[EAS] CAP Converters

[Sean Donelan]

On Wed, 16 Nov 2011, Clay Freinwald wrote:
> I have been preaching for years about the fact that it's just plain wrong
> for a broadcaster (of any flavor) to ignore a Tornado warning or similar
> event where advance warning could be life saving...Yet this is just what
> many broadcasters do.  Is it any wonder why those in Emergency Management
> feel that EAS is an un-reliable means of public warning?

Historically, the majority of broadcasters have been active and 
generally willing EAS participants, although maybe not all are enthusastic 
about it.  Those that aren't, aren't going to change because of CAP 
converters or FCC rules.

If you look at tornado alley, the stations the compete on weather and 
tornado warnings often do not use EAS on the air.  The EAS user experience 
wasn't great in the 1990's and didn't age well for either television or
radio, and especially not cable. Instead they spent a lot of time and 
money on systems and news rooms that are frankly better than EAS. They 
are active with their local emergency management agencies. Forcing them 
to use a EAS for on air warnings and alerts would be a step backwards for 
them.

On the other hand, systems that don't want to carry warnings/alerts will 
continue to ignore or actively find ways not to no matter how cheap
EAS/CAP boxes are.  With CMAS, providers can choose not to provide
warnings and alerts, and must inform their customers.  Why not the same 
for broadcasters that choose not to participate in state/local alerts? 
Each time they broadcast their legal ID, add a statement informing 
listeners and viewers that station does not carry warnings and 
alerts.

If the "daisy-chain" is eliminated and no station relies on over the
air, in band signalling from another station, why continue to require 
broadcasters transmit alerts in a particular format on air?