National EAS tests

[Deleted User]

you missed my point, once the air chain is released, the automation system just chugs along, it doesn't even know that nobody heard the last set of commercials that didn't make it to the STL

If there is nobody at the station to repeat the warning, it is next to useless.


"10 minutes ago the National Weather Service in Taunton MA reported severe thunderstorms and heavy hail moving towards our area, take cover" would be nice IMHO, but with no warm body at the board it ain't ever gonna happen

 

[TheBigA]

If there is nobody at the station to repeat the warning, it is next to useless.

How about the thousands of other stations that DO have the staffing? Should you throw out a system because some might not use it properly? Or use it as an excuse to mandate minimum staffing requirements? Which do you prefer?

 

[Deleted User]

and there is the issue, having a basic knowledge of how WLYN and WAZN is set up (and this is not a slam) once the batteries in the emergency power supplies go down, or the internet service into West Cummings Park gets disrupted (as it has), the EAS is going to be useless because there is nothing feeding the transmiters.

I bet there are stations out there that didn't have Grady's and Jeff's knowledge and failed to even think about back up power supplies for the racks.... and the outlet in the GM's office where the EAS monitor was mounted.

 

[davideduardo]

If there is nobody at the station to repeat the warning, it is next to useless.

The EAS system is supposed to be fully automatic and triggered by the designated authorities. Stations don't originate alerts.

So it does not matter if there is anyone in the station. What matters is proper origination and that the stations have their equipment operating correctly to "relay" the alerts and cut them off upon the proper signaling.

 

[Deleted User]

How about the thousands of other stations that DO have the staffing? Should you throw out a system because some might not use it properly? Or use it as an excuse to mandate minimum staffing requirements? Which do you prefer?

the system is only as good as its weakest link... If the concept is to convey information in an emergency, short of the Government grabbing your air chain and programming it with their information until the threat passes, there needs to be someone at the local area who can, at a minimum, make periodic announcements that there is a warning issued.

 

[davideduardo]

And I don't want to hear crap about how we need the FM radio chips activated in smart phones. There are already emergency notifications sent to cell phones that are far superior and have better penetration than EAS could ever hope to have.

The reason to believe that we need a system that includes sirens, radio, TV, cellphones and anything else useful is that no one system is omnipresent.

Cellular systems are very vulnerable to disaster situations, both due to failure of individual cells and overloading. Not everyone listens to radio 24/7 and the same applies to TV.

In recent cellphone alerts for Los Angeles area wildfires and flash floods, the system has not been able to process all phone alerts on a timely basis. Additionally, the latency in the system that updates the cellular database to identify the area you are in often causes you to get alerts to areas you may have recently been in but not where you live or where you are at the moment. I have gotten as many wrong alerts by cellphone in the last year as correctly targeted ones, and I have had several that took more than 30 minutes to get to me due to system overload and latency.

 

[davideduardo]

the system is only as good as its weakest link... If the concept is to convey information in an emergency, short of the Government grabbing your air chain and programming it with their information until the threat passes, there needs to be someone at the local area who can, at a minimum, make periodic announcements that there is a warning issued.

The ability to run small stations unattended has made 24/7 operation feasible in many cases, and in the smallest cases allowed for operation much of the day without program staff while the station, in the recessionary economy, has been able to still operate profitably.

Again, the local staff would not have the base data the EAS alert was based on in text form, so they could not repeat it accurately even if they wanted to.

 

[b-turner]

That is a good point. From my years in radio, if a station was having a tough time financially, they cut hours from their operation. Now that same station runs 24/7 if licensed to do so.

The fact is, if there was a warm body required, they station would not be on the air during some crucial hours. I knew one small market FM that operated 6am to 7pm on weekdays, went off at 5 on Saturdays and never signed on Sundays. It was a really small town and revenue was minimal. Even though the owners made the effort to get down to the station for that tornado warning at 11 at night, everybody knew the only local station was off the air by 7pm. That same station operates 24/7 and in lieu of a morning show, they invested in a local news director. They are still barely there financially.

My point is, unmanned is better than off the air any day. I do get what you say. If the National Weather Service issues a Flash Flood Warning for the next three hours, how often does that repeat on the air after the EAS comes across? The automation program I have worked with allows the spoken EAS message to repeat as frequently as you have designated in the program (no tones, mind you, just the audio message). When you're off the air the message you get across is nothing and there you have it.

 

[TheBigA]

there needs to be someone at the local area who can, at a minimum, make periodic announcements that there is a warning issued.

Once again, there are thousands of stations that ARE staffed 24/7. And even those that aren't actually staffed 24/7 have at least one person who can come in to handle things if an emergency happens. Things like that happen all the time.

But there's no reason why a government issued warning needs to only go out once. If it's big enough, we've been told that there could be multiple alerts sent, with more updated information as it becomes available.

 

[JoshTheRadioDude]

As far as pushing a failed system, there are lots of obsolete laws on the books dealing with lots of obsolete technologies. And the government has paid for a lot of very expensive hammers and toilet seats.

