Why cannot it absolutely not be the case? What makes you think they HAVE to announce it being a test in order for it to be a test?
Many of us have heard the tone over the radio with no accompanying message before, we don't think its overly unusual.
The purpose of a test is to see whether a station is playing the tone or not, you don't need to announce it being a test in order to determine who is complying.
I'm a pretty old guy and as I recall from a long long time ago there were direct statements about this stating specifically you will ALWAYS hear an announcement of it being a test, otherwise it is the real deal. This was common knowledge just a couple decades ago. It was a very explicit requirement by the Emergency Broadcasting System.
And just for the sake of this discussion I just called a buddy up who's been in radio for a long time and he told me the same thing. They always have to announce it's a test.
Obviously one of us is wrong and neither of us is going to convince the other.
Let's just hope things are shaking around behind the scenes for all of our sakes.
I totally get your reasoning, but if they HAVE to announce its a test, why don't they ALSO HAVE to announce what the ACTUAL emergency is for? Does that logic really sit well with you?
The reasoning behind announcing it is a test is so people don't panic and assume an emergency that doesn't exist, correct?
Well.... playing the tone and NOT announcing the emergency will cause the SAME result, panic because one thinks theres an emergency but what is the point because we don't even know what the emergency is.
No. It could have been a mistake. Federal regs require all tests to be anounced.
If it is not a test, it must be accompanied by an official anouncement, as to what the emergency was.
I've heard once or twice where it was like this, a tone without an anouncement. One was a dude joking around and was arrested, lost his job.
The other was a kid who set it off "by accident" when visiting a station once. Had to issue a public apology and was banned from radio stations. I dont remember if he had to do community service.
Yes it does happen, but used to be there were heavy consequences for fakes.
If it’s established that an announcement MUST be made alongside an emergency broadcast, whether test or not, I would be inclined to believe that the message was cut off by the broadcaster, that is, if we’re throwing out the possibility of mistakes. I know I’ve heard the tone without any message, and I also honestly recall the tone being cut abrupty back to normal programming in these instances. I give you my word because I remember thinking that the message was required too during these instances and it struck me as odd.
Do you think it’s more possible that broadcasters have been cutting off these signals short in order to censor them without consequence, or that it was simply a mistake?
Why cannot it absolutely not be the case? What makes you think they HAVE to announce it being a test in order for it to be a test?
Many of us have heard the tone over the radio with no accompanying message before, we don't think its overly unusual.
The purpose of a test is to see whether a station is playing the tone or not, you don't need to announce it being a test in order to determine who is complying.
I'm a pretty old guy and as I recall from a long long time ago there were direct statements about this stating specifically you will ALWAYS hear an announcement of it being a test, otherwise it is the real deal. This was common knowledge just a couple decades ago. It was a very explicit requirement by the Emergency Broadcasting System.
And just for the sake of this discussion I just called a buddy up who's been in radio for a long time and he told me the same thing. They always have to announce it's a test.
Obviously one of us is wrong and neither of us is going to convince the other.
Let's just hope things are shaking around behind the scenes for all of our sakes.
I totally get your reasoning, but if they HAVE to announce its a test, why don't they ALSO HAVE to announce what the ACTUAL emergency is for? Does that logic really sit well with you?
The reasoning behind announcing it is a test is so people don't panic and assume an emergency that doesn't exist, correct?
Well.... playing the tone and NOT announcing the emergency will cause the SAME result, panic because one thinks theres an emergency but what is the point because we don't even know what the emergency is.
Are we being invaded?
Is there going to be a natural disaster?
Are we under martial law?
Did the President get assassinated?
Whats the point?
The only logical answer is... its a TEST.
No. It could have been a mistake. Federal regs require all tests to be anounced.
If it is not a test, it must be accompanied by an official anouncement, as to what the emergency was.
I've heard once or twice where it was like this, a tone without an anouncement. One was a dude joking around and was arrested, lost his job.
The other was a kid who set it off "by accident" when visiting a station once. Had to issue a public apology and was banned from radio stations. I dont remember if he had to do community service.
Yes it does happen, but used to be there were heavy consequences for fakes.
Right and now this has happened multiple times. Also: https://greatawakening.win/p/12hRCFk0GJ/x/c/4Dx422Dw3n8
Check this out: https://greatawakening.win/p/12hRCFk0GJ/x/c/4Dx422Dw3n8
If it’s established that an announcement MUST be made alongside an emergency broadcast, whether test or not, I would be inclined to believe that the message was cut off by the broadcaster, that is, if we’re throwing out the possibility of mistakes. I know I’ve heard the tone without any message, and I also honestly recall the tone being cut abrupty back to normal programming in these instances. I give you my word because I remember thinking that the message was required too during these instances and it struck me as odd.
Do you think it’s more possible that broadcasters have been cutting off these signals short in order to censor them without consequence, or that it was simply a mistake?