Wednesday, June 27, 2012

WiFi in Schools:
CTV Disguised Infomercial as Investigative Report

CTV, is professional ETHICS part of your journalism?

Industry-funded and industry-affiliated infomercial was disguised as credible science by Bell Canada's CTV News in their investigation on Wi-Fi radiation in schools. This piece is a poor attempt to offer false security to the public by using a flawed protocol and skewed data.

It does not appear that CTV has researched or disclosed any conflict of interest with their expert, Mr. Karl Reardon who conducted the testing.

Mr. Reardon is/was:
  • A former Director and General Manager of Motorola
  • A current industry consultant (Planetworks and Radiowize) with close financial ties to the telecommunication industry
  • Collecting paycheques from consultation on cell tower installations
  • Author of a celltower guidebook for the Municipal Engineers
  • Holder of seven US and EU patents on wireless and data technology
  • Chief Technology Officer of Wireless Image whose sole business is the sale of mobile advertising solutions for cellphones.

Did CTV not bother to conduct proper "investigation" on your expert's conflict of interest before presenting this one-sided, crippled testing to stroke the backs of the wireless industry?

This might only be a quick story for your program, but this is an important issue to parents for the health of numerous children. To parents who have electrosensitive children, this is even a matter of whether the child can attend school or not.

Instead of engaging an engineer who makes his money from the wireless industry, Bell Canada's CTV should have interviewed experts who understand the low-level effects of non-ionizing microwave radiation on human cells, such as Dr. Martin Blank, Dr. Leif Salford, Dr. Henry Lai, Dr. Andrew Goldworthy, Dr. Magda Havas, and Dr. Olle Johansson among others.


  1. Shame on Bell and CTV for duping the public with this kind of underhanded reporting. I will not look at Jon Woodward's news in the same way again!

  2. Jon Woodward’s claim that the danger of Wi-Fi is "overblown" is a condescending and ultimately negligent one in the face of sound and mounting evidence that Wi-Fi is biologically harmful, especially for children. His so-called “reality check” is housed in a slanted and over-simplified investigation aimed at what he sees as poor, beleaguered citizens who, he says, find the issue too “difficult for the average person to understand.” 

    To be relevant and accurate, this demonstration would have been set up very differently. Mr. Reardon, who has long-held and substantial monetary ties to the wireless industry, states, “The signals coming off the Wi-Fi units are so low that they almost don’t register on most equipment, all of them thousands of times below the Health Canada standard.”

None of the numerical readings displayed on Mr. Reardon’s meter were made available to the viewer, and no comparison was given to show that Health Canada “standards,” (not actually standards at all, but merely guidelines) are thousands of times more lenient than those of more responsible and ethically aware countries that are limiting Wi-Fi or removing it completely from their schools after new studies have come to light.

    Canadian citizens are, yet again, pawns in a deadly game of control, with wireless corporations, and corrupt government agencies holding almost all the cards. 

    This atrocious piece of distorted information housed as an "investigation" would never have been accepted by a reputable broadcaster, so this points to the strong possibility that either CTV, owned by Bell Canada, is either very misinformed and gullible, or the persons who pull the strings are complicit in a corrupt cover-up with the wireless industry.

  3. The Internet is a wonderful learning tool, and no one is saying it isn't. In a non-wireless environment it would still be utilized and appreciated. All that would be different in a wired school would be the delivery system. A wired connection will always be safer, faster and more secure, and will not endanger our children’s futures. In many countries, Wi-Fi is being pulled from educational settings after its effects were deemed unsafe. Ultra convenience is not a necessity in education. No school worth its salt puts all their eggs in one basket, and a school with 300 students does not need 300 laptops to function at a high level.

    Whether or not the wireless industry will admit it, wireless has been linked to learning deficits like ADD, concentration problems, decreased mental focus, cognitive effects, headaches, anxiety disorders and depression. The existence of health effects such as heart arrhythmia, nausea, sleep disorders, tinnitus, nausea, dizziness, compounding of allergies, infertility and an increase in childhood cancer, These health effects are supported by research done by highly esteemed scientists and epidemiologists worldwide.

    For another demonstration of Wi-Fi that uses a more responsible approach than that of Planetworks and CTV, perhaps Mr. Reardon would learn something new (to him) from a more informative meter reading demonstration that is paired with some research results and historical background. The filming was done last year in an elementary school that has Wi-Fi. This information was gathered and offered even before the levels of Wi-Fi skyrocketed in our school system and society in general. There was no conflict of interest, and hence this demonstration is far more helpful for parents who would like a more thorough picture of the situation facing their children in school.,16,1347,16,1532,16,1873

  4. I’m not against the use of Wifi, but it is not well advised that the kids have full access with it. Staying up late for this can contribute to their sleep cycles