[SBE] Partnership For Public Warning - Alumni and Interested Stakeholders

[Adrienne Abbott]

This attitude that broadcasters have no interest in serving their
communities by providing Public Warnings is a perception that many of us in
the EAS community are working hard to dispel. FEMA and many state and local
emergency managers have found it easier to say that "broadcasters don't
care" than to understand and use EAS because they confuse EAS with the news
media and the last thing they think they want in a crisis or disaster is
bunch of reporters who can't pronounce the name of the affected community,
can't seem to grasp the scope of the problem and can only ask the victims
"You've just lost your home. How do you feel?" Their perception is: odds are
pretty good that no one will notice the flood-the smoke-the tornado-or the
giant green cloud than it is to find and support good public information
officers who understand the difference between Public Warning and a news
story. That is the single, strongest impetus behind the push for more
"personalized" and limited warning notification technologies like cell phone
alerts. The problem is, that after a 20-some year break in my engineering
career to do news, I can tell you that a single 72-character text message
isn't going to be nearly as effective at getting people to modify their
behavior to save their lives than an EAS activation that is followed by
reliable and timely information delivered by a familiar and trusted
broadcaster. In the years since CONELRAD was launched, we've devoted
thousands of hours of broadcast time educating people to pay attention when
they hear the distinctive tones that precede an EAS message. And inn spite
of our best attempts to declare it dead, radio is still the medium that
people trust the most for emergency information, especially when the chips
are down, the power is out and the wolf is at the door. I don't believe for
one nano-second that our broadcasters here in Nevada are any different than
those across the country. When there's a problem, their first instinct is to
warn people, and think about it, when something happens, your first reaction
is to turn on the radio or the TV, not pull out your cell phone unless
you're calling Aunt Meg to tell her to get out of the house. And don't throw
the FCC's Report and Order on Broadcast Localism at me-the single biggest
question I get from my station managers is "What more can I do to help my
audience?" It doesn't matter whether these managers are running a large
conglomerate of seven stations or own a small Mom-and-Pop AM/FM combo. They
all care, it's just difficult to document that caring in the confines of an
Issues/Programs Quarterly Report, the apparent source of much of the
information in the Localism Report. And, yes, common sense dictates that
generators are the first steps any broadcaster can take to ensure their
ability to serve their community in a disaster but a federal mandate to do
isn't any help when the National Guard confiscates your fuel shipments at
gunpoint as happened to the Mississippi broadcasters dealing with the
aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Of course, that's all water under the bridge
now, and supposedly things are "fixed" as demonstrated by the response to
Hurricane Gustav, in which local broadcasters played a significant role. But
if you, and anyone else, firmly believes that the feds should mandate that
broadcasters buy and install generators and other emergency equipment, then
get behind Senator Mary Landrieu's First Response Broadcasters Act of 2007,
HR 2331, now languishing in various subcommittees, which would put
broadcasters, and their ability to provide public warnings and public
information, on the same level as law enforcement, public safety and
emergency management officials in times of disaster. Let's get behind the
idea of solving the problems of getting timely, adequate and reliable
information to our audiences instead of beating up on our industry!

Adrienne Abbott

SECC Chair for Nevada (since 1995)   

 

  _____  

From: sbe-bounces at sbe.org [mailto:sbe-bounces at sbe.org] On Behalf Of Edwin
Bukont
Sent: Saturday, September 06, 2008 3:08 PM
To: sbe member discussion mail list
Subject: Re: [SBE] Partnership For Public Warning - Alumniand
InterestedStakeholders

 

The problem is, while the idea is noble, it appears the interest is on the
part of engineers, not station owners.  The FCC and FEMA have become so fed
up with broadcaster attitudes that they are mandating various alternates to
broadcast of emergency info.  The approach now being favored is to send info
direct to cell fones, which would respond to the alert based upon their GPS
position.  Radio at best would broadcast an announcement saying 'if you live
in XXX, please turn on your cell fone for important news".  We should note
that radio, unlike all other wireless communication media, is not required
to meet public communications emergency criteria such as generators and
their run time.  

Edwin Bukont CSRE, DRB, CBNT 
Comm-Struction and Services LLC 
P.O. Box 629;  Bel Air, MD 21014 USA 
V- 410.879.5567 F- 240.368.1265 C- 240.417.2475 

ebukont at msn.com 

Member: IEEE, SBE, AES, PMI 
Digital Media and Power Systems Integrators. 
A Harris Broadcast Channel Partner 


> From: weathertop at charter.net

> To: sbe at sbe.org

> Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2008 12:23:09 -0700

> Subject: Re: [SBE] Partnership For Public Warning - Alumni and

InterestedStakeholders

> 

> Richard--

> I am interest in being a part of your revived group for Partnership for

> Public Warning, in whatever form it takes. I am particularly interested in

> developing an educational program to train emergency managers in the use

of

> the broadcast media for public warning and in the coordination of those

> warnings across all technologies. 

> Adrienne

> 

> OK--so I'm just getting around to answering my emails--it's been a busy

> week!

> 

> 

> -----Original Message-----

> From: sbe-bounces at sbe.org [mailto:sbe-bounces at sbe.org] On Behalf Of

Richard

> Rudman

> Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2008 10:54 PM

> To: Rudman Richard

> Subject: [SBE] Partnership For Public Warning - Alumni and

> InterestedStakeholders

> 

> Greetings:

> 

> I have set up a group within the LinkedIn professional network to see 

> if there is interest in reviving the Partnership For Public Warning 

> (PPW) in some form.

> 

> I cannot and will not promise outcome. I just want to see who might be 

> interested in connecting on this effort. I have talked to some other 

> original PPW Trustees about this with some positive response.

> 

> I personally believe that an independent group of public/private 

> stakeholders might help advise and guide the unfolding process.

> 

> It worked once. It might work again.

> 

> Here's the link:

> 

> http://www.linkedin.com/groupsDirectory?results=&sik=1220420061944

> 

> Richard Rudman

> 

> 

> 

> 

> _______________________________________________

> The SBE Roundtable, SBE at sbe.org

> To unsubscribe, go to http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/options/sbe

> 

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

> 

> _______________________________________________

> The SBE Roundtable, SBE at sbe.org

> To unsubscribe, go to http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/options/sbe

> 

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


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/sbe/attachments/20080906/a4d3e673/attachment.html>