[EAS] Cable TV Problems

[Sean Donelan]

On Fri, 2 Dec 2011, Adrienne  Abbott wrote:
> Broadcasters here cannot even apply for the cable over ride exemption
> because the cable companies in Nevada's two biggest cities don't have the
> equipment that would let them do so. Then there's the wide variety of set
> top boxes in homes and businesses as well as the subscribers who don't have
> a box at all...

It doesn't prevent them from asking or including it in their retransmission
negotiations. If they don't start negotiations, its going to be even a 
longer time.  Likewise broadcasters could negotiate with consumer 
electronic industry on improving EAS handling in over the air TV tuners.

>From a national level, it doesn't impact the distribution of national 
EAN messages because everyone, broadcasters and cable, are supposed to
carry the same presidential message at the same time.  It doesn't matter
who interrupts what. There isn't a reason for the FCC to get involved 
in essentially a local tug-a-war between broadcasters, cable systems and 
local emergency officials.

If the FCC made a new national rule, the only certain thing would be 
broadcasters, cable systems and local emergency officials wouldn't like
that rule either. For example, if TV translator stations and cable systems 
were mandated to have selective override, should all broadcasters also be 
mandated to carry all emergency information for every community their 
programming reaches through cable, satellite and translators?

> In addition, the local channel operations, studios and control facilities,
> that many cable companies used to provide in their communities have
> completely gone away in many areas, victims of cutbacks in local budgets.

There have been cutbacks in all industries, broadcast, cable and local 
governments.  Many broadcasters have also cut back their operations.

There are also large areas of the country which rely on satellite 
local-in-local, cable systems, and TV translator stations hundreds of 
miles away from a broadcast station which does not carry emergency 
information local to the viewer, outside of the broadcaster's immediate 
area (or sometimes even in the broadcaster's immediate area).  The Weather 
Channel's weathercan automation box at the local cable head-end may be 
providing more localized weather information in those cases than a 
distant broadcast station.

There are many local differences and need to distribute local emergency
information, such as university campuses, military bases, TV translator 
stations that use emergency override on all channels for local emergency 
information that may not be carried by every broadcast channel.  It is
difficult to predict what will happen to every crisis to communication 
systems.  Who would of predicted most over the air TV broadcasters in 
Manhattan would have had to rely on cable to transmit their signal on
9/11?  The FCC historically allows the maximum flexibility possible when 
communicating emergency information, even if it does sometimes cause
interference such as allowing broadcasters to increase their transmission 
power levels.

Why don't broadcasters, satellite, cable systems and local emergency 
officials sit down and reach an voluntary agreement to fix all the stuff 
that is a problem at the local level?  No cable, satellite or TV 
translator station can re-transmit a broadcast signal without the 
permission of the broadcaster.  So broadcasters seem to already have
the biggest stick, why ask for even a bigger stick?

But again, it doesn't seem to be an issue for national EAN messages
getting through.