post intermission because more ushers leave then? If that is the case then that isn’t correct. At least anymore.

If you’re on the late shift you’re there until the show is over and the audience clears out. And, it should be noted that if the production doesn’t want something like ushers going down the aisle stopping phone usage of any kind, they are able to make that request and we as front of house are instructed to honor said request.

A very good example of this would be any Scott Rudin production. He doesn’t want latecomers being seated at any time, so, anyone that ushers at any of his shows has to
Honor that request. Most likely a better example than Beetlejuice since it’s more well known amongst theatre fans. "

Not every single usher from beginning of show to end of the night stays for the whole thing, that is what I’m saying. For example at The Public Theater, there are those who only stay until intermission, or up until a certain point and they they leave. They aren’t there for the whole show. I think I know what I’m talking about so don’t say I’m incorrect?