The benefit of cellular architecture is that it is a geographically distributed model. You lose a tower or two in an area due to fire, but there is likely another one on an adjacent hill still functioning. The signal and available lines may be reduced, but a distributed model is more useful than a single broadcast facility.Can cell towers broadcast? That is, transmit emergency or other information to an unlimited number of phones within a given radius in miles without an individual phone call in progress with each phone in that radius?
Many radio station transmitter sites are colocated or in areas prone to wildfires, like hilltops or mountains. It isn't unusual for fire to take out several radio sites, or the at least the utilities that run them."" so much for AM radio coming to the rescue ""
Radio stations are additional irons in the fire for disseminating information. I suppose that a radio station of decent power outside would be able to penetrate a larger area that has lost all of its media compared with the system of cell towers.
Other than the potential for EAS, no emergency services are concerned with firing up some radio station then operating it like Les Nessman. That's just silly fantasy thinking.Still better would be first responders to reactivate radio stations whose operators had shut down and evacuated, and to obtain and rebroadcast further into affected areas emergency information.