It amazes me that the reasoning was given for going from EBS to EAS was the public had become so insensitive to the EBS tone it was ineffective. Then, instead of lowering the frequency of tests, kept them the same. The EAS is almost equal to the car alarm.
When I started in radio, a direction AM had to have a 1st ticket at the station at all times and meter readings were every 30 minutes. That was because of technology at the time. These days our equipment is more stable, reliable and long lasting without the maintenance it required even a few decades ago.
The weekly EAS is nonsensical. EAS equipment is stable and reliable. A monthly test should suffice. And there is no reason it must be anything other than internal. Quite frankly, if an EAS is properly configured in the audio chain, unless you have rats or other animals, that audio chain is not going to change. Let's get real. That electrical wiring to your light switch is not going away and doesn't need to be looked at or tested weekly. My point is if things are assembled properly you don't need to check it that frequently. The rules as they are only make EAS more ineffective. Equipment is simply more reliable now. Just look through that mound of paperwork showing your weekly and monthly tests and ask yourself how often your EAS did not work properly.
I wonder just how important EAS is today, except maybe on a local basis. Think back to 9-11. Media was on that instantly and if the president wanted to go on the air I bet all the networks would have been trying to beat each one out by a second or two to get him on the air.
I question whether EAS can do better than what today's media can do in a timely fashion. Obviously the national test was horrible. It showed just how ineffective it would be in a real crisis. If changes need to be instituted, it should start at the top.
Even looking at local emergencies, the information chain works pretty flawlessly without the EAS. Oklahoma City's tornadoes and flooding rains on May 6 give a good example. Media was all over it, well organized and detailed without ever having to run a tone. Even the National Weather Service issued the first ever Flash Flood Emergency for Oklahoma and it was communicated frequently and effectively without EAS being involved at all, although it was obviously activated. It was even explained this was the rare step up over a warning just as the Tornado Emergency exceeds the Tornado Warning.
I think the hard question is how does the EAS exceed and better communicate information than the media already does?
Certainly, how we get warnings has changed. Radio, TV and cable TV might be viable, but we need to look at the device instead of the product received on the device. What good is the car audio system when the radio is off, when the cell phone is off, etc. If you're listening to your device via your car radio, the manufacturer should have a way to override the device to broadcast a real emergency, not a test. Same with the 'off' cell phone. It should turn on and give the emergency message (not a darn Amber alert at 3 am). By requiring the content providers versus the manufacturers to do more is simply wrongheaded thinking. Those thinking EAS need to look at the ways to reach as much of the population regardless of the device and how to do that when one specific device may not be in use (ie: radio, TV, cable, phone, etc.).
As was pointed out, redundant ways to reach all people is needed. Just like the tornado siren that is old school, the idea is to get everyone to hear. How do we do that with EAS and not wear out its effectiveness through over use of tests?
