On phones in clubs

Introduction

It’s become common at the ’trendy’ (read the scare quotes how you will) clubs of London to ban or limit use of phones either inside the premises or on the dancefloor. FOLD in Canning Town follows the Berliners in making you put a sticker over your camera on entry, and you will be removed (or at least given a stern warning) if seen trying to take photos. Fabric similarly prohibits unauthorised photos and videos – though doesn’t state anywhere what will happen if you violate this policy (however there was a recent incident where they were forced to act). Phonox discourages any use of phones on the dancefloor at all.

I’m broadly sympathetic to these moves by clubs, though I think there are a few things to clarify. There are a few different reasons clubs/people give for banning phones, and also a few different ways phones can be banned: I find some more convincing than others.

Firstly, on different ways phones could be banned. There are a number of different bans: (1) a ban on phone use tout court; (2) a ban on dancefloor phone use; (3) a ban specifically on photography; (4) a ban specifically on dancefloor photography. Each of these has its own set of (overlapping) justifications.

Secondly, on justifications for the phone bans of various kinds. Those I could identify are: (a) you harm an individual’s ability to express themself freely (or perhaps safely) when you introduce the possibility of that individual’s actions being captured and shared; (b) you inhibit your own enjoyment of the night by focusing on capturing videos rather than ’living in the moment’; (c) you damage others’ enjoyment of the night by waving your phone around. I’ll proceed by examining (a)-(c), then see where this leaves us regarding (1)-(4).

An initial point should be made clear: I am not here considering how people ought to act inside venues where these rules already exist, but rather whether venues should make these rules at all: if you use your phone (not in the interests of safety) in a manner not prohibited by the venue’s policies, then I think you are in the wrong. Anyway, onwards.

Why ban phones?

(a): you harm an individual’s ability to express themselves freely.

I think this is very important, and it is in my opinion the strongest case against phones in clubs (though which of (1)-(4) this implies I will get to below). Maintaining clubs (or at least, certain clubs) as places where people are able to cut loose and express themselves without fear of being judged or exposed more widely is integral to their existence. This idea has its roots in, and is certainly still by far most relevant for, liberationary movements – queer spaces have long emphasised the importance of freedom and privacy (and for many this is as much about personal safety as it is enjoyment of the night – especially in social contexts where intolerant opinions still prevail). That said, I think it applies to us all to a degree: aren’t you able to enjoy a night of dancing like a nutter more when you don’t have at the back of your mind that your actions might come to haunt you the next day, especially if they may be shared with a significantly wider circle of peers than those who know you in ‘clubbing mode’?[^1] For many, the purpose of clubbing exactly consists in freedom of expression and freedom from judgement: if we get in the way of this then we’ve taken away their reasons to go clubbing (bad for the clubs) and their ability to do something they enjoy (bad for them). How (modulo footnote 1) could someone’s ability to use their phone trump this?

(b): you inhibit your own enjoyment of the night by focusing on capturing videos.

I have some limited sympathy for this argument: clearly if you spend 90% of a night recording videos to show your friends the next day (who, trust me, will never think said videos are as cool as you do), your priorities are off. However I’m also too young not to find the evangelising tone of (usually) older folks banging on about the ‘right’ and ' wrong’ way to enjoy things quite annoying. (I don’t record loads, and I definitely enjoy the nights I go to a lot, but sometimes it’s nice – if permitted – to have a few clips of tunes I liked to look back on – I really do look at them!) I’m not sure there is a fact of the matter about the ‘right’ way for a randomly chosen person to experience a night, or even that there’s a fact of the matter about the ‘wrong’ way to do so (usual vague caveats apply: insofar as no harm is being caused etc). Policing actions in a club is one thing, and in many cases is entirely justified, but I think a line is being crossed when we start defining the way people ought to enjoy things. We wouldn’t (in general) require that someone dance in a particular way or consume any particular substance, so why require that they make no recordings of the night? Is that really a can of worms we want to open?

It might be argued that this is an unfair interpretation of the point being made: ‘we’re not saying that you have to not go on your phone, only that if you do it less you’ll enjoy your night more!’ I’m sympathetic to this, but it’s hardly sufficient to justify restricting phone usage. A case also sometimes made, which I’m not going to delve into here, but hopefully elsewhere, is that you shouldn’t record DJ sets out of respect for the secrecy/exclusivity of the tunes they’re playing: maybe Pangaea doesn’t want you to ID and then rip his (all-but unreleased) edit of ‘Must Be Higher’, maybe life was cooler when people didn’t know it was an edit of ‘Lions of Judah’ that Four Tet always rinsed. All I’ll say here is I’m unsure of my stance on this, but as yet unconvinced that it justifies restricting phone usage in any formal way.

