I'm Not Saying Anything, But….

They are at it again.

Last week, The Daily Mail newspaper published an article by Powerwatch’s Alasdair Philips. One of his periodical pieces on the dangers of mobile technology, “Is Wi-Fi Frying Our Brains?” attempted – with mixed results – to get the message across to the public in an easily-understandable way, by using examples that most people could identify with; the efffects and risks from heavy mobile use, reports of dropping sperm counts, rising cases of depression, links to dementia, and so on.

The approach was also characterised by repeated assertions of his own technological background and knowledge, obviously to nullify the usual “this idiot doesn’t know what he’s taking about” accusations that follow any such article. Also, and more damagingly, the content appeared to have been watered-down to include unnecessary caveats and backtracking statements suggesting that any dangers still had not been confirmed or proven.

This is, of course, absolute nonsense and what makes it worse is that Alasdair Philips knows this. He believes passionately in the very real harm that Wi-Fi, EMRs and mobile technology in general can cause, and are already causing to a widespread degree.  So why neuter his own genuine argument?

Quite simply, no media outlet will allow the truth about microwave radiation via mobile phones and telecom base stations to be published. There always has to be that caveat, the disclaimer, the air of weakness in the author’s case against the technology, for it to be palatable to them.

So, men like Mr. Philips compromise their position, and their beliefs, in the hope of raising awareness. They run the gauntlet of abuse, ridicule and accusations of impartiality because they are involved in an organisation, a company, which recommends and sells a range of products to combat the symptomatic effects of culminative exposure to EMRs. Yet those who try to discredit an opinion on the basis of vested interest are happy to accept the Government and the Telecoms industry’s continued insistence that wi-fi, mobile phones and phone masts are all totally safe, ignoring the fact that literally billions of pounds’ worth of investment and projected income are behind their claims!

 ”Is Wi-Fi Frying Our Brains?” wasn’t a great piece in terms of arguing the case against mobile technology. It seemed necessarily aimed at a particular audience, and written with them in mind, trying to break through the carefully created wall of ignorance perpetuated by the media through endless, sexy advertising.

Many points were flawed, shocking facts were swiftly passed over, and the only suggestion given to us in the battle to protect ourselves from this onslaught of penetrating radiation was to move somewhere remote. Given that plans are already afoot to bring saturated wireless broadband to every nook and cranny of the United Kingdom, it isn’t the most helpful advice. A sense of defeatism also permeated the latter third of the article; while it is entirely apparent that MPs, councils, health organisations and news outlets are all committed to a wall of silence over the subject, it is wrong to simply accept it and do nothing more. On that point, I can see why detractors would criticise Mr. Philips’ attitude; the ultimate tone of the article makes it seem he is saying “there’s nothing you can do, except purchase one of my products”.

So far, so very predictable. The Daily Mail has a history of putting supposedly ES-sympathetic material in its print and online editions – usually with a hopeful headline – only to make sure it undermines the argument by the article’s end. There have also been cases of blatantly pro-Wi-Fi pieces published on their website (see my earlier blog post “Recycled Rubbish”) which quickly have their “comments” section disabled to prevent any meaningful debate.

It is this refusal to countenance a balanced outlook on the subject that leaves The Daily Mail looking like hypocrites. Championing populist, Middle-England, middle class injustice is all very well if you are not simultaneously silencing discussion on a divisive topic such as this. Of the first 88 reader comments that were posted in response to Alasdair Philip’s article, early reaction was primarily of growing concern; several people shared tales of how much their lives have been affected by this rampant growth of Wi-Fi-related technology. There were obviously the usual mob of dissenters and deniers, though fewer than is often the case.

However, perhaps having been tipped off about the piece’s existence, a flood of negative responses began to follow. Many were near-identical to the type seen during the summer of 2009 on The Daily Telegraph’s website, when a then-Science Editor (since promoted) wrote a withering, ill-informed attack on anyone who thinks this technology is harmful. It was pathetic nonsense, but the mob loved it. The Daily Telegraph made no attempt to moderate some of the nastier comments, in fact the author effectively encouraged the abuse by making no secret of his own hostile stance to the idea of Wi-Fi causing problems.

This was in contrast to The Daily Mail’s subversive approach where they pretend to be concerned about the health effects yet do their best to undermine or censor any views that might jeopardise their relationship with the Telecom firms. Just the weekend before “Is Wi-Fi Frying Our Brains?” appeared, the inside front spread of The Mail On Sunday was a huge advertisement for the new Daily Mail e-newspaper iPhone app. “Download it wirelessly!” they excitedly intoned. All newspapers and TV stations are doing the same, of course, since revenues are tumbling and they need to surivive in the digital age (blah blah…) but it leaves them in a tricky situation. If they put too much doubt in the public’s mind over the safety of using their Smartphones and iPhones and Blackberries, they lose money. They lose readers. They may eventually go bust. Likewise, the phone companies will be none too pleased, since they will also stand to lose customers.

And that is what it’s all about, really. What everything seems to be about. Money. Nevermind the damage to our health, our sanity, our futures. Nevermind journalistic integrity or the right to free speech. Nevermind the need to show both sides of an argument in a fair manner. Just let the “Total rubbish! Go and buy a tin foil hat” remarks through, and make sure the “hang on, shouldn’t we have a choice about all this?” comments are kept to a minimum and, if necessary, close the topic to any comments if the latter outweigh the former.

And that’s all right, isn’t it.