[EAS] 'improving' EAS

[Mike McCarthy]

Let's not co-mingle the two issues. And I appreciate you confirming my
point about the vast majority of stations not relaying non-compulsory live
tests making that a moot point.

As for compulsory relay of more message types, I'm on the fence about
that.  I had in the past argued short fuse high perishability call to
action messages, such as tornado, flash flood, and tsunami warnings issued
by the NWS should be compulsory. However, and in light of the message
flooding matter, I've walked that back to a great degree. Others might
argue EVI should be a compulsory given the wild fires and dam breaches.

At this point, the matter has become too complicated for the average
station manager to comprehend, let alone craft a plan their operation. And
even more so considering the varied state/local plans that span from
intense collaboration with the state to nothing at all. EAS is very much a
pawn in a tug of war between federal silos.

MM

On Thu, July 19, 2018 10:31 am, Adrienne Abbott wrote:
> But, supporters say one of the benefits of a Live Code Test is to show
> that EAS equipment is properly programmed to receive and rebroadcast a
> specific Event Code...if stations are not carrying local activations,
> what's the point? Is the next step an FCC Order to carry local
> activations?
>