Conservatives say liberals want to kill talk radio. But there’s plenty else on the AM dial – much of it essential

  • TooTallSol@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    1 year ago

    I love how people here ignore that most government notifications about emergencies is over AM radio.

    Who needs to be notified about sudden storms/tornados/accidents/AMBER Alerts while they drive the US? /s

    • ShadowRam@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Most people get their emergency notifications on their mobile phone.

      Don’t have a mobile phone in the year 2020+??

      Then you’re doing it wrong.

      • JWBananas@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Today is day 6 of some people still not having power after the recent barrage of nearly hurricane-strength storms along the southern US.

        Those cheap AM/FM/weather radios that run off AA batteries are invaluable.

      • blazix@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Phones are great for emergency notifications but I think AM would be better for long-term sustained emergencies. It’s a highly highly unlikely event though.

      • Badabinski@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Phones require cell towers, internet backhauls, data centers, satellites, and power. I agree that phones are an absolutely fantastic first-line platform for emergency notifications. You still need more, though. There are many emergency scenarios that can hamper or disable cellular communication. Emergency preparedness is all about having redundancy and contingency plans. AM radio is extremely primitive, meaning it’s low power, easy to run, and easy to repair. It’s a fantastic option for a backup emergency warning system. Most people have one AM radio nowadays, and that’s in their car. I think keeping that option around is a good idea, considering how cheap AM radio components are.

        EDIT: I’ll add that I’m fairly progressive. I just believe in defense-in-depth. Information is really important during emergencies, and we should have many ways to warn people that they’re in danger.

      • armeck@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes you would have to be listening to an AM station. I almost never listen to the radio, but when I do it is an FM station. The EBS breaks into that when any emergency arises.

      • coldredlight@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        AM is more effective for true emergency situations where civilization has broken down because the section of the spectrum it uses naturally propagates further. You can hear an AM station over a much larger area than an FM station.

      • socialjusticewizard@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        AM radio is not only longer range, as the person above already noted, but a highly stable and maintainable old technology requiring minimal functional infrastructure. It is perfect for emergency broadcasts. It’s actually idiotic to remove am radio, it’s a classic case of manufacturers trying to save a few cents because they don’t give a shit about public safety.