(c): you inhibit others’ enjoyment of the night by waving your phone around.

An important initial caveat: the sense in which you’re inhibiting others’ enjoyment here is intended as distinct from the sense intended in (a). I.e. this is about people who get annoyed or distracted by the presence of phones, rather than those who feel their privacy has been violated. With this said, I find this point quite unconvincing. Per the above, I’m certainly not in the business of telling people how to enjoy themselves on a night out, though I would humbly suggest that if your enjoyment is sufficiently fragile that the sight of a phone screen ruins it, then maybe you should go to better nights (and if it really is impossible for you to enjoy a night unless you don’t see any phones: unlucky, I guess). That isn’t to say that the TikToks of Hedex at Printworks with a million phone screens recording an incredibly average double aren’t intuitively a bit jarring, it’s just to say that I’m inclined to see that as more of a me problem (and certainly not one best solved by banning phones in clubs).

A parallel: I get quite annoyed when I’m on the dancefloor and there are two (usually coked-up) blokes standing next to me who spend the entire set yelling in each others ears. Notwithstanding that their voices do genuinely get in the way of the music – easily fixed by just moving away – it should be clear that my finding this annoying is very much a ‘me problem’, and not one you should fix by banning people from talking on the dancefloor. You could argue that rather than a club-enforced rule, what should be argued for here is a social norm: you shouldn’t talk on the dancefloor (though we won’t do anything about it if you do). I might agree with this, in that I do think establishing social norms around some aspects of clubbing could be a good thing, but I’m not sure if I’d want one here or not – in any case it’s not too relevant here.

Where does this leave us?

With the above said, we can now move to consider what it implies about (1)-(4). Given that the only thing I really care about is people’s right to privacy, I think I’m most in favour of (3) or (4). More than this, since I don’t think it’s really possible to effectively enforce (4) – no dancefloor photography – and not (3) – no photography at all – (what if you take a picture of the dancefloor whilst not on the dancefloor? what if you are taking a picture of not-the-dancefloor but accidentally capture a bit of the dancefloor? who the hell can be bothered to check all this stuff?), and also because I’m not really sure why the right to privacy in a club should be restricted to the dancefloor, (3) seems most compelling.

(1), unless planned very carefully and well-established seems pretty unworkable: being able to go out to the smoking area and text your mate to ask where they are is a good thing and we should keep that. This doesn’t preclude venues giving it a go: if everyone was properly prepared and willing to commit to it I’m sure it could be fun, but as a general practice I don’t think I’d be too keen on it.

Though I’ve made it clear in my discussion of (b) and (c) above that I’m weakly sympathetic to the thought behind (2) – no phones on the dancefloor – I’m certainly not convinced enough of it that I think it should be made any club’s official policy, for the reasons given in that discussion.

Conclusion

I suppose in all of this rather than saying what I think every club in London should do, I’ve really been stating and justifying (part of) the blueprint for the sort of club that I think music-enjoyers-like-me might like to attend. Clearly most of what I’ve said above applies primarily to a particular type of night out: I don’t think it’s as critical that Embargo bans photography as, say, FOLD, because there are different people attending with different intentions. In particular, what’s crucial to making the above work is that people have a reasonable expectation that the dancefloor of whatever club we’re discussing can be a safe space for free expression and enjoyment – this is certainly true of FOLD, Fabric, and friends, and (I would argue) not of Embargo and co.

If I had to summarise the argument then, I think it would be this: (i) it is important that spaces for free expression exist (and they do!); (ii) photography can inhibit the freedom of these spaces; (iii) it is therefore justified to restrict photography in these spaces. As an additional caveat: ‘finding phones annoying’ and attempts to police how people enjoy their nights are not good enough reasons to restrict phone usage, and over-the-top moralising over this is annoying :)

Footnotes

[^1] It is worth noting that a counter-argument could be made that in enabling such behaviour, we are also enabling bad actors (perpetrators of sexual assault, most obviously) for whom the freedom from the possibility of evidence of their actions implies only the ability to do more wrong with impunity. I agree we should do whatever we can to minimise risk to attendees of these places: insofar as phones are concerned this seems an obvious exception, where taking out your phone to record an incident as evidence is an entirely justified protective measure (and if security come over to give you a hard time, simply point out what’s happening in front of you). There is much more to be written (and much which has already been written) on this subject – the role of door policies in protecting attendees for example – though this article doesn’t seem like the best place.