Try to reach out and touch someone these days, and you're likely to get your hand slapped.

Want to sell goods, services or ideas to American households? Hold the phone, or you might violate state or national "do not call" lists. Watch out if you send mass e-mails, because Congress wants to drop the hammer on spammers.

And if you go door-to-door, you might violate a local law such as the do-not-knock ordinance that took effect Saturday in Villa Hills, one of several such measures in Greater Cincinnati.

What's going on? Why are we beginning to resemble a nation of Garbos who "vant to be left alone"?

The usual explanation holds that families are "cocooning" these days with broadband computers, home theater equipment and other entertainment options. We're exercising control over environment in a world that seems to lack control.

But there may be more to it than that. "The big picture is there's so many people now that we can't deal with it," said Peter B. Crabb, associate professor of psychology at Penn State University, and an expert on the social impact of technology. "For most of human history, we lived in smaller groups. We don't know how to handle the problem of a huge, mass society where everyone has his own agenda. So conflicts are arising."

The business agenda, Crabb said, is obvious: "Get into homes. Get people's attention. Get things sold." The problem is, he added, technology keeps creating new "channels" of communication that help people pursue competing agendas.

At one time, the only channel was the front door. Now there's radio, TV, telephone, e-mail, cell phones, Web cams, pop-up ads and more. Coming soon are interactive digital TV and wearable computers. Pittsburgh's Carnegie-Mellon Institute is developing a new cell phone called the SenSay, which uses position, biometric and environmental sensors to give callers not only the user's location, but also data on what he's doing - walking, driving, exercising or even dancing in a nightclub.

"People have never had to deal with such complexity before," Crabb said, "so they are scrambling to figure out how to deal with intrusive phone calls, junk e-mail and the like. People are just making it up as they go along."

It's invasion of privacy, and more: It's information overload, forcing our society to adapt.

"The larger the scale of society, the more conflicts," Crabb said. "And the bigger a society gets, the more rules and regulations it must adopt to solve those conflicts."

That may explain the growing popularity of "do-not-(fill-in-the-blank)" laws. The national Do Not Call registry in particular has created a heightened expectation of privacy - an expectation it may not be able to meet. The 45 million-plus Americans who signed onto the national list as a magic solution may be in for a shock.

"Problems are coming because of the many exemptions the laws provide," said Sue Godar, professor of marketing at William Paterson University in New Jersey. "Once people realize there are all these exemptions, there's going to be a backlash against the politicians who sold us this solution."

The federal list exempts fundraising by non-profit groups and charities, media survey calls, opinion firms' polling, market researchers and solicitations by political parties and candidates. The consumer group Private Citizen, which has fought telemarketing abuse since 1988, estimates the list will block only 25 percent of telemarketing calls.

Sellers are already finding ways to circumvent the list, with some commercial telemarketers posing as market researchers and pollsters, Godar said. Such deceptive tactics turn consumers off.

"As a marketing researcher, I am concerned about people violating ethical standards," she said. "I'm concerned that legitimate researchers will be damaged. We're already hearing that some pollsters are having trouble doing their research since the no-call list."

If the registry loses its effect, what will Americans do? Raise the stakes with more technology, adding to the spam filters, telezappers, security cameras and other creative solutions we've adapted.

"The answering machine was clearly the first telecommunications 'fix' to enforce privacy, but that was an accident," Crabb said. "It wasn't intended to screen calls, but take messages when you were out. The screening function was incidental - but now, as people have adapted it, it's as important as the message function."

The problem is, technology changes our behavior in ways we don't even understand, manipulating us far more than we manipulate it. When camcorders first came on the market, tensions arose as people started videotaping total strangers. Likewise, cell phones have changed the way people act in public, leading to conflicts in theaters, classrooms and other settings.

The new camera phones have complicated matters, with some schools and health clubs banning them from locker rooms and similar intimate situations.

To Crabb, this begs some questions: Do we really need these new gadgets? Do they threaten our privacy further? Why do we buy them? "Nobody ever asked for a cell phone with a camera," he said. "I'm for designing behavior the right way in the first place. We should ask: Does society really need these devices? Are they causing intrusions, disorder and conflict? Or are they going to be useful things?"

His solution might seem as radical as a "do not call" list would have seemed generations ago:

"I envision a government agency, like the Food and Drug Administration, that would look at proposed products, test them for their social consequences, and approve or not approve them," Crabb said. "That is perfectly reasonable for government to do."

But what's a reasonable solution to some is an unreasonable intrusion on innovation and the free market to others.

Regulating what products consumers are allowed to have could lessen our privacy and sense of control over our lives. Government could monitor our homes and guarantee our privacy from all outside forces - except government.

There must be a better way. If you think of one, let us know.

You can call, e-mail or knock. We don't mind being bothered.

About Villa Hills' 'no-knock' policy

As of 4 p.m. Friday, 98 households had signed up on the "zero knock" list at the city building of Villa Hills, which has 8,000 residents. The law took effect Saturday. The Villa Hills law does not exempt any groups, not even non-profit organizations such as the Girl Scouts, but residents must register a complaint before authorities can take action. First-time offenders face a $250 fine and could spend up to 90 days in jail. Each subsequent offense calls for a $500 fine and up to a year in jail. The city is developing a "no-knock" sticker for households that do not want door-to-door sales visits.

---

Ray Cooklis is a member of the Enquirer Editorial Board. E-mail him at rcooklis@enquirer.com