There’s been an interesting development over the promotion by a UK company, 118800, of a directory of cellphone numbers. The service has been available since June, but suddenly it’s off the air. For non-UK readers: the “118…” company name reflects the UK’s assignment of 118xxx phone numbers for directory services.
The UK media covered the story in June, interviewing 118800 executives and covering privacy concerns. The privacy regulator had approved the new service. That doesn’t mean they like it – that’s not their job. All it means is it doesn’t appear to contravene applicable law.
But approval did require an easy opt out. Most of the stories covering the new service publicised how to do this. Registering to protect your number as ex-directory (XD) is indeed easy, from either your phone or (the way I did it, on Thursday) from the web. And there’s no reason to disbelieve the message that came back saying that my details would not now be published.
It was actually a well thought out service, from the privacy point of view. It wouldn’t release numbers. What it would do – will do, if it gets up and running – is to offer the call to the target number and then connect the call.
Well … I registered😄 on Thursday, following an email which was circulated, chain-letter style, from a relative. The alert said that😄 registration had to be completed by Monday. I don’t know if that was actually the case, in fact I rather doubt it; but, real or otherwise, it triggered me to do the deed.
Today, two days later, the service’s web presence is reduced to one page which says Service suspended whilst we make improvements and goes on to say … whilst we undertake major developments to our ‘Beta Service’ to improve the experience for our customers. Everything’s suspended, including the ability to go😄. This is progress from yesterday when, as reported by a Taily Telegraph‘s columnist, the service was just “unavailable”.
Now I emphasise that this is pure speculation, but I wonder if so many people have gone onto the site to have their data protected that either the site crashed under the pressure, or the promoters have decided the service isn’t viable after all.
What’s interesting is the light it sheds on our understanding of the “Facebook generation”. It’s usually reckoned that the Facebook and Twitter generation – who are also the mobile phone generation – are less protective of their personal space. They tweet about all kinds of things and publish a wide range of pictures and content on Facebook which many people can see. But, if my guesses are right, it seems that my mobile phone number is still my castle. Even for Generation Y, there are limits.
And here’s another thought. I de-registered with 118800. Yet, if I could swallow the £1 fee for each use (whether they have the number or not) plus whatever charge is made for actually connecting the call, it’s the kind of service I might well use. I freely admit there’s a contradiction here. I want to protect my data, but I’d like to be able to see other people’s. But then, I trust me. I don’t trust unknown people on the other side of a 118800 account.
What do you think?
• Screenshot: 118800.co.uk captured on 11 Jul 2009
• 118800: Has the privacy backlash already begun?, Basheera Khan, Daily Telegraph blogs, 10 Jul 2009
• Mobile phone directory to launch, BBC, 9 Jun 2009
• I have failed to locate Connectivity UK (the parent company, based in Theale, Berks) on the web. If you know their website, please let me know.
• Incidentally you can still find quite a lot of 118800 website content by doing a Google search and looking at the cached pages.