▶ Your Answer :
With the number of mobile phone subscribers peaking to 48 million in South Korea as of January 2011, it is clearly not an overstatement to say that the use of mobile phone use in South Korea is becoming more and more common in everday the everyday life. When stepping into a Seoul subway tube, a normal foreigner might be dumbfounded by what he or she might see sees; citizens ranging from young to old all immersed in of their mobile phones, not even looking up or minding at their accompanies. Like this, mobile use on the go The use of mobile phone is a very common phenomenon but some point out that it should be restricted during when in a public transportation. However, its grounding support basis is faulty flawed, and the notion for containing moblie the use of mobile phones proves as impratical is most likely to be impractical for the following reasons.
Prominently, critics point out that the use of mobile phone use during in a public transportation distracts others severely. However, this these kind of cases are barely nonexistent rare; exempting a few minority. Today's globalized The globalized citizens of the 21st century citizens knows are much aware of themselves when they bother better than to be a continuous bother to other passengers, because of their basic since they are well-educated and with etiquettes. They have a basic knowledge of trying not to be nuisance to one another not to be a source of interruption because they would not want to be distracted as well. because they would not like to be on the receiving end as well. In fact, according to the Korean Institute of Statistics, a 2010 survey of indicated that more than 82 % of respondees ' respondents always tries avoid being the source of distraction to to not bother other citizens while when in trains, subways, or on the bus. Like this, the A few minority minorities who do yap on the phone in a an excessively loud voice is a rare occasion and even in the case of those being the source of interruption to others becoming a bother to other customers; the problem is not a matter of life-and-death matter.
Next, the integerity of use of smart phone use in among citizens' citizens lives makes the notion of prohibiting passengers from using mobile phone in public transportation methods an impratical impractical idea as well as an infringing to the citizens’ rights. South Korea, albeit rising newcomers like India or China, is one of the dominant leader leaders of the global information technology era, particularly in the smart phone sector with Samsung Electronics enterprise. Therefore, its people are always on the demand of having the adamant in getting a grip on the newest smart phone model, may it be be it the 2011 Samsung Galaxy model, or Iphone 5 of the Apple company. They incorpora``te incorporate the use of their smart phone phones use into their everyday lives. For example, Min Ji Kim, a graduate of the Seoul National University student graduate, works with in Meritz, a financial bank. She starts her day at 6 am with checking the weather on her Iphone. Next, she checks the stock market while she rolls off her bed, and watches the headlines news while heading to work, located in Dae Chi dong. After a long, excruciating day at work, she sends off some immediate email responds as response to her colleagues while returning home on the subway. Like this illustrates, With this example, it can seen clearly that more and more korean people Koreans are infused with the use of their smart phone use for its convenience. To reprimand the use of these widely distributed communication devices is very unreasonable and more importantly, somewhat impossible. To sum up, the use of cell phones may cause irritation to some public transportation passengers, but this is just a minimal damage because citizens of the contemporary era are better educated in with proper manners public etiquette. Considering the already heavy infusion of smart phones into Korean's lifestyles, it is irrational to believe that the restriction on the restricting use of mobiles will be possible, and such intolerance is an infringement on individuals to individuals’ lifestyles.
|