It is becoming increasingly obvious that the cell phone industry is doing all it can to keep the lid on the cell phone cancer issue by manipulating what appears in the media. Understanding that most people now get their news from television – sadly, less than a majority of people now get their news from newspapers and other print media – the target of the cell phone industry currently is television news. This is because television news is the easiest to manipulate – (see also, the Dan Rather debacle during the last presidential election). Over the past five months there have been several glaring examples, but the one I describe here is illustrative of what is now going on as a matter of course. It is important for the public to see the industry’s playbook so that they can prevent this continuous duping – and consequent public endangerment. Here is the story.

 

Dr. Keith Black, a leading neurologist and surgeon at the prestigious Cedars Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles, told Dr. Sanjay Gupta of CNN that he believed Johnnie’s brain tumor was a result of Johnnie’s excessive cell phone use. Johnnie apparently believed it too, because after he was diagnosed, he is rumored to have bought headsets for all of his employees so that they could move the phone away from their heads and not be endangered as he believed he was. 

 

Dr. Gupta and CNN were quick to do an interview with both Dr. Black and Johnnie Cochran’s daughter. They would not want to be scooped by the competition – Fox News, CNBC, MSNBC and the rest. Dr. Black was a friend of Johnnie Cochran and gave to Dr. Gupta a heartfelt opinion based on discussions he had with his deceased friend and patient. Johnnie’s daughter presented herself as any bereaved child would. Dr. Black did not present scientific studies in his comments – he could have because he is very knowledgeable and has ready access to all of the key information – because he apparently was led to believe this was to be more of a personal interest story, not a medical science story. CNN promptly set Dr. Black and Johnnie’s daughter up for a major bait and switch and a public embarrassment. 

 

Dr. Gupta and CNN, probably unwittingly or unwillingly, fell into the trap set by the industry to “include a counter opinion”. This is one of the tricks that the industry now propagates – neutralize all information that is negative to the industry position by bringing in another scientific opinion – one that they pay for and one they can trust will be favorable. This masquerades as fair journalism, when in fact it is media manipulation.  Medical and public health science should not be relegated to opinion – there are facts in published literature to rely on. But, the industry wants the game to be played on their home court – politics, financial interest pressure and public relations. In the Johnnie Cochran case, the hired gun du jour was some doctor from Emory University who I have never heard of – you can interpret that to mean he has never done any real work in the cell phone health risk area – who gave the industry line that studies do not prove cell phones cause brain cancer. Then, CNN shamefully aired a statement from the industry citing an obscure American Cancer Society report that lists cell phones as one of the ten cancer myths. At the end of the piece, one was left with the impression that Dr. Black and Johnnie Cochran’s daughter were distraught, emotional and uninformed – a characterization that was totally unfair. Most importantly, the viewers were left with the impression that the health risk issue was decided in the favor of the industry – go forth and buy more and more cell phone minutes because it is safe. A message that is wrong, grotesque and extremely dangerous to public health.

 

Of course, CNN and the duped reporter – Dr. Sanjay Gupta who I believe does a great job most of the time – did no investigative work on their own before airing the story. Had they looked into it, they would have found that the doctor from Emory was paid by the industry for work in defending industry interests in litigation and public relations. They would have found a financial link between the American Cancer Society and the cell phone industry – employees from the American Cancer Society testified on behalf of the industry in litigation hearing in Federal Court in Baltimore four years ago. They would have found that virtually every human epidemiology study published to date shows evidence of increased tumor risk. They would have found that the original scientific work raising red flags of risk funded by the cell phone industry itself, the WTR program which I headed, had been corroborated by studies in 15 different laboratories funded by the European Union not six months before.  They would have found very good print journalism summaries of the relevant public health science under the names of the Toronto Star, the Florida Sun-Sentinel, and RCR; under the names of Nancy McVicar and Jeffrey Silva to name just a few.  In short, the news that the science continues to accumulate showing a public health problem has been and continues to be out there for all those who simply look for it. CNN and Dr. Sanjay inexplicably allowed themselves to be used and manipulated. They probably thought no one was watching. 

 

Of course, this is not the first time this has happened with CNN. Several years ago when I was doing interviews regarding the findings of the WTR, I did a piece with Wolf Blitzer – now a senior news anchor at CNN. Wolf is a personal friend of mine – we are both from the Buffalo, New York area and are loyal fans of the George Washington University Colonials basketball team. Unfortunately, after I did the on-camera piece with Wolf, the cell phone industry imposed another hired gun into the system – Dr. Linda Erdreich – to carry the “all is fine” message.  Under the guise of being “fair” the public was again duped. While Wolf made sure what I said was aired in its entirety, the powers that be required that the “counter scientific view” was included as well. Of course, there was no on-air debate which I would have welcomed – just disparate “talking heads”. In the end, the public was left with the idea that this whole question of cell phones and cancer was still up in the air. That conclusion is untrue.