Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Emergency TV turn-ons by government don't click with many
San Diego Union Tribune ^ | 10 April 2002 | Seth Borenstein

Posted on 04/10/2002 11:46:51 AM PDT by CounterCounterCulture

Emergency TV turn-ons by government don't click with many


Technology exists; question is whether it should be used

By Seth Borenstein
KNIGHT RIDDER NEWS SERVICE

April 10, 2002

WASHINGTON - If your TV is off when disaster looms, some emergency managers want to be able to turn it on to warn you of the coming danger.

The technology that would allow the government to remotely activate your television or radio already exists. But it's never caught on because so many people don't like the idea of government reaching into their homes.

Still, one emergency specialist who believes a "smart receiver" system can save lives intends to delicately broach the idea at the National Association of Broadcasters convention today in Las Vegas.

"The more you know about what's happening, the better off you are," said Peter Ward, chairman of the new nonprofit advocacy group Partnership for Public Warning, which will raise the subject at the broadcasters convention. "We hope to reduce loss of lives . . . .

The reality is if you look at warnings and the history of warnings, they have saved lives."

"As an emergency manager, it is a necessity," said Jim Butchart, communications technology coordinator for Alaska's Division of Emergency Services. "Because all of the NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) weather radios, all of the cable television scrolls, all of the television announcements do you no good if you're home asleep."

Nevertheless, it's still an uncomfortable idea, and the White House Office of Homeland Security says it's not actively exploring the idea.

Since 1997, the Federal Communications Commission has required radio, broadcast television and cable television companies to have the equipment "that sends out the proper codes to turn things on," said Frank Lucia, the retired emergency communications bureau director for the FCC who has joined Ward's efforts. But the FCC hasn't required radio or television makers to install the equipment to receive such automatic-on signals, he said.

Cable companies can turn on your set with a simple burst of reflected infrared light, said Mark Smith, spokesman for the National Cable Television Association. And in Europe, a smaller-scale version of this concept is used in 95 million car radios that can switch from playing a compact disc to issuing an emergency or traffic warning. Residents near nuclear power plants in Sweden have radios that turn on automatically in an emergency at the plant.

So the technology works. The question for Americans is whether it should be installed.

"Just the reality of it coming on in your home, if that technology is there, it becomes easier to add the capability to peek," said Wayne Crews, director of technology policy at the Cato Institute, a libertarian research center in Washington funded primarily by business interests.

"Anonymity still matters to a lot of people, and privacy still matters to a lot of people," Crews said. What's more, people already have access to nearly instant communication through the Internet, he said.

Supporters say consumers would still have some control over privacy because they will be able to program what warnings they want to receive.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: danger; emergency; fcc; government; homelandsecurity; maxheadroom; privacy; smartreceiver; spy
Earlier thread:
Technology could turn TVs on in emergency
1 posted on 04/10/2002 11:46:51 AM PDT by CounterCounterCulture
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: CounterCounterCulture
Next steps?? Mandatory TV ala 1984?? Not only unable to turn it off, but can't even throw it away?? Not to worry, a national (or local??) emergency could be reason enough to wake us up any hour of the night. Would we have volume control?
2 posted on 04/10/2002 11:53:37 AM PDT by widowithfoursons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CounterCounterCulture
wouldn't matter. our tv's always on anyway. now, if they were to change
the channel to say, lifetime, there'd be gunplay.
3 posted on 04/10/2002 11:56:48 AM PDT by glock rocks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: widowithfoursons
Next steps??

TV that watches you.

4 posted on 04/10/2002 12:01:32 PM PDT by oyez
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: widowithfoursons
Next steps??

TV that watches you.

5 posted on 04/10/2002 12:01:32 PM PDT by oyez
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: oyez
Yes, that was how it was used in "1984".
6 posted on 04/10/2002 12:07:13 PM PDT by widowithfoursons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: widowithfoursons
Next Steps?? A device which allows you to control the television remotely from your easy chair, using some sort of as yet undiscovered proton beam. Probably not in our lifetimes, though.
7 posted on 04/10/2002 12:34:27 PM PDT by Jack Wilson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Jack Wilson
A device which allows you to control the television remotely from your easy chair, using some sort of as yet undiscovered proton beam.

FINALLY, revenge when people park their bodies between me and the tube! (Could we maybe add a taser function?)

8 posted on 04/10/2002 12:57:36 PM PDT by Still Thinking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: CounterCounterCulture
Wouldn't it be easy to just put a switch on the set to enable/disable the automatic function at the owners discretion? That way people who want it can have it, and those who don't, not.
9 posted on 04/10/2002 12:58:52 PM PDT by Still Thinking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking
That way people who want it can have it, and those who don't, not.

you'd still pay for it as you now pay for algore's V chip TM... just more nannyism

10 posted on 04/10/2002 1:21:29 PM PDT by glock rocks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

Comment #11 Removed by Moderator

To: CounterCounterCulture

This is Lawsuit City. Look at how New York is being sued to death right now on the grounds that city government "should have known" that a terrorist attack was imminent.

Now these guys want to set themselves up as the people who "should have known" and "should have warned" everybody that an earthquake/tornado/mudslide/whatever was about to happen. The plaintiff's bar must be licking its chops.


12 posted on 04/10/2002 1:54:34 PM PDT by Nick Danger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: widowithfoursons
This reminds me of a short story I read once -- "The Running Man," by Stephen King (writing as Richard Bachman). The movie, with Ah-nold Shwarzenegger, was GOOD, but they deleted out the political commentary King had in the story.

In the story, all people had to have a TV (called "FreeVee") on, all the time, because of the "mandatory benefit" law.

Between the advent of "reality TV" and reading this article, I'm...nervous.

13 posted on 04/10/2002 2:00:41 PM PDT by Malacoda
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Malacoda
Don't be...we already have "COPS".

Which is already basically "Running Man" except without giving the perps a sporting chance.
14 posted on 04/10/2002 4:06:39 PM PDT by Maelstrom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson