[EAS] "improving" EAS

[tpt at sevenrangesradio.com]

There is an element here of blaming the messenger. Or looking for a (regulated) scapegoat.
 
Ad agencies routinely send out requests for "rates and avails."  E.G. "rates for mid-day, afternoon drive, Demo: Females 35-54." About a dozen years ago, the FCC started an NOI on diversity, minoirty broadcasters complained that they were deliberately excluded by the agencies (No urban, no Spanish) or not availed at all. So what does the Commission do?  Require stations to affirm in their advertising contracts that they "don't discriminate in the sale of advertising." Since most "advertising contracts" are best implied from an e-mail exchange anymore, we all have these stupid disclaimers tied to the e-mails from the sales folks.  Of course, it was the agencies who were discriminating in their buying practices--but the Commission doesn't regulate advertising agencies.
 
First question that comes to mind here: What is a "false" message?  We monitor both Charleston, WV and Pittsburgh NWS weather radio. Couple years back Pittsburgh had the bad habit of sending alerts with no audio.  Came up just fine on a TV crawl--but didn't work well for audio: tones-silence-tones. Is that a false alert? And if you didn't hear it how would you know from just reading the log?
 
On a massive screw-up like Hawaii, fine-I can go back to see what we received & sent, the Sage keeps all that.
 
But if the Federal Government is going to nit-pick every time somebody keys in the wrong code, maybe it is time for Congress to set up their own warning system, and leave us alone.