[EAS] FCC Seeks Comment on Multilingual EAS

[Bill Ruck]

At 01:11 PM 3/14/2014, you wrote:
>The whole issue with EAS is both historical and how government 
>operates in general. When this all started with Conelrad it was 
>already an unfunded mandate although nobody questioned it much at 
>the time. At the time, it was a fairly simple system as the FCC 
>regulated it and the ADCC directly disseminated alerts to key 
>stations or what is now PEP by the best possible early 50s 
>technology, the broadcast loop. There were few fingers in the pie 
>and despite technical flaws, the system worked.

I have divided opinions.  I've not been through a tornado or flood 
but did survive (?) the 1989 earthquake.  And watched the Oakland 
Fire up close in 1991.  One needs to remember that earthquakes are 
self-announcing.

On one hand the public deserves the best Emergency Public Information 
possible.  Technology exists today to do this.

On the other hand the local governments around here (San Francisco 
Bay Area; Northern California) are so out of it to describe them as 
"clue-impaired" would be a compliment.  Yes, there are really 
dedicated public servants working in OES, but overall EPI is a 
completely unfunded mandate; and "unfunded mandate" is an 
understatement.  And add into that the fact if counties were allowed 
armies there would be border wars.  There is no carrot or stick.

In the middle is media.  Used to be just broadcasting but in this 
enlightened age includes a whole lot more.  And that "lot more" is 
completely decentralized and has no local connection.  Think about 
it.  Who holds the license for "the Internet"?

I often feel like Diogenes of Sinope.

Because I now have one foot in the broadcast world and the other foot 
in the public safety communications world and I see the value of EPI 
I'm trying to connect them.

But I am not holding my breath.

Bill Ruck
Curmudgeon
San Francisco