I witnessed a spectacular row in a beer garden this summer. My fellow voyeurs and I guessed the couple were on a date — not their first, but perhaps their second or third — and he had checked his notifications too often for her liking.
“Why don’t you just date your phone instead?” she snapped, standing up to leave. “Hope you’re happy together.”
I have edited out a few F-bombs, but that was the gist. Sadly, she drained her drink rather than sloshing it in his face. Reader, I nearly stood up and applauded.
Illustration: Mountain People
“Phubbing” — a portmanteau of “phone snubbing,” or deciding to interact with your mobile phone rather than a person — is a 21st-century epidemic.
Last week, scientists confirmed, as they often do, what we already knew — that phubbing is bad for relationships.
Well, duh.
The study warned that it could even cost you your marriage. Couples who frequently phub experience more marital dissatisfaction. If your husband is a phubbee or your wife is a phone widow, beware.
“When individuals perceive that their partners are phubbing, they feel more conflict and less intimacy,” researchers from Nigde Omer Halisdemir University in Turkey said. “People should be mindful about being present with their loved ones to show they care and put their phone away.”
Amen, my white-coated friends.
I cannot bear being phubbed. The habit is not just rude, it sends a message that actual people matter less than digital ones. You are effectively saying that non-urgent e-mails and the latest Twitter spat are more interesting than a “catch up” with that valued pal you see twice a year. Sorry mate, was my amusing anecdote keeping you from liking Instagram pictures of sunsets?
The ultimate phubbing insult is watching videos or browsing TikTok with the sound up. A friendship-ending offense, frankly.
I am accustomed to being phubbed by my children. Born in the era of smartphones, online gaming and social media, they are part of the “grunt a reply without even looking up” generation. To maintain sanity, we have a strict screen curfew and ban at mealtimes. It is a matter of manners. Boundaries. Standards. Other words that infuriate youngsters.
From partners or peers, phubbing is less forgivable. The average person spends 3 hours, 23 minutes a day on their phone and checks it 58 times. It has become a buzzing, beeping comfort blanket. If you must have it to hand, at least keep it face down out of courtesy. Besides, you can always peep when they nip to the toilet.
When is it OK to phub?
Perhaps when you arrive early at a large meeting and there is a tacit agreement to swerve small talk until everyone arrives. In social situations, only phub for the communal good. This might include finding a funny meme, looking up a fondly remembered recipe or confirming a celebrity’s age, height, whether they are still alive.
When is it not OK?
During dates, mealtimes, work appraisals, weddings, funerals and sex.
There are polite ways to phub. See the old: “Sorry, I’ve got to take this” gesture, or the classic mouthed apology and eye roll in mid-phone conversation. If you must phub, explain why and keep it short.
Awaiting communication from a family member or crucial work news? Fine.
Checking in on the latest Love Island recoupling? Not fine.
A midweek soccer match not involving your team does not qualify, despite how the TV station hypes it up. Be honest and don’t lie about it. I call this “phibbing.”
It also raises the question of what we did in the dark days before mobile phones. Hide behind the newspaper like a grumpy dad? Retreat to the kitchen or garden shed to “potter” (i.e. get some peace and quiet)?
Maybe we stared blankly into space until somebody said “penny for them,” or clicked their fingers in front of our face to snap us out of it. Those people can phub right off.
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to
The US Department of State has removed the phrase “we do not support Taiwan independence” in its updated Taiwan-US relations fact sheet, which instead iterates that “we expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means, free from coercion, in a manner acceptable to the people on both sides of the Strait.” This shows a tougher stance rejecting China’s false claims of sovereignty over Taiwan. Since switching formal diplomatic recognition from the Republic of China to the People’s Republic of China in 1979, the US government has continually indicated that it “does not support Taiwan independence.” The phrase was removed in 2022
US President Donald Trump, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth have each given their thoughts on Russia’s war with Ukraine. There are a few proponents of US skepticism in Taiwan taking advantage of developments to write articles claiming that the US would arbitrarily abandon Ukraine. The reality is that when one understands Trump’s negotiating habits, one sees that he brings up all variables of a situation prior to discussion, using broad negotiations to take charge. As for his ultimate goals and the aces up his sleeve, he wants to keep things vague for
RSS