Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Wi-Fi Allergy a PR Stunt

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the hope-he-made-his-buck dept.

ADiamond writes "There is no Wi-Fi allergy. The English DJ claiming a Wi-Fi sensitivity, chronicled earlier, was a PR stunt to promote his new album. It would appear that the stunt was highly successful, appearing in multiple high-profile media outlets like The Sun, The Telegraph, and Fox News. The article at Ars goes on to discuss the evidence, or lack-thereof, of electromagnetic spectrum sensitivity."

10 of 174 comments (clear)

  1. It's Times Like These ... by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... I wish downloading an artists album without paying actually did do the artist physical/economic harm. Here's to hoping that later in life he suffers from an actual ailment while everyone ignores him.

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:It's Times Like These ... by Smidge204 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not to worry, if we use a high enough signal power I'm sure we can get a reaction of some kind.

      A few megawatts should just about do it.
      =Smidge=

  2. Oh, very fning funny by geekoid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Now this story will linger as 'common knowledge' for years and rational people will have to cnstantly explain it was a PR stunt.

    Well done jackass, you've made the world a worse place.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:Oh, very fning funny by Seumas · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Both, plus the news outlets covering it. Everyone knows "wi-fi allergy" has already been disproved, which means there is no story. They might as well be running news articles and segments about how some guy claims to have gotten aids from a hug. UNLESS, they're covering it with the same "what a moron" treatment they would give that "woman claims daughter got pregnant from swimming pool" moron. But of course, they didn't. They sensationalized it because that's easier than spending three minutes googling the truth. Most of today's "journalists" can sucking cuck a fock, as far as I care.

    2. Re:Oh, very fning funny by geekoid · · Score: 3, Insightful

      He's feeding into a belief. Anyone claiming to ahve this problem while knowing it's not possible is a much bigger jack-ass then people who ignorantly think this can be true.

      Of course, the biggest jack asses are the one where you show all the studies and the still refuse to change there minds.
      Did I say jackass? I meant moron.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    3. Re:Oh, very fning funny by Thaelon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Quick, put it on Snopes.com.

      It's the best we can do for now.

      --

      Question everything

  3. Re:would suck if someone somewhere was actually by adolf · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's attitudes like that which keep people reclusive when actually do experience strange things (whether medical, mental, metaphysical -- whatever strange means today).

    Some people are attention-whores, for sure. And some of those people make stuff up. The rest of the world, though - they'd probably rather keep their strangeness to themselves, than to be studied like a lab rat.

    You're talking about human beings, not creatures which we need to find in order to "be able to study them."

    --
    Kid-proof tablet..
  4. Should be classified as fraud by syousef · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Misleading and deceiving people for notoriety and financial gain. How the fuck is this not fraud?

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
  5. Re:Tried before with success.. by ivan_w · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Awww.. come on !

    The dihydrogen monoxide/hydric acid/hydrane stunt was just *brilliant* !

    --Ivan

  6. Re:would suck if someone somewhere was actually by sexconker · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Except they don't suffer from "this" affliction.
    If they can't pass a double blind test, then the affliction doesn't exist.