Ahh, marketing - the art of deception by obfuscation or omission (in the name of appealing to the general public)!! For Jon_B's information, both the Volt and Bel are units derived from proper names Count Alessandro Giuseppe Antonio Anastasio Volta and Alexander Graham Bell, respectively.
I'd write dB and mV - but I can't remember ever writing either out longhand! If you need to explain what meant by a mV you may be writing for the wrong audience (or do I mean readership?), if you need to explain dB you problably dispair at the inadequacy of the educational system!
I do remember several years ago giving a presentation in a lecture theatre that was fully equiped by an active noise cancellation system; it was an intriguing and slightly weird experience. I had to give my presentation to a technician in the control room and the system had a monitor speaker that could be switched to reproduce the subtracted sound. This was a multichannel system and I started to wonder about the possibility of building a multichannel system that could monitor individual conversations anywhere in the auditorium.
Has anyone ever done this?
The author's nomenclature made me cringe. I was taught that it's decibels and millivolts, not deciBels and milliVolts - only the abbreviation has a capital letter when the unit is named in honour of a person.
This was an interesting refresher on the definition of the dB as it is used in electronics and in acoustics.
The author's implication about the dishonesty of such marketing relies solely on his perceived lack of understanding of dBs vs. percentages by the consumer.
I don't believe that such a lack of understanding is very prevalent in the world of audio, and certainly not among audiophiles.
Imagine if the topic was THD instead of noise cancellation. No audiophile would be impressed by a THD of 1%.
This is just another way of saying that in some contexts, being within 1% of perfection just isn't terribly impressive performance.