[EAS] New EAS NPRM now posted on the EAS Forum Website

[Kelly D. Alford]

I agree with what you're saying from a Commission perspective Clay.  From what I've seen/heard, GM's, Owners and PD's are hesitant in getting more active in EAS participation, beyond the basic requirements anyway, boils down to two issues:

1.  Complexity.  As with anything, reliability becomes compromised the more complex the system.  Concerns about someone down the line dropping the ball, ultimately making your station who carries the erroneous or unreadable information, appear dumb to listeners and viewers.  From a programming perspective, at the end of the day your programming or news departments are responsible for what is broadcast on your channel.  Listeners and viewers don't know if the information, accurate or inaccurate came from somewhere else.  They heard the poor quality audio or incorrect information on YOUR station.  Other than NWS, alerts are generally confusing to listeners.  The audio is never consistent in quality, except  consistently bad and a big departure from the typical station audio.  Remember the nationwide test?  How about the Zombie Apocalypse alerts?
2.   Concerns about local state and local authorities screwing up the message which could embarrass 'my' station.  Is there a common protocol for vetting local and state alerts, then checking accuracy of information again before sending?  Answer; not that I've ever heard.  Is there proper training, rehearsals with checks and balances of information before activating a local or statewide alert?  After years of flailing around trying to develop a common system protocol, the answer is still no.

Unfortunately the system is just too complex with too many human beings required to perform certain responsibilities, usually outside their job requirement, or that requires them to care.

Kelly

Kelly D. Alford
General Manager of Production and Operations
Middle East Broadcasting Networks, Inc.
Springfield, VA 22153