I'm well aware of that. Why else do you think I have a problem with this?

But the report in the OP doesn't say anything about appropriating any money for this.

No, and the cost of the system itself falls to the stations, as well. It's an unfunded mandate, which is yet another problem.

 

[TheBigA]

Are you the same guy who said this:

That's not true at all, the marketplace has a very significant effect on the government, because the government has to spend the people's money in an effective way.

So which is it? The government is the government. There's nothing you can do to change it. They'll force radio stations to run EAS alerts regardless of the marketplace because they can. And radio will do what they say to retain their license. That's just how the world works.

 

[JoshTheRadioDude]

Tell that to the parents of all the children recovered via Amber alerts.

Amber Alerts started as a private venture between concerned stations in Texas. It did not begin -- nor does it rely entirely, or even mostly -- on the EAS system. In fact, it was a fight just to get the government to allow EAS activation for them. Amber Alerts are an example of the marketplace answering a need that the government was not fulfilling, just like I've been saying needs to be done here.

Or the folks who have been warned about flash floods and tornados by local alerts.

And that wouldn't be the case in a privately-developed system how, exactly? I can come up with a far more effective tool than the EAS to take its place, and there are others like me who have already proposed their own.

The system works. The problems have generally been traceable to the government agencies responsible for implementation and activation.

Oh? Need I dig up audio of the national test again? Because that's proof positive of exactly the opposite. And I have quite a bit of personal experience to the same end. The system is a pile of mule dung. There's no getting around that fact.

The classic example is the "Minot Fail" where the local stations were 100% EAS equipped and activated but the local authorities did not have the knowledge, training and intelligence to actually activate the system.

There are plenty of other examples, Minot is just one of them. And do you know why Minot is so damning? It's not because nobody had the knowledge, training or intelligence. It's because there wasn't a warm body to be found anywhere. It was an indictment on the broadcasting industry for cutting so far back that they literally CANNOT fulfill the requirements of their license. That had nothing to do with knowledge or training -- arguably intelligence, though not for the reasons you're thinking of. No, Minot is not an example of the system failing, but it's a good example of why the system will never be as effective as they want it to be, even if theycould fix it (which they can't, it's not possible, the technology is inherently flawed): nobody in the industry cares enough to do anything about it, and nobody listening or watching cares enough to hold them accountable. Because technology has marched right past traditional broadcasting in the realm of emergency information. It's obsolete.

 

[JoshTheRadioDude]

So which is it? The government is the government. There's nothing you can do to change it. They'll force radio stations to run EAS alerts regardless of the marketplace because they can. And radio will do what they say to retain their license. That's just how the world works.

Nothing I've said is contradictory. I qualified the statement you quoted by saying "or at least that's how it should be." I know that the government oversteps its bounds by miles on a regular basis. That's exactly my point.

 

[JoshTheRadioDude]

Cell phone networks can get overwhelmed. Prolonged power failures can wreak havoc on them. Internet connections can go down. Sirens - sure, if you are very local - within earshot. Obviously, getting the word out through all available means is the way to go. What I am saying, specifically about the EAS system, is that regularly testing it nationally BECAUSE the one national test did not go well, will help get the bugs out of the existing system.

WEA notifications don't rely on the cell networks themselves, they're transmitted directly from the towers in the alert area, not via the actual network.

Besides, my main point is that if we absolutely need emergency alerts on a national system through traditional broadcasters (which I don't believe we do, but that's neither here nor there), EAS is a technological failure that cannot be fixed, and it would be better to replace it with a functional system that the private sector chooses and develops rather than a government-mandated pile of crap that will never work the way it's supposed to. Obviously the point is to inform as many people as possible. What I'm telling you is that EAS will never fit the bill. It's time to go back to the drawing board.

 

[TheBigA]

And do you know why Minot is so damning? It's not because nobody had the knowledge, training or intelligence. It's because there wasn't a warm body to be found anywhere. It was an indictment on the broadcasting industry for cutting so far back that they literally CANNOT fulfill the requirements of their license.

If that was true, why didn't the Congressional investigation say so? The Congress of the United States, led by North Dakota Senator Byron Dorgan, who absolutely hated Clear Channel, held hearings into what happened in Minot. If anyone would have wanted to blame radio for Minot, it was Dorgan. At the end, he realized what the real problem was. The real problem was that the train should not have been traveling in a populated area without informing local authorities. That's why the local authorities weren't prepared. It's not radio's job to run homeland security. Congress itself passed that law, and it didn't give radio that authority. That's why no radio station or company was blamed by Congress or the FCC for what happened in Minot.

 

[TheBigA]

Nothing I've said is contradictory. I qualified the statement you quoted by saying "or at least that's how it should be." I know that the government oversteps its bounds by miles on a regular basis. That's exactly my point.

But in this case the government isn't overstepping its bounds. It's doing exactly what the law says it's supposed to do.

