United Airlines Cracking Down On Those Blasting Audio On Loudspeaker (Among Other Things)

I don’t know if it’s a generational thing, or just increasingly common behavior thanks to the growth of TikTok, but it’s surprising to see so many playing music and videos on full blast on the cellphones with no care in the world. It’s fine if you do that at home, but not so much when you’re in confined public spaces like on a bus, a train, and especially on airplanes.

With the roll out of free, high-speed internet across its fleet, United Airlines has quietly updated its contract of carriage to cover a few problematic issues they predict might arise. A user in the United Airlines subreddit highlighted the changes that took effect on February 27, 2026, most of them targeting internet and media consumption. There’s also one major change which broadens its crackdown on those trying to take advantage of ticket pricing loopholes.

Passengers required to wear headphones when listening to audio or video content

According to Rule 21 (Refusal of Transport), Section H (Safety), item 22, United Airlines now has the right to refuse transport if passengers do not use headphones to listen to audio or video content.

United previously encouraged its customers use headphones when playing any media with audio, but now that this has been firmed up on their contract, it makes it easier for them to enforce the policy if the passenger proves problematic.  

This is one policy I agree with since blasting audio at full volume seems to be a common trend these days. Thankfully it does not seem too prominent on airplanes, but I have seen first hand cases of passengers playing videos through their speaker during flight.

Viewing offensive content can also result in denial of service

Rule 21 (Refusal of Transport), Section H (Safety), item 1 which covers a number of offensive items, has been updated to include viewership of said content.

“Passengers or Passengers’ Service Animals whose conduct is unlawful; indecent, lewd, or sexual in nature (including viewing offensive content); harassing; disruptive; disorderly; offensive; abusive; unsanitary; or violent.”

Credit: United Airlines

With the ability to easily view live streamed and video on demand content thanks to faster internet speeds, it wouldn’t be surprisingly if you find more than the one-off passenger taking the chance to view their favorite “red” websites. The rule obviously isn’t limited to that, but I suspect that will be case for most who try to view anything offending.

Video calls banned as well

United has expanded its ban on calls, now covering video calls as well. Rule 21 (Refusal of Transport), Section H (Safety), item 19 has been updated as follows: “Passengers who are unwilling to follow UA’s policies that prohibit voice or video calls after the aircraft doors have closed, while taxiing in preparation for takeoff, or while airborne.”

I’m guessing United will put blocks in place (if they already have not) to prevent access to certain types of applications, IP addresses and domain, and application types, but they have still officially added video calls to their ban list, making it easier to enforce.

Starlink boasts exceptional download speeds for a satellite internet provider, but this is possible mainly because they have heavily prioritize download traffic sped over uploads. As a result, multiple passengers video calling can easily clog up their upload bandwidth limits, making the general experience bad for everyone on the flight. On top of that, no one really wants to hear your phone conversation on a flight.

Ticket pricing circumvention policies broadened

United is broadening its rules regarding ticket pricing, because they don’t like when you take advantage of loopholes they inadvertently created. Prior to the update, Rule 6 (Tickets), Section J (Prohibited Practices), item 3 covered specific cases such as booking roundtrip tickets on certain days in order to take advantage of discounts (e.g. booking multiple roundtrip tickets which included a Saturday night stay but avoiding the Saturday by using them out of sequence).

Those traveling between two destinations multiple times weekly are the main offenders, as they mix and match tickets (which both include a Saturday night stay) in order to fly between two destinations within the week (e.g. Monday to Friday) while still taking advantage of the Saturday night discount.

The updated line item has been expanded to any ticket type and covers filed fares, inventory controls, and tariff rules.

It says, “the use of Flight Coupons from two or more different Tickets for the purpose of circumventing and/or undercutting filed fares, inventory controls or applicable tariff rules (including, but not limited to, advance purchase/minimum stay requirements) commonly referred to as “Back-to-Back Ticketing” is prohibited by UA.”

An example of undercutting fares would be buying two separate one-way tickets rather than a roundtrip ticket if the two one-way tickets are cheaper. For more international airlines like Emirates for instance, it’s not always cheaper to buy one-way tickets, with one-way sometimes costing almost the same as the roundtrip equivalent. However, you often see the reverse with airlines offering lots of connections (e.g. within the United States) resulting in one-way fares sometimes being cheaper than the roundtrip equivalent.

With regard to inventory control, a flight from New York to Los Angeles may be much more expensive than a flight from New York to Boise and back. This is just part of their complex machine to control supply and demand. More in-demand routes may go at a premium so that seats don’t sell out too quickly, with the added benefit of being able to make more money. Less popular routes typically are cheaper so airplanes don’t fly empty.

What some customers may do is book separate tickets, with one going from New York to Boise, and the other going from Boise to Los Angeles. As a result, their overall total spent is much less than flying non-stop from New York to LA. It’s kinda like another version of skiplagging, except you’re just adding more legs to your route to save a few bucks.

While I understand the need for price controls to balance out seat availability, this update appears to be a bit overreaching as not all customers buying separate tickets are intentionally trying to cheat the system. Maybe they need to fly to one city for a short meeting before continuing on to another for a trade show. I suspect if United does go after anyone for fare circumvention, it would be done on a case-by-case basis, and would require a bit of investigating to prove their case (e.g. looking for historical patterns, determining if fares are much cheaper with segmented legs rather than booking non-stop).

Sign up for the free Gate Checked newsletter here sent three times weekly.