[EAS] FCC NPRM on improving EAS just issued

[Larry Wood]

Speaking as a broadcaster I can say I agree that some EAS messages should "auto-forward" as soon as they are received. The TOR is a good example of this. However, most EAS messages can wait and if properly introduced by a live operator stand a much better chance of having the listener pay full attention to the message.

Some EAS messages in our area are first sent by the NWS and then they are rerecorded and resent by the local LP1. The rerecorded EAS messages sound much better and have the words and numbers pronounced and read correctly. We prefer to send the rerecorded alerts. We also still receive phony and incomplete CEA alerts from the local authorities. As far as I know, no one has ever been held accountable for the CAE errors. I will never forget the state wide CAE telling everyone to look out for missing child last seen in a white car. No model, no license plate, no description! We kill these if we can.

We are happy to participate in the EAS system, but within reason.

Thanks,

Larry Wood, CPBE
KQED-FM, San Francisco

-----Original Message-----
From: eas-bounces at radiolists.net [mailto:eas-bounces at radiolists.net] On Behalf Of Don Heppelmann

Broadcasters need to be a bit more accepting and configure their box to "auto-forward". It's time for broadcasters to quite focusing on what is inappropriate, and let the system automatically pass along the emergency public information post haste.

If broadcasters are so paranoid for false alerts and to always require manual confirmation, then lives will be lost. Several precious minutes have already passed since the event start time just to publish and forward the alert, broadcasters shouldn't add to that latency. What is more important "dead air" or dead people?