 

[davideduardo]

And do you know why Minot is so damning? It's not because nobody had the knowledge, training or intelligence. It's because there wasn't a warm body to be found anywhere. It was an indictment on the broadcasting industry for cutting so far back that they literally CANNOT fulfill the requirements of their license. That had nothing to do with knowledge or training -- arguably intelligence, though not for the reasons you're thinking of. No, Minot is not an example of the system failing, but it's a good example of why the system will never be as effective as they want it to be, even if theycould fix it (which they can't, it's not possible, the technology is inherently flawed): nobody in the industry cares enough to do anything about it, and nobody listening or watching cares enough to hold them accountable. Because technology has marched right past traditional broadcasting in the realm of emergency information. It's obsolete.

That's a big dose of misinterpreted information.

Until consolidation, the Minot stations signed off at midnight or before, and earlier on Sundays as the cost of remaining on the air was prohibitive in a market of that size. But with consolidation and technology, the stations could stay on the air. They provided a degree of service that couldn't be rendered previously. And with EAS being fully automated, they could also serve the few people even listening at that hour (the Minot incident was at about 2 AM).

Far from cutting back, in this case radio had vastly expanded its normal offerings to the market... something it had not had before.

And in many much larger markets, overnights even when there is a staffer present, is run with a board op, not a DJ. So even if there was an emergency there would not be anyone to deliver any spoken information at all.

The fact that there are so many stations that run unattended or with board ops shows why the EAS model of remote activated alerts in the hands of the proper public authorities is the way to go. And the inclusion of broadcast radio and TV as well as cellular, electronic highway signage and even sirens in an alert system guarantees that a huge portion of the population is informed.

As for a private initiative to replace EAS, good luck. When was the last time you saw a government program be given up to such a private initiative? And here, we have the suggestion it be given up to an industry where about half of all stations don't make money and would not do anything that cost additional money.

 

[b-turner]

Actually one of the facts nobody realizes on the Minot situation is when stations had to be manned, ALL the stations in the market signed off at midnight or earlier. So, if they had been manned, they would have been off the air when the incident happened in the middle of the night. Because they were on the air and simply a computer in the studio overnight, the EAS would have still functioned.

Everybody likes to blame the radio company but there is a misconception that we're too busy rolling in our money when the reality is we're trying to not fall off that financial cliff. Yes, some stations do well but most are pretty much in the same mode as the average American worker, say, paycheck to paycheck. And, yes, that does include the big corporate station and the mom and pop in places like Minot. Does anybody have a clue just how many radio advertising dollars are in Minot, North Dakota? Minot is around 40,000 (a bit more with the oil boom) and 9 radio stations excluding translators and LPFMs. So, no, the stations were not forsaking the public for the almighty dollar. They couldn't afford to be manned in the middle of the night. After all, Midnight to 6 is zero billing and the usual expenses for 25% of the hours in the day. If they were after the almighty dollar, they'd just shut down each day after the last paid commercial aired. In fact, I'd bet none of the Minot stations have a paid commercial after 10 at night, maybe earlier in the evening.

I'm sure there are a good number of cases where the EAS did not work thanks to a local station but let's put that in to perspective: it's about like the fast food restaurant that screws up a few orders but gets most all of them right. But you sure hear about how badly they screwed up.

So, if you had a business, would you remain open during hours you never had any customers? Would you forsake some of what otherwise would be more profit to do that? Sure, a radio station isn't the same thing but my point is would you operate your business during hours you had no customers and never have had customers during those hours, paying to keep the AC or heat on, the lights on, etc? For radio, it's about like the convenience store that closes for the night but keeps the gas pumps on so you can pay via the credit card if you need gas at 3 in the morning.

 

[JoshTheRadioDude]

Nobody was asking the stations in Minot to run Homeland Security, and that was why the investigation found problems with government authorities not being notified in the first place. The point remains: the EAS was not activated because there was nobody there to activate it, and even if there had been, it would have been more effective to simply break into local programming and give the warning live. Yes, stations are hanging on by a thread financially, but that's thanks to years of the industry cannibalizing itself. It never had to be that way. That's part of why people have left it behind: greed took over the business, it began ignoring the audience, the audience turned to other sources as technology moved on, and now we're stuck with a platform that nobody cares about trying to remain relevant lest an emergency occur. The whole situation is backwards, upside-down and laughably stupid.

 

[TheBigA]

The point remains: the EAS was not activated because there was nobody there to activate it, and even if there had been, it would have been more effective to simply break into local programming and give the warning live.

You don't have to be in the radio station to activate EAS. Radio is not in charge of EAS. Emergency officials are in charge. Radio is merely the pipe through which the information travels. That's how the law was written. This is not about radio greed. This is about the people who are supposed to be responsible not knowing what to do. It's also about a train that should not have been carrying dangerous chemicals without an escort. They tried to sneak through late at night without anyone knowing. This was a much bigger problem than staffing a radio station.