[EAS] "improving" EAS

[Clay Freinwald]

TP wrote - 

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.

My comments follow - Clay

This whole matter exposes a problem that is rarely mentioned. 

>>> The FCC has no authority over the person or agency that initiate the bad
message.

>>> They DO have authority over the entity they license that forwards it.

Think of this like the FCC's attitude toward 'Wardrobe Malfunctions' ....The
Commish has no authority over the person wearing the outfit.     Someone
complains and demands action...so who does the FCC go after - Not the
performer or the middle man ...The production company, the director
etc...NOPE!.    They act where they have the authority...Even if those they
go after had nothing to do with the act.    

As been said - They are going after the poor dude on the horse who is just
relaying the message. History is full of examples of how this process works
at various levels of government.  
Unfortunately punishing the messenger  is an all too common practice.
Perhaps they do this in the hope that those that are held responsible will
swim back up-stream and put some heat on those message originators and, in
the process, re-distribute the 'heat' ?

In the State where I've been dealing with EAS issues for many years we too
have experienced screw-up's.   I can tell you - regardless of any FCC
actions - the folks here take these matters very seriously.     There is a
significant amount of fear in the minds of everyone in this state when it
comes to initiating any EAS Message... FEAR OF GETTING IT WRONG.
This fear is, perhaps, stronger than the fear that a broadcaster has of been
targeted by some FCC enforcement action.    

Unfortunately this fear has a couple of major down-sides - 

1- You don't want an Emergency Manager (or other entity) fail to issue a
public warning message for fear they might get it wrong.

2- You don't want any Broadcast or Cable system to not carry or air the
message for fear they will be punished for someone else's wrong doing.

The public is hardly served with when this kind of fear of action attitude
prevails.

So what could or should we do?    Here are some thoughts - 

This all exposes one  MAJOR shortcoming in ALL OF THIS -  LACK OF TRAINING!

>> Often those that initiate messages are poorly trained in not only how to
initiate an error-free message but what happens 'down-stream'

>> A shortage of well-trained trainers and training materials.

Another issue that I constantly see is the lack of cooperation with all
parties involved with the Public Warning Process.      These, well
publicized, screw-up's should be driving all  the parties TOGETHER to find
solutions as opposed to what appears to be taking place - 

Disconnecting warning systems is NOT the best solution to any problem.
However it is popular to 'hunker down' and hope that it will go away is
popular.

There are those that would be pleased to see the FCC pull the plug on EAS
and every other public warning system....However, I'm not sure that they are
in favor of not having any system at all.  In my view, the greater public
good should be our focus and goal.     We need to face the fact that humans
are always going to be involved in all of this!

Working through these issues should be one of the prime responsibilities of
SECC's and LECC's.    These committees should involve all levels of public
warnings from those that initiate message, the systems that distribute them,
and those that represent the systems that reach the public  a major function
of these Committee's must be training !

Mistakes are going to take place - What's vital is having a
viable/working/cooperative/collaborative mechanism or organization where the
processes can be corrected to ensure that we have a more - mistake free -
system.

One aspect of broadcasting has been quite effective here - Those that treat
message initiator screw-ups as a News Story.    (This has happened here in
this State too) This is where a TV Station digs into a story and exposes
wrong doing and, by increasing public pressure, enforcement takes place.
Thereby doing something that the FCC is unable to accomplish.

MY BOTTOM LINES 

Everyone needs to be held accountable for their actions - What is Important
in this debate is that we make sure that the FCC fully understands that
Messenger Punishment may well be counter- productive and misdirected.
Having less EAS participation may well be the end result which, in some way,
makes the FCC a party to a process where a citizen may not receive a
life-saving message.       The FCC's NOI's and NPRM's is a great vehicle to
put forth this information.

Clay Freinwald
(Still) Chair - Washington State SECC