[EAS] The California Fires - Another view

[Ed Czarnecki]

>>> "At some point however, the efforts needed to alert that 0.1% will make
alerting the remaining 99.9% unwieldy complicated and time consuming."

Perhaps ... perhaps not.  Either way, I'm leery of a rhetorical ipse dixit
"proof by assertions" on topics like this.  

Art, for example, never said 0.1% - just that we don't need to reach
"absolutely everybody" for a critical mass of awareness to be built up.  EAS
(TV, Radio, Cable), WEA (smartphones), private SMS (opt in devices), private
email (opt in) ... other apps like desktop or phone widgets... 

All of these are existing tools that are not that unwieldy or time
consuming, even if all used at once (or - if they are, then the warning
"producer" may want to take a hard look at their workflow and tools being
used).

What about the population existing in info silos.  Tourists?  This might
speak to the need for the hospitality industry to "plug in" to warning.
And those who deliberately seek to "unplug" or are unable to"plug in" (e.g.
the homeless)?  Not sure of the solution for that latter segment, and that
perhaps is the 0.1% at risk in any scenario.

So - in one California county that used WEA (possibly EAS), and other tools,
they had massive property damage but zero reported loss of life.  Another
county that used a private notification system - but did NOT use WEA or EAS
- suffered significant casualties.  Now, correlation does not mean
causation, and there are undoubtedly a host of variables that influenced
differing casualty rates in different counties, but IMHO this is going to
have to be something that is examined.  Just as in the Gatlinburg fires
(though it looks like usable information on what happened there is falling
into the shadows).

And, no, tying this discussion to multilingual depends also makes some
logical stretches.  Mainstream commentators on this are merely trying to
figure out the best way for a media service to provide alerts to their
particular audience, in the language most relevant.  No credible commentator
has been opining about getting a country western station in Nebraska to
carry alerts in English, Spanish, Albanian and Chinese.  The discussion IMHO
is really about what needs to be done to serve known and predictable
audiences.  

Consider this - those who are wringing their hands about providing alerts in
20 languages are arguing about a scenario that nobody has actually proposed.
But by focusing on this absurd case, the discussion of the primary case is
being distorted.  If such an absurd proposal is floated in an NPRM, that can
be addressed.  But really, the discussion should be simpler - about serving
known audiences with emergency alerts in the primary language of that
station.

-----Original Message-----
From: EAS [mailto:eas-bounces at radiolists.net] On Behalf Of Mike McCarthy

Anyone who thinks everyone needs to or can be reached is living in a fantasy
world. It is an impractical, never mind theoretical impossible matter to
reach everyone...100%. It is sad unsettling truth to be certain.
But a truth never the less.

At some point however, the efforts needed to alert that 0.1% will make