[EAS] The words we use

[Botterell, Arthur@CalOES]

As mentioned previously, Ed, I respect the role you have to play... whatever it is!  Our philosophy here is that the B2B space is where the bulk of the ROI from earthquake warning will be found.  Especially if some of those Bs are themselves mass-media outlets.

We view ATSC 3.0 like the FM chip and broadcast TV to mobile devices.  (As the White Queen put it, "The rule is, jam to-morrow and jam yesterday - but never jam to-day.")  They're all skirmishes in the gargantuan battle between the broadcasters and the wireless carriers over who will get to monetize all that newly-privatized spectrum.  I expect there were analogous struggles during Enclosure in England, and the parallels to water rights on the American frontier are too obvious to bear listing.

We don't expect to be able to guess the winner in that great electromagnetic Götterdämmerung, so we'll wait and see.  Meanwhile, there are things that need doing and ways available to do them, and that's our focus.

Art
________________________________________
From: EAS <eas-bounces at radiolists.net> on behalf of Ed Czarnecki <ed.czarnecki at monroe-electronics.com>

"Datacasting" via ATSC 1.0 does not get to the consumer/audience.  The best
use of ATSC 1.0 is transmission of data as a backhaul ("B2B" model for lack
of a better word) or to specialized receivers.

Transmission of alerting content to the consumer receiver ("B2C" or even
"G2C") is not a strong point in ATSC 1.0.  I rode that horse for too long.

However, consumer receiver targeting may be a stronger element in ATSC 3.0
... maybe.   The technology may take off, and it may not.  Remains to be
seen, but a number of broadcasters and TV manufacturers are likely to take a
big initial plunge in 2018-2019.  Just as a point of information, the
"Advanced Emergency Alerting" function is ATSC 3.0 is a bit of a misnomer -
it is not EAS, and is not even purely "alerting."

I'm not marketing ATSC 3.0, nor next gen cable, per se.  I hold no stocks in
any companies in either area ;^)  I'm just looking out 5-10-15 years from
now and trying to consider which technologies may fit particular alerting
requirements.  That might be a different discussion than the one we are
having here.  And that may be premature for some, but part of forward
planning for others.