[SBE] Partnership For Public Warning - Alumni and InterestedStakeholders

[Richard Rudman]

The original seventeen PPW Trustees believed PPW should support  
multiple warning systems using many delivery technologies -- all   
working together. Broadcasters sometimes feel they "own" warnings. I  
personally do not think that is any more constructive than emergency  
managers not communicating properly with the media to fill in the  
details after a warning goes out.

Going back to some key PPW basics as they apply to all warning systems:

1. National Warning Strategy
2. Common Alerting Protocol (CAP)
3. Common Terminology

We only have the CAP piece in place so far, and there have been  
threats to its integrity.

Having CAP implemented at as many warning centers as possible might  
care of a lot of training issues.

Training EM's in the use of broadcasting has in my mind more to do  
with telling the story of the emergency as opposed to the headline of  
the story, the warning. I have believed for some time that solving the  
sub set, the warning, is a separate problem from the superset, the  
ongoing story of the emergency. Some of you may remember I coined an  
acronym for the superset some time ago, EPI (Emergency Public  
Information).

EPI works best when both sides meet half way to plan, train and  
improve -- and fails miserably where they do not. The recent Gap fire  
in Santa Barbara County is not a good EPI story. Hurricane Gustav  
might turn out to be a better story in this regard.

There is more basic work to be done learning the scales before EM's  
and broadcasters perform the symphony of warnings and EPI in tune.

So, stay tuned. That's at least a double pun.


:-)


Richard
(One of the PPW 17)


On Sep 6, 2008, at 3:08 PM, Edwin Bukont wrote:


> 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

> _______________________________________________

> 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/20080906/09501b54/attachment.htm>