DHS MEDIA ROLE SEEN LIMITED TO SETTING WARNING SYSTEM STANDARDS

Executives drew the line, however, at airwave control and possible govt. examination of nongovt. material distributed over the emergency message systems. The 41- member FCC-established council will finish voting on proposed best practices soon and will begin research going “from the 30,000-foot level to the 5,000-foot level” on those issues, said Ira Goldstone, vp-chief technology officer, Tribune Bcstg., and chmn. of the Future Technologies/Digital Solutions task force of the MSRC Communications Infrastructure Security Working Group. Clear Channel Vp- Technology Al Kenyon said of the reports to be voted upon: “There might be some comments, but I don’t think there is anything anyone would object to in these proposals at this point.”

The general outline of a federal role in emergency broadcasting was in an interim report by John Eck, pres., NBC bcst. & network operations and chmn. of the MSRC Public Communications & Safety Working Group. He said the group’s first recommendation to the Council was based on the potential that existed for a partnership between the public and private sectors. Eck said “a single federal entity should be responsible for assuring public communications capabilities and procedures exist, are effective and are deployed… that they establish lead responsibilities and actions and that a national, uniform, all-hazard risk communication warning process is implemented.” He said that entity should be the DHS and that delivery of the emergency information would be done by both the public and private sectors and not just one group. DHS Secy. Tom Ridge agreed DHS should be involved, but specifics weren’t discussed at the meeting.

The media companies can’t set the rules and standards to control the emergency warning system, MSRC members said. Goldstone said: “We need them to set the standards. We can help them to scope the requirements, but there is no [media] group right now out there that can set the standards.” He said the fact that the current Emergency Alert System wasn’t used Sept. 11 was an example of its “poor hierarchal structure” and that in the future “someone has to be in charge of that, and it’s not the broadcaster or cable operator: It’s the government that has to help us out.”

FCC support for DHS-mandated rules also is a “must” for Council members, said NBC Vp-Technology Glenn Reitmeier, chmn. of the Prevention Task Force of the Communications Infrastructure Security Group. “The issue of government coordination is really up to the DHS and FCC to work out to see how government responsibilities fall, in terms of what regulatory oversights are appropriate.” Reitmeier said that while the DHS should set standards, those rules should be loose or general enough to make room for progress and new rules as they might arise: “For many good reasons, it makes sense to set up a framework… but by having that freedom to innovate, we'll see many good ideas and solutions bubbling up as the cooperation of public and private sectors starts, and hopefully the good ideas will get emulated and replicated.”

MSRC would like to see media companies “do what they do well, which is get information out in accurate and timely manner,” Reitmeier said. In exchange for setting the standards, Goldstone said the media companies had the responsibility of providing the DHS with information on how all types of communications could be used. Reitmeier said he didn’t foresee much resistance if DHS brought up the idea of being able to transmit its emergency messages whenever it felt they were necessary: “That’s not much different in principal from when the President needs to make that alert. If there’s a national-level threat, it’s pretty serious.” Reitmeier also said the President did not even use his complete access to the current Emergency Alert System Sept. 11, so it was not likely the new system would be controlled by a federal govt. entity other than the President any time soon. Kenyon agreed, but didn’t see it as a big issue: “Obviously the media is supportive of DHS needs as much as possible, but I don’t think this is going to be an issue… The mandatory rebroadcast of information is such a political football that the first person that tries to exert that control outside of the President will be remembered for it.”

As for control over content distributed over the alert system, Council members felt it was their duty to pass on govt. warnings, but Goldstone said that when it came to the information of the media companies, “it is our duty to control this… If we gather new information, it is ours and the government should not have control over that or editorialize it.”

Cost was another sensitive issue for Council members, especially in reference to increasing “geographic diversity” among media companies to ensure the maximum number of citizens receive emergency warnings. However, few executives seemed worried, and they were confident the issue of expansion of delivery systems would resolve itself naturally over time. They said the main way that growth would develop would be by media companies’ keeping their old facilities as auxiliaries when they grew and built new spaces. Kenyon said: “We don’t anticipate this will happen overnight, and it will not be done for the sake of the [emergency warning] system, but as upgrades happen, it’s in the best interest of the station, and it is hoped that they will maintain their old facility as an auxiliary facility.”

Executives said the increase in geographic diversity would come not as multiple individual company tasks, but as a cooperative effort with coordination, and those who were able to do so chipping in to the cause. Kenyon said: “This isn’t a change that will be available in all markets in all stations, and it’s common sense that there is some cost involved, because we're talking about leasing 2 tower locations instead of just one.” Reitmeier said: “We couldn’t ask every broadcaster to have full geographic redundancy, but in a cooperative sense within a market, it’s something we need to look for and encourage… One of the philosophies we've seen in the working group discussions is to try and do things on pooled basis, and that does tend to share the costs, but there are a lot of details that will have to be worked out based on individual circumstances in each market.”

Another recommendation to help geographic diversity was to establish “backup carriage plans with other nonnews networks,” primarily cable networks, said Harris CEO Bruce Allan, Communications Infrastructure Security Group chmn. Many executives didn’t see such unions currently in existence, and said such recommendations “are things that would be established on discussion-and-handshake basis” from company to company, as Kenyon put it. Council members believe examples will come out in the results of surveys MSRC distributed throughout the media industry, but regardless of the results, Reitmeier said there would be “a lot of effort to come up with solutions that can be implementable with the industry with cooperation that would keep costs manageable for everyone involved.”

Some Council members said they would like to see govt. partnerships aiding geographic diversity, in particular with zoning and getting permits to build new towers. Reitmeier said: “I would certainly hope that the government would play a role in helping to streamline some of the issues that are difficult at the local level, like zoning and getting permits to put up towers. Those can be very difficult and time-laden kinds of things.” Kenyon said he could see media companies’ looking to the FCC or DHS to become involved to ease tower construction in the name of homeland security by “encouraging stations and companies to work,” but he had “no idea how that would take place… It involves a great deal of difficulty and requires a long lead time to get a tower put up even in places where there are multiple towers already.” Kenyon also said “zoning and real estate policies are pretty much solely under state rights, and yet there are national interests in this case especially… striking the right balance will be a difficult procedure.”

FCC facilitation plans haven’t changed since the interim reports at the MSRC meeting 2 weeks ago, FCC sources said. “There is nothing really new coming out on this end,” said an FCC spokesman after checking with numerous Commission officials on their plans with the Council and the DHS. She said plans still were very general and the Commission “definitely has no plans to oversee” the Council’s further development of the emergency message system, although the FCC did plan to be involved to some degree in helping further communication with the public.