[EAS] [BC] What's the point of LP-1s anymore?

[Mike McCarthy]

I don't disagree either.  My comments surrounded the altruistic thought
that there are some broadcasters out there who want to participate so long
as it's a zero cost to them and it won't be abused.

I am somewhat heartened to see ATSC 3.0 contain a field for EAS message
conveyance in background.  The question is whether the TV people will
embrace that over the more intrusive main channel interruption. Such might
allow the individual viewer to tailor the counties they want to see
warnings for in lieu of seeing the whole carrier taken over.

When you start getting into background operations embedded within a
transmission, the door opens for mandatory carriage since it does nothing
to their main revenue stream.

MM

On Mon, November 6, 2017 3:42 pm, Botterell, Arthur at CalOES wrote:
> I'm afraid you've cut to the heart of it, Clay.  For whatever reasons the
> broadcasters are no longer seen as reliable local partners.  That's why I
> think we need to start thinking about a National Warning Grid that can
> include whoever wants to be included, but without breaking if someone
> chooses otherwise.
>