Presidential Alert system

[Ten oz]

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) will run a test next week for a Presidential Alert which gives POTUS the ability to directly send messages to nearly all cell phones nationally via the Emergency Alert System. Under current law the wireless emergency alert system can only be used for natural disasters, acts of terrorism, or other man-made disasters or threats to public safety. 

Is this a good idea? Should the President have the ability to send emergency alerts out directly? I personally do not see the use. This is what we have emergency response agencies for. I do not understand how a Presidential Alert is an improvement. I also am concerned about the potential politicizing of it. Theoretically if the President had any reason to suspect a mass shooting or other type of terror attack on an election day they could send an alert out which would potentially frighten people into staying home and not voting. 

[iNow]

Regardless of whether or not a POTUS should be able to do this directly (I’m inclined toward not), seems like a rather outdated tech. We’ve got 24hr news and twitter and it takes seconds for anything the prez says to go all the way around the world. If you’re gonna txt me too, it’d better be bc a tornado is in my neighborhood and I need to find shelter

[Ten oz]

13 minutes ago, iNow said:

Regardless of whether or not a POTUS should be able to do this directly (I’m inclined toward not), seems like a rather outdated tech. We’ve got 24hr news and twitter and it takes seconds for anything the prez says to go all the way around the world. If you’re gonna txt me too, it’d better be bc a tornado is in my neighborhood and I need to find shelter

Plus we already have an Alert system. I had received flooding and child abduction alerts directly on my phone before. FEMA, DHS, FBI, NOAA, and etc are the agencies which brief the President regarding natural disasters and what not. So getting an alert directly from the President doesn't cut out the middle man in anyway. If anything it creates more bureaucracy as advisors working for the various agencies with now possibly waste time calculating from whom an alert should come.    

[swansont]

I can turn alerts off for my phone, and have done so. I got tired of getting flash-flood warnings while asleep. This new system will apparently not allow you to opt out.

Gotta wonder what restraints are in place to ensure the system is not abused. Because if it's the willpower of POTUS, I anticipate trouble. There have to be repercussions for spreading falsehoods and/or propaganda, or anything that isn't official government business.

[zapatos]

Quote

...The couple was woken up each morning by an official state announcement, transmitted through speakers installed in every house and building in North Korea...

https://nypost.com/2016/01/10/how-north-korea-kidnapped-hundreds-brainwashed-them-into-spies/

[Ten oz]

51 minutes ago, swansont said:

I can turn alerts off for my phone, and have done so. I got tired of getting flash-flood warnings while asleep. This new system will apparently not allow you to opt out.

Gotta wonder what restraints are in place to ensure the system is not abused. Because if it's the willpower of POTUS, I anticipate trouble. There have to be repercussions for spreading falsehoods and/or propaganda, or anything that isn't official government business.

Hopefully the emergency alert system Law is updated to reflect the expanding potential uses. 

[iNow]

Really requires a check from congress. Unless something changes in this years midterms, that check will likely remain blank. 

[Sensei]

3 hours ago, iNow said:

Regardless of whether or not a POTUS should be able to do this directly (I’m inclined toward not), seems like a rather outdated tech. We’ve got 24hr news and twitter and it takes seconds for anything the prez says to go all the way around the world.

You need to have 1) Internet connection, 2) smartphone, 3) bandwidth (Internet can have download limits), 4) you have to be interested about news, to read such warning on website(s). Free alert SMS would arrive regardless of the all four above requirements. I frequently see older people who have no smartphone, just obsolete almost 20 years old phones. They don't know how to use Internet, how to use smartphones, and see no need to fill this gap in their knowledge.

3 hours ago, iNow said:

 If you’re gonna txt me too, it’d better be bc a tornado is in my neighborhood and I need to find shelter

Agreement. Such alert system should not be abused for trivial things.

On the other hand, tornado is local event, such alert requires knowledge about location (from e.g. GPS) of person. It can easily be misused for invigilation purposes.

Edited September 15, 2018 by Sensei

[iNow]

https://www.theverge.com/2018/9/15/17863652/fema-emergency-test-ipaws-eas-esa

Quote

On October 3rd, FEMA will conduct a test of its Integrated Public Alert and Warning System (IPAWS), which brings together two existing alert systems, the Emergency Alert System and the Wireless Emergency Alerts system. This system will also mark the first time that a “Presidential Alert” will be sent out to a majority of cell phone owners, who won’t be able to opt out. ... It will take place at 2:18 PM.

(...)

The messages can be sent at the President’s discretion, but while experts have downplayed the possibility of the system being misused, this is the first time that the message will come with the heading “Presidential Alert.”

(...)

The WEA system is the same one that’s used to alert the public in the event of an AMBER Alert or a critical weather situation, and it comes after a terrifying incident in January when an alert went out in January that warned Hawaii residents that a missile was about to strike the state.

 

Edited September 18, 2018 by iNow

[Endy0816]

On 9/15/2018 at 11:18 AM, Ten oz said:

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) will run a test next week for a Presidential Alert which gives POTUS the ability to directly send messages to nearly all cell phones nationally via the Emergency Alert System. Under current law the wireless emergency alert system can only be used for natural disasters, acts of terrorism, or other man-made disasters or threats to public safety. 

Is this a good idea? Should the President have the ability to send emergency alerts out directly? I personally do not see the use. This is what we have emergency response agencies for. I do not understand how a Presidential Alert is an improvement. I also am concerned about the potential politicizing of it. Theoretically if the President had any reason to suspect a mass shooting or other type of terror attack on an election day they could send an alert out which would potentially frighten people into staying home and not voting. 

 

I think people are more likely to take a presidential alert seriously(if for not entirely rational reasons).

Though heaven help us with our current president. If it is abused or doesn't seem personally relevant then people may start ignoring it like everything else.

[swansont]

3 hours ago, Endy0816 said:

I think people are more likely to take a presidential alert seriously(if for not entirely rational reasons).

I think there are a lot of people who realize the president just makes stuff up, and has no credibility, so why would they trust something coming from him? He's poisoned the well.

[Endy0816]

3 hours ago, swansont said:

I think there are a lot of people who realize the president just makes stuff up, and has no credibility, so why would they trust something coming from him? He's poisoned the well.

I know, probably the worst one imaginable for it to be completed under. Brings to mind any number of 1984 scenarios or worse it turns into his second twitter page without a chance to opt out.

Different focus, but thinking more along the positives seen in Roosevelt's fireside chats. If he had his secretary give the same national radio addresses, would as many have listened? Why exactly?

This president is a dingleberry. Hopefully next one though uses it in a restrained manner that more people end up receiving and actually heeding warnings than otherwise. Placing some checks or restrictions on it is definitely a good idea too.

[StringJunky]

3 hours ago, swansont said:

I think there are a lot of people who realize the president just makes stuff up, and has no credibility, so why would they trust something coming from him? He's poisoned the well.

Yes, on the Reuters site I often read along the lines of "President Trump accused Mr X of... without evidence"

[iNow]

As I think about this more, the problem seems more related to WHO uses it than to the idea of it existing at all.

I realize that I'd be fine with such a system if my mayor used it.
I realize that I'd be fine with such a system if my governor used it.
I realize that I'd be fine with such a system if my congressman or senator used it.

Following this logic, I am ultimately fine with such a system if my president used it.

My problem and apprehension seems more firmly related to the current president who averages 32 lies per day and has told over 5,000 confirmed falsehoods since taking office, and the possibility that more like him will take office in the future.

[swansont]

At least the law that governs this system (see link above by Ten Oz) says (sec 526 part d)

"Except to the extent necessary for testing the public alert and warning system, the public alert and warning system shall not be used to transmit a message that does not relate to a natural disaster, act of terrorism, or other man-made disaster or threat to public safety."

[iNow]

34 minutes ago, swansont said:

At least the law that governs this system (see link above by Ten Oz) says (sec 526 part d)

"Except to the extent necessary for testing the public alert and warning system, the public alert and warning system shall not be used to transmit a message that does not relate to a natural disaster, act of terrorism, or other man-made disaster or threat to public safety."

That does give a bit of hope, but, as we all know, Nancy Pelosi is a threat to public safety and Chuck Schumer is a man-made disaster

(only half kidding... can totally see this reasoning being used)

[Phi for All]

8 minutes ago, iNow said:

That does give a bit of hope, but, as we all know, Nancy Pelosi is a threat to public safety and Chuck Schumer is a man-made disaster

(only half kidding... can totally see this reasoning being used)

Terrorists want to make Americans forget about the landslide victory over Clinton, and the record-breaking inaugural attendance. Great new system for reaching out each week to remind us. Make America Gag Again!

[Ten oz]

2 hours ago, iNow said:

As I think about this more, the problem seems more related to WHO uses it than to the idea of it existing at all.

I realize that I'd be fine with such a system if my mayor used it.
I realize that I'd be fine with such a system if my governor used it.
I realize that I'd be fine with such a system if my congressman or senator used it.

Following this logic, I am ultimately fine with such a system if my president used it.

My problem and apprehension seems more firmly related to the current president who averages 32 lies per day and has told over 5,000 confirmed falsehoods since taking office, and the possibility that more like him will take office in the future.

I am not okay with any politician using it. Every decision a politician makes gets filtered through what the impact on their public image is. More often than not what is best for a politician comes down to pleasing their supports and not doing what is best. Politicians are graded as much for the red meat they give their base as they are the job they actually do. I think emergency management professionals should handle alert systems. Rather than a local Mayor the Local Fire Dept. or Police Chief. Rather than The President the Sec. of DHS or Administrator of FEMA. In my opinion those individuals working in specific emergency management positions have a narrower focus and doing their job well is most typically the best way to raise their profiles. Ifthe Sec.of DHS sent out a questionable alert which appeared to be bias or politically motivated it would be much easy for Congress to check them than it would be checking a President for the same alert. 

2 hours ago, swansont said:

At least the law that governs this system (see link above by Ten Oz) says (sec 526 part d)

"Except to the extent necessary for testing the public alert and warning system, the public alert and warning system shall not be used to transmit a message that does not relate to a natural disaster, act of terrorism, or other man-made disaster or threat to public safety."

Terrorism and public safety are terms which can be manipulated. If on election day Trump sent out an alert warning that millions of illegals planned to vote would that be a violation? Millions of illegals voting could theoretically be a public safety concern. Even if it were a clear violation who would hold Trump accountable. Congress has yet to hold Trump accountable for any of his various violations and breaches of protocol. 

[swansont]

4 hours ago, Ten oz said:

Even if it were a clear violation who would hold Trump accountable. Congress has yet to hold Trump accountable for any of his various violations and breaches of protocol. 

That's a huge problem, on many fronts.

[John Cuthber]

I'd like to think that even Trump would realise that spamming the whole nation would be counter-productive.

I'd like to think that...

[Phi for All]

15 minutes ago, John Cuthber said:

I'd like to think that even Trump would realise that spamming the whole nation would be counter-productive.

I'd like to think that...

You're looking a great deal farther down the road than he usually does. He prefers a crystal ball to binoculars. Everything he does is to make "now" great for himself, which he thinks automatically makes it great for you too. It seems totally in character that he would assume you'd be honored to have a free message from T himself.

 When I saw the title I was kind of hoping that this thread was going to be about a new Twitter Defense System, a sort of anti-tweet lie detector for reasonable people.

[John Cuthber]

If hundreds of millions of people reply saying "Where is the 'unsubscribe' button?", even he might get the message.

 

[Ten oz]

Testing of the system has been pushed back and many people have raised concerns about not being able to opt out. 

Quote

 

The Federal Emergency Management Agency, which oversees the wireless emergency alert (WEA) system, announced that the test that had been scheduled for Thursday will be pushed back to Oct. 3, citing the "ongoing response efforts to Hurricane Florence."

The initial announcement was met with concerns from social media users who stated that a direct message from President Donald Trump to the nation could be used for political purposes, similar to how he uses his official Twitter page.

One online user responded to FEMA's announcement via Twitter, saying, "We don’t need presidential alerts! We already have public emergency alert messaging. This is not necessary!"

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/mobile/fema-s-presidential-alert-test-postponed-some-americans-want-disconnect-n910406

 

 

[StringJunky]

2 hours ago, Ten oz said:

Testing of the system has been pushed back and many people have raised concerns about not being able to opt out. 

 

"Hello, Big Brother here". 

Edited September 19, 2018 by StringJunky

[John Cuthber]

If one person in 10  switches the TV on "to see what's happening" that will be a big power spike.

If it knocks the power grid out (even locally) and that causes something important to fail (traffic lights would be an obvious possibility) then Trump's vanity project will kill people.

Are there any Trump supporters here who would like to comment on why they think he' doing a good job?