Wireless Industry Asks FCC to Move Slowly on Further Changes to Alerting Rules

The FNPRM also asked whether WEA-capable devices should give subscribers options that let them decide how alerts are presented and about other ways to reduce the rate at which subscribers opt out of receiving alerts. FCC Chairman Brendan Carr noted in February the importance of addressing consumers' alerting fatigue, which can cause them to decide not to participate in the WEA program. The FNPRM is the 11th the FCC has issued on WEAs.

The FCC should ensure that any “new enhancements” to the WEA system “do not undermine the established success of the system and delay the delivery of information that can save lives,” CTIA said. The individual wireless carriers didn’t file separate comments.

“Experience has demonstrated that when enhancements are overly complex or implemented too quickly, and when education and training is lacking, the efficacy of the WEA system is impacted,” CTIA said. Any changes to the alert signal tone and vibration “warrant careful consideration as they represent a significant change to the established operation of the WEA system and public expectations.”

CTIA also urged the FCC to clarify that alert originators should refrain from using silent alerts, “except for active shooter scenarios,” until the FCC, Federal Emergency Management Agency, alert originators, participating carriers, device manufacturers and others “gain experience with the new Attention Signal suppression capability and have evaluated its efficacy.” Focus first on active shooter alerts since it makes the most sense for them to be sent in silent mode, the association advised. To the extent the commission “proceeds with additional changes to when and how the Attention Signal is used,” CTIA encouraged the FCC “to keep the process as simple as possible.”

The Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions noted that “there is no definitive evidence that altering the audio attention signal will reduce consumer opt-out rates.” Further changes to alerts could “cause confusion” for alert originators and consumers, “jeopardize safety, and complicate the [originator] training process and consumer education.”

It’s also unclear whether the proposed expanded use of public safety messages “will accomplish or frustrate the goal of reducing consumer opt-out,” ATIS said. The decisions made by alert originators when writing messages and utilizing WEA capabilities “will always be the key factor influencing consumers' confidence levels and their decisions to opt out.” The alliance urged the FCC to pause the proceeding and collaborate with FEMA’s Integrated Public Alert and Warning System Working Group to analyze how WEAs were used in recent events. “The Commission should then reassess methods for limiting consumer opt-out and determine whether modifications are needed to satisfy the goal of reducing consumer opt-out.”

Hamilton Bean, chair of the University of Colorado Denver's communication department, cautioned that much remains unknown about why consumers elect not to receive WEAs. It’s “uncertain whether expanding the use of the Public Safety Message class would reduce alert fatigue or opt-out because there is no verifiable baseline data concerning the prevalence of or reasons for either.”

Bean stressed that device manufacturers don’t adequately provide consumers with WEA information. For example, iPhone users “still find an undifferentiated group of options under