Rebutting the "More Cell Phones than Toliets" argument
July 2, 2010 9:58 AM   Subscribe

Where did the "In X Country, there are more cell phones (or people on social media) than flush toliets" meme come from? And thoughts on why people persist on throwing out this data point?

How I wish there was a Bureau of Internet Memes I could write a complaint letter to!

I've noticed several articles lately about economic development that throw out a statement about how in a certain country (I've seen it for both India and Kenya), there are more people who have cell phones than flush toilets. Depending on the article, it's used an a example of how private good is more prized than public good. Or I've seen it used as an example of how Western consumer culture is warping people's priorities and making them more concerned with status than basic health/needs. I'm wondering if there's a way to trace the provenance of this meme and some good ways of rebutting it beyond my own anecdotal experience. Also since it's been awhile since I've been in school, this is a false dichotomy, right? Or is it another type of rhetorical argument that's actually based on assumptions that have no connection.


Personally, it drives me crazy every time I see somebody use this statistic. I was in the Peace Corps and lived in a village where yes, it was easier for me to get a cell phone than it was for me to have access to a flush toliet. I was shocked at first and would've agreed with the argument that something was wrong. But the longer I lived in that situation (and traveled in the developing world), the more I realized that the type of resources and infrastructure you need for a cell phone network versus running water/indoor plumbing are two completely different creatures. For the situation I was living in, having a latrine was actually the more practical and sustainable solution because we didn't have an easily accessible source of running water nearby. You could put in plumbing and build a toliet, but if there's no water it won't work.

This kind of stat also drives me nuts because I find it a little condescending because you could make the same argument about rural communities in the US. Like I know the farm that my mom's family owned didn't get electricity or running water until the Tennessee Valley Authority.
posted by gov_moonbeam to Technology (11 answers total)
 
I've never heard the toilet stat, but the first I heard of anything like this for cellphones was about 10 years ago when I heard that Finland was the first country to have more cellphones than landlines.
posted by rhizome at 10:06 AM on July 2, 2010


I think the better point to make is that in much of the world, it is now easier to get a cell phone than a land-line. Like plumbing, telephone lines require a level of infrastructure that cell phones do not. It's interesting though I don't think it proves something about selfishness or personal vs. community values or some shit.

I think one relevant rebuttal to a critique of a lack of flush toilets is that they are completely environmentally irresponsible, and although many community health problems in poor countries would be improved by better sanitation, flush toilets are not the only or best answer to sanitation problems and are absurd in situations with limited fresh water - which is a huge swath of the world.
posted by serazin at 10:25 AM on July 2, 2010 [1 favorite]


Unfortunately I don't have an answer for you, but you could as far as a Bureau of Internet Memes-type solution you could try KnowYourMeme.com or the Snopes.com message boards. Someone at either of those places might have the Google-Fu to find your answer.
posted by geekchic at 10:26 AM on July 2, 2010


Or is it another type of rhetorical argument that's actually based on assumptions that have no connection.

When I've heard this particular type of anecdote, it's usually just an illustrative tool about relative levels of poverty and the general lack of social services. "You'd think that Country A would have had Problem X solved by now, since we've had Problem X solved for decades. Strange, huh?"

It's a way of saying, "Country A is so poor, they still have not reached Country B's level of prosperity on this specific metric, which the people of Country B now consider a ubiquitous concept available to anyone."
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 10:28 AM on July 2, 2010


Best answer: Also since it's been awhile since I've been in school, this is a false dichotomy, right? Or is it another type of rhetorical argument that's actually based on assumptions that have no connection.

I think it's more of a non sequitur. The argument you are describing is basically, "There are more cell phones than flush toilets, therefore Western consumer culture is a higher priority than basic needs." Even if the first statement is true, it does not necessarily imply the conclusion. As you said, the practical logistics of creating an infrastructure for flush toilets may be significantly more difficult than the logistics of creating a cell phone network that can support an equal number of phones. I think the best way to refute the argument is to continue on that path of explaining why flush toilets might not exist everywhere and why cell phones are becoming ubiquitous, regardless of any cultural preferences.
posted by burnmp3s at 10:28 AM on July 2, 2010 [3 favorites]


I think it makes an interesting statement about what different cultures see as a priority. The statement itself doesn't need to have any judgement attached to it, although the reader may bring that with them. The context of the statement ie the rest of the paragraph/article would be the telling point.
posted by ThatCanadianGirl at 10:28 AM on July 2, 2010


I always heard this as "...more TVs than flush toilets" and it has been around at least 20 years.
posted by monkeymadness at 10:41 AM on July 2, 2010


Best answer: It is really more of a statement of (2, unrelated) facts than an argument that needs rebutting; either it is true for a given country or it isn't. In the sense of a response that shows that it is sort of a meaningless factoid, you could always offer a analogous argument about a developed country. "The United States has more cell phones than people with health insurance", for example. (Which is true according to a little googling for the numbers).
posted by TedW at 10:54 AM on July 2, 2010


The rhetorical point they're trying to make is, "Why are these people spending money on such high-tech frippery when basic needs are unsolved?"
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 12:58 PM on July 2, 2010


I'm trying to find the link, but can't at present, however I heard an article recently about a 'toilet activist' in Cambodia who stated the fact that: there were more mobile phones in Cambodia than proper toilets. The context of that statement in the conversation was that this activist wanted to make toilets a status symbol of modernity just as the mobile phone has become.
posted by Kerasia at 2:50 PM on July 2, 2010


Best answer: I agree with monkeymadness, and a little googling suggests it derives from a datapoint about the 1960 United States Census that was in a UPI wire service article. I found the same meme repeated for the French in 1975, the UK in 1986 and Japan in 1992 (sometimes the comparison was to bathtubs instead of toilets).
posted by dhartung at 10:36 PM on July 2, 2010


« Older How can I fit in socially at work?   |   Name This Tune Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.