[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: the new emergency alert system.
- Subject: Re: the new emergency alert system.
- From: SteveOrdinetz <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Sat, 9 Aug 1997 01:19:22 -0400
At 05:58 PM 8/8/97 -0400, Rob Landry wrote:
>This is a poorly engineered
>system. Interrupting a piece of music abruptly is something that should
>properly be done only in a *real* emergency, when you want to be sure to
>attract the full attention of your listeners. If you do it routinely, it
>loses its dramatic effect -- you're crying "wolf", and when the real
>tornado or nuclear missile shows up a lot of listeners will not pay any
>attention to you.
>The rules have to be changed.
I'll have to agree with Rob. Even the few "real" bulletins we've relayed
have been thunderstorm warnings.....really stiff, stifled copy read by
someone with a total monotone delivery and audio that sounded like 2 or 3
generations of transistor-radio-held-in-front-of-a-telephone sound quality.
Moreover, even when you could understand the warnings (you had to strain to
decipher them), it was really generic copy with the usual "chance of hail
and dangerous winds..." that 99 % of listeners would completely ignore and
really said nothing.
Alas, the whole reason the EAS system was developed to make it easier for
stations to run unattended and still "serve the community".