I explained it already. It was pretty clear. Do you need me to boil it down in simpler terms?What are you trying to accomplish exactly? I don't get it.
I'll take that as a minor compliment, or at least some small understanding.Under your obnoxious questioning, while parts of this market are still under water and suffocating from heat without ac, I think you actually have a partial point: a lot of smaller stations, mostly with niche audiences, do not have the resources or will to provide much if any custom information for their listeners nor do they have the resilient systems to stay on the air continuously during a disaster-type event. That's accurate and not just the case in the Houston market.
You've no doubt seen the claims on this site about how local radio can be a lifeline during emergencies. The problem is; as has been illustrated with Beryl, and your comment, that local stations don't have the resources to staff 24/7 to provide instructions or information to the general public. Next, is the reality that the majority of consumers don't have portable radios nor keep fresh batteries around. Finally, many emergency services caught up in an emergency aren't thinking of activating EAS, let alone with a script containing information for the general public via EAS over radio. Most emergency services are hitting the ground determining the impact and trying to contract the general public in the most popular way; cell/smartphones. In the case of weather events, they leave that up to the NWS.
If that's indeed the case, that's great. The original post seemed to indicate, at least wherever they were, that most local stations were off, or in dead air.However, the large groups did pretty well here staying on the air and passing information (and maybe even a little normalcy through some regular programming too) to their audiences. While the total number of stations off the air or broadcasting dead is is substantial, I would guess looking at the reports here the stations that remained on the air serving their audiences is probably around 70% or more of total listening.
Oh, and guess where the Governor of Texas was during this whole event? Certainly not in a place where he could give instructions for the affected areas.
Seems like he took a page from from Senator Cruz' playbook during the harsh winter a couple years ago.
In the case of larger cities like Houston or Dallas, I think that's accurate. There are a lot of smaller communities and stations outside the big cities. Especilly in a big state like Texas. It seems unreasonable to expect those stations would be in any position to provide the same level, or any coverage, as a larger station.And if you think of radio as being a collective service as opposed to each station individually carrying all the burden, i think what radio groups and trade associations are pitching -- that radio is a valuable resource that often works when power, cell, and tv is out or inaccessible -- is not inaccurate at all.
