[EAS] Another NPRM: Needless & Pointless Rule Making

[Adrienne Abbott]

Yes, that's "descriptive video" and I thought the requirement was to be
phased in according to market size over a period of years. Have we reached
the end of the phase-in? The problem with using the secondary audio stream
is that many stations use that channel for Spanish translations of their
local news programming and in some cases, the stations have sponsors for
that service. Can it be used for both? Spanish audio during local news
programming and descriptive video during entertainment programming? Does the
rule provide that kind of flexibility? Or are stations supposed to pick and
choose between minority groups? 

Adrienne Abbott
Nevada EAS Chair
Nevada Broadcasters Association

Just a reminder everyone - this NPRM was not FCC's idea.  An Act of Congress
(the CVAA) directed FCC to adopt a rule by April 9, 2013 that allows
sight-impaired persons to hear an aural representation of any non-EAS
emergency information presented visually.  So any displeasure should be
directed toward your Member of Congress, not FCC.
 
So FCC must find a way to do this. If we feel that putting that aural
information on the secondary audio stream is not the way to go, then we must
suggest an alternative.  Otherwise, I presume FCC will adopt the secondary
audio channel as the method.  FCC must adopt some law to do this - Congress
has given FCC no choice in that - our influence is to what method that rule
will require.
 
Alternate ideas out there?
 
Gary Timm
WI SECC