It seems that the only people who read blogs are hackers. How else to explain the dire warnings that a third of bloggers risk the sack because they have posted sensitive or revealing work information on their blogs?

Of course as we all know, personal blogs are as widely read as the nutritional information on a deep fried Mars bar, and if I discovered a fourth secret of Fatima and wanted it hidden from human view forever, an 'all about me' blog filled with posts about my cat's hurt paw and how annoying unsolicited marketing calls are would be the perfect place.

The vast lonely tundra of the blogosphere is untouched by the hordes of readers that bloggers crave, but the information is nonetheless out there, and it seems that hackers, and employers, are taking it seriously.

HR firm Croner commissioned a survey which found that 39 per cent of the bloggers asked had at one time posted sensitive or damaging information about their work or a colleague.

Now the sensible thing for companies to do is to have a clear policy on such matters. How much trouble a company can get you into is unclear. A couple of high-profile cases have been lost by companies seeking to punish workers for blog content written in their own time.

There is no reason in principle, though, why a company shouldn't be able to take action against an employee even for behaviour outside of working hours and premises.

The sensible thing for workers to do is to have a think for just one second about what they are saying and how idiotic it is to spill the beans online. Just because it's only you and your mum reading the blog, anyone trawling for dirt could easily come across the information and you are utterly traceable, and could end up being utterly sackable for it.

Should we be sending our kids to school in tinfoil hats and ET-style zoot-suits made of lead? The BBC's Panorama programme might have us think so: they have made a big song and dance about the fact that wireless internet (WiFi) signals are three times as strong as mobile phone signals.

Well, hold off on the cookware millinery, it is unlikely that our kids' brains are going to be fried quite yet.

Stem the tide of parental outrage for just a moment and ask yourself: should we really be surprised that a wireless data network signal is stronger inside a classroom it is designed to cover than a mobile phone signal is outside?

And given that the World Health Organisation (WHO) says that mobile signal strength ranges from 0.02 per cent to two per cent of the government guidelines, shouldn't we be blowing fat raspberries at Panorama and saying: fine, but three times almost nothing is still not very much?

We should. Common sense tells us that all these radio waves infecting the air just have to be frying our brains. We all have a touch of the Cassandra about us, wailing that we can't have all this mobile fun for nothing, there's a reckoning in the post and we'll all be sorry.

Well, common sense also says two tonnes of metal shouldn't fly through the air and that cheesy beans should be horrible, but common sense isn't always right.

There may well be evidence we haven't yet found that says that mobile phones and WiFi networks will send us all mad, but the fact that a wireless network is stronger than a mobile phone signal just isn't it.

So put the tin foil away - much to their dismay it's just the normal school uniform for the kids tomorrow.