Radio's role in major national crises!

[blackgold]

I'd like to ask a question to all of you. How would radio be able to react in a time of a major national crisis, such as asteroid collision or nuclear attack? Any ideas?

 

[TheBigA]

That's really the job of the Department of Homeland Security. After 9/11, that agency was created and they were given that responsibility. It's not something "radio" would do on it's own without proper authorization.

 

[FreddyE1977]

EAS would kick in and you would receive "official information" until the big bang hits.

 

[vchimpanzee]

Every station I usually listened to was doing news on 9-11. I find it interesting that the station where I listened to Paul Harvey did "The Rest of the Story" as usual. That was kind of comforting as if things weren't as bad as I thought.

Stations that you would expect to be playing music were on in Dairy Queen and where I paid my power bill, but they were just doing news.

I do recall one rock station where people wanted to talk about what happened.

 

[broadcastguy]

EAS would kick in and you would receive "official information" until the big bang hits.

This.

 

[Kelly A]

EAS would kick in and you would receive "official information" until the big bang hits.

Yeah...right.

 

[b-turner]

I think the EAS would fire off but likely after the fact. As 9/11 showed, TV was on it right away. Radio grabbed TV audio, then went to their own originated material, generally via a news network. I suspect firing off an EAS National Activation takes some form of protocol delaying it for a minute or two, maybe longer. I suspect media might beat EAS to the punch in reaching some, while the EAS would grab the rest.

Some say the EAS should have been fired off on 9/11. I won't speculate either way. A national emergency, yes, but media likely moved quicker than the EAS could have in most places. Even in the sticks somebody would have seen the TV reports and called a local station or communicated in some way.

Funny thing, I was doing sales in radio when the Gulf War began. We simulcast an ABC TV station local cast and swiftly got permission to carry their audio. Then my boss called CNN after seeing their coverage minutes later and we became a CNN News affiliate instantly, switching to their feed.

 

[TheBigA]

Some say the EAS should have been fired off on 9/11. I won't speculate either way. A national emergency, yes, but media likely moved quicker than the EAS could have in most places.

But what did media do? Just report on the facts. That's not what EAS is supposed to do. If there's an actual attack, EAS is supposed to inform people of designated shelters, certain military procedures, and that sort of thing. Then again, there was no DHS then. There is now. So things might be different next time.

 

[davideduardo]

Some say the EAS should have been fired off on 9/11. I won't speculate either way. A national emergency, yes, but media likely moved quicker than the EAS could have in most places.

The purpose of the EAS is to advise of an imminent danger... a bomb threat, a tornado, a gas leak. The concept is to keep people safe from harm.

In the case of 9/11, there was nothing that the EAS system could "warn" people about. The events had already happened, and there was no information that could keep people safe.

Similarly, events like the Northridge Earthquake in 1994 did not trigger an alert. The quake had happened, and the system is not set up to provide ongoing information (as the quality of the alerts should prove). I think of the EAS like the siren on a fire engine... it gets people out of the way, but it does not put out the fire.

 

[b-turner]

I agree with the EAS as being to alert before, but how about ongoing? Might EAS have alerted the nation all flights were grounded? In an earthquake, might EAS alert where there is shelter and assistance? Ongoing means the threat is no over, right? Would media not also provide much of the same information as it pertains to designated shelters? Certainly the EAS is vital in alerting military procedures and the President going live.

It seems the best purpose is the local and regional alert but so many times stations eith just broadcast the information without the EAS or local officials never activate it.

For example, in Houston during the Tropical Storm Alison event. emergency shelters flooded, every hospital shut down, 911 was down for hours, freeways were literally filled with 18 wheelers bobbing in the water. 36 inches of rain at spots and at one point over 7 inches an hour. All we got was a Flash Flood Warning saying flooding was occurring from the National Weather Service. There was no EAS outside of this Flash Flood Warning. Shouldn't the EAS provide information to save life and property during the event by updating emergency information?

 

[davideduardo]

Shouldn't the EAS provide information to save life and property during the event by updating emergency information?

The problem is that the folks who trigger EAS alerts are generally using communications gear that rivals that of a CB station, complete with push-to-talk mikes. They are not set up for receiving neighborhood level information, verification of that data, and broadcasting it.

The quality is almost uniformly poor, and the folks in charge are doing a civil defense job... they are neither reporters nor communicators.

What you are describing is a different type of structure and content.

 

[TheBigA]

The problem is that the folks who trigger EAS alerts are generally using communications gear that rivals that of a CB station, complete with push-to-talk mikes.

I wonder though...there was a ton of money available when they set up DHS. A lot of it got disbursed to the states and local emergency crews, who spent it on state of the art communications gear, mobile units, and anything else they could think of. Didn't some of that go to the central office?

 

[gr8oldies]

There's nothing a screeching EAS tone and tin-can sounding voice would have added on 9/11. Flights being grounded isn't an emergency and radio/TV more than had that aspect covered.

 

[b-turner]

I disagree. All air travel was grounded in the entire nation, as I recall, for four days. The government doesn't tend to do that on a whim but rather an emergency.

Granted, radio and TV in general had it covered but not every station and every town.

 

[TheBigA]

I disagree. All air travel was grounded in the entire nation, as I recall, for four days. The government doesn't tend to do that on a whim but rather an emergency.

Granted, radio and TV in general had it covered but not every station and every town.

So you're saying there was a failure of EAS on that day. Not a unique idea. That's been said many times since then. That's another reason why EAS is now under DHS. However, that doesn't change the fact that there was very little information the federal government wanted to communicate to the public that it wasn't already doing through conventional means. And the emergency clearly was targeted in NY and DC, so coverage in the rest of the country wasn't particularly relevant. Having the federal government take over the entire national broadcast media platform, which is what EAS is, requires a pretty unique set of circumstances that really hasn't happened yet.

 

[b-turner]

You are correct but in the heat of the moment, not understanding fully what might be playing out, it was a national emergency albeit far from the type you'd read about under a national alert in those procedure booklets stations had to have in the studio. Those scripts were scary stuff. Activation might have caused more panic than helpful communication in areas where national media and well connected local media were not in place. I recall jocking in a remote Texas town station when Reagan was shot. It took a call to the station from a listener, then a call to confirm through a station we knew had a teletype or network news. That little station had no AP/UPI ticker or network and a blank radio dial except for us.

I might add, my opinion of EAS is that it is good for local emergencies and still untested on the national front. Even so, EAS is less and less a factor as the years move on. While broadcasters still need to be a part, I think their role will take more of a backseat to other devices to alert citizenry. In my experience, radio and TV tend to be the last form of communication standing in some events. Phones and internet are not always up when the worst happens. When Hurricane Ike hit Houston, parts of the city was without electricity for about a month...far longer than laptops and phones can go without a charge but a couple of batteries and a radio works fine.

 

[TheBigA]

That little station had no AP/UPI ticker or network and a blank radio dial except for us.

I think it's pretty rare today that even the smallest licensed station has no access to internet, network, or cell service.

Even if EAS is activated, listeners are directed to the major stations that DO have access to information.