Uber’s silent mode: aggressively anti-social or just another commodity?
Uber has recently introduced a ‘Quiet Mode’ feature available to all users who order their premium services. This enables the passenger to effectively silence the driver for the entirety of their journey, albeit whilst being charged a higher rate than the standard Uber car.
Immediately, my mind jumps to the problematic nature of this new roll-out; the ability of one person to be able to silence another, at its very core, is troubling. There is a risk of dehumanizing the driver; passengers will be able to get in and out of the car, and travel for however long they wish without exchanging in the briefest of conversations with their driver. Perhaps, in some cases, not even a thank you upon exiting.
It is too simplistic, however, to merely pigeon-hole this issue as an attack on Uber drivers and, more generally, the public service sectors workers. There are cases where the silent mode is not only useful, but necessary. As a young woman, I can fully imagine a situation where the silent mode in an Uber would save embarrassment, nervousness and, sometimes, extreme anxiety. After being separated from friends on a night out, too drunk to get the night-tube home and wise enough to decide against it, Uber is almost always my go-to. In these situations, yes, a quiet and safe journey home is exactly what I would need. But, I’m not sure that’s a good enough reason to completely silence someone and diminish normal, human interaction.
Another, perhaps more deserving example, could be amongst deaf passengers. Silent mode would save the awkwardness, for both parties, in establishing the boundaries of the relationship. Someone suffering from a panic attack in public would be deserving of the solace offered by the silence of an already-established quiet Uber environment.
The rest of us, however, might be better off learning how to navigate everyday social interactions better. Of course, there will be instances where passengers prefer not to engage with their driver and they do arguably, as a paying customer, have the right to do so. There is no harm, however, in establishing this in a polite manner. We must be careful not to completely tailor every aspect of our social interactions to be amongst only those we wish to. There is a danger of communication existing solely with selected friends, partners and colleagues throughout the course of a day: no need to speak to the driver in the Uber on the way to work; ordering your coffee can come without the need to thank the barista through self-order machines/apps; and, if you live in London especially, there’s certainly no desire to have a chat with a fellow commuter.
It would, however, be entirely inappropriate not to give some thought to the Uber drivers themselves. To be silenced by passengers might be an offensive and dehumanizing problem they just have to deal with in order to carry on working; another part of their day where they serve solely to the needs of other people. However, there might also be an argument for Uber drivers enjoying the new feature and the peace and quiet it brings. Perhaps, it might be more fitting for the silent mode feature to work both ways; both passenger and driver have the ability to mute one another. If we’re going to be so anti-social, then at least make it equal, right?
The aggressive anti-social nature of the silent mode feature contains the underlying sentiment of ‘the customer is always right’ and the attitude of ‘well, I’m paying for it’, which is arguably indicative of a wider social issue of our desire to control every perceivable aspect of our lives.
A Twenty-Something Opinion 