[sbe-eas] EAN Test followed by RWT

[Dan Mammone]

Good points...

I think that a possible solution would be to have these "executive" office
messages be recorded live, then repeated until the EAT is received for
return to normal programming. The only exception would be the Local and
State messages.

As far as the recording, it could be done at the source and distributed, or
at the LPs.

Dan

-----Original Message-----
From: sbe-eas-bounces at sbe.org [mailto:sbe-eas-bounces at sbe.org]On Behalf
Of Ken Evans
Sent: Monday, June 13, 2011 9:15 AM
To: SBE EAS Exchange - a mail list for discussion about the Emergency
AlertSystem and other emergency communication issues.
Subject: Re: [sbe-eas] EAN Test followed by RWT


I have to agree with the fact that the EAN/EAT setup does not work, and not
only that, it could be bad for us all in the long run.  At least as a
holding device that captures our stations while we waited to hear the
President.

It dawned on me yesterday afternoon, that had they used EAN on 9/11, that
people who wanted to know what to do would not have gotten the news.

What they would have seen was a screen with EAS activation on it and maybe
if everything was working to a point where local and state messages could
get through, a few EAS messages and crawls including the one in the
handbook. But my area did not do any EAS messages during the 9/11 crisis.
So what would fill the time besides the basic handbook message?

Had EAN been the case, had we remained in the dark of what was taking place,
the fourth plane would have probably hit its target! You see the people on
the plane had received messages about what was happening from people
watching the news. And everyone was carrying the events in New York, and
Washington DC.  The fourth plane attack never reached its destination
because the people on the plane knew about what took place in New York, so
they heroically took action to stop that plane!

Also at the same time I thought about what people today want in a crisis.

They want to know what they should do, and they want news on what is
happening! I think they want messages to be believable. They also want to
see it just as much as hear it, as this makes it much easier to believe.
That means our State EAS plans need to have a way to not only carry the
Governor's vocal message, but a way to see it as it  is happening. So I
suppose the people will turn to television/cable or the internet news for
that.  Then how much will that jam up the internet infrastructure? Something
else to add into our State plans I guess.  But I would suggest the message
not be given priority over life saving messages to the area involved with an
emergency crisis.  Saving lives needs to be the first priority!

Regards,

Ken Evans





-----Original Message-----
From: sbe-eas-bounces at sbe.org [mailto:sbe-eas-bounces at sbe.org] On Behalf Of
Ryan McCauslin
Sent: Sunday, June 12, 2011 7:12 PM
To: SBE EAS Exchange - a mail list for discussion about the EmergencyAlert
System and other emergency communication issues.
Subject: Re: [sbe-eas] EAN Test followed by RWT

All cable and satellite will be blacked out with "Emergency Action
Notification" scrolling across the screen, with audio. So it'd be pointless
to try and tune somewhere else.

- Ryan McCauslin
  mccauslinr at gmail.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Reite" <br at telcen.com>
To: "SBE EAS Exchange - a mail list for discussion about the Emergency
AlertSystem and other emergency communication issues." <sbe-eas at sbe.org>
Sent: Sunday, June 12, 2011 6:45 PM
Subject: Re: [sbe-eas] EAN Test followed by RWT



> For sure, a boring script will get people to tune elsewhere, or even look

> for a news source other than broadcast.  I would imagine that in a real

> emergency, people will turn to an all news radio station, which are

> usually staffed 24/7 if there is one in their market.  If at home, they'll

> turn on the TV set, and if they have cable or satellite service, they'll

> tune in to CNN.

>

> On 6/12/11 4:47 PM, Richard_Rudman wrote:

>> Let's look at this from the point of view of the average person who has

>> just heard a real EAN and ask ourselves, what is the desired public

>> action after hearing an EAN supposed to be?

>>

>> So, the first question: Will the average people hearing a script repeated

>> again and again keep tuned to a source of local broadcast information, no

>> matter what the script says, or try to go somewhere else for more?

>>

>>   Second: If the goal here is to do everything possible to keep the

>> audience standing by for further information of a local or national

>> nature, what is the best way to do that?

>>

>> Richard

>>

>>

>> On Jun 12, 2011, at 1:19 PM, Bob Reite wrote:

>>

>>> Yes, and the rule for state local and federal emergencies coming in at

>>> once is:  The President of the US must be carried live.  After that,

>>> local emergency announcements, then state.   But with the automation

>>> proposal, the recorded announcement would be overridden when any EAS

>>> alert came through.

>>>

>>> On 6/12/11 4:04 PM, Richard_Rudman wrote:

>>>> Interesting discussion, and the idea of automating playing the scripts

>>>> could be made to work.

>>>>

>>>> However, I must offer my personal opinion that local stations have a

>>>> valid role to play after a given EAN event ends with an EOM, even if

>>>> other EAN's will follow.

>>>>

>>>> There is a saying many of you are familiar with that comes from the

>>>> field of emergency management -- "All emergencies are local."

>>>>

>>>> I can think of a number of scenarios where local information should go

>>>> out to the public after an EAN would be issued. You probably can too.

>>>>

>>>> Repeating a canned script when local information related to the EAN

>>>> should be passed along to the public does not seem like a good idea to

>>>> me. Never did. When I was in my last term as chair of the EAS National

>>>> Advisory Committee in 2002 this argument was brought to the attention

>>>> of the FCC when we asked them to correct the errors in the FCC EAS

>>>> Handbook.

>>>>

>>>> Richard Rudman

>>>>

>>>> On Jun 12, 2011, at 12:05 PM, Bob Reite wrote:

>>>>

>>>>> In theory, the EAN/EOM message could trigger a special routine in the

>>>>> station's automation system that would play a recording of the

>>>>> handbook script over and over,  and it would be reset to normal upon

>>>>> receipt of the EAT/EOM.

>>>>>

>>>>> On 6/11/11 4:17 PM, Stephen Weber wrote:

>>>>>> This brings up the issue of unattended operation again; how does a

>>>>>> station air the script in the Handbook over and over after the

>>>>>> EAN/EOM

>>>>>> when there is no Warm Body there??

>>>>

>>>> _______________________________________________

>>>> sbe-eas mailing list

>>>> sbe-eas at sbe.org

>>>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/sbe-eas

>>>>

>>> _______________________________________________

>>> sbe-eas mailing list

>>> sbe-eas at sbe.org

>>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/sbe-eas

>>

>> _______________________________________________

>> sbe-eas mailing list

>> sbe-eas at sbe.org

>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/sbe-eas

>>

> _______________________________________________

> sbe-eas mailing list

> sbe-eas at sbe.org

> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/sbe-eas

>


_______________________________________________
sbe-eas mailing list
sbe-eas at sbe.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/sbe-eas
_______________________________________________
sbe-eas mailing list
sbe-eas at sbe.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/sbe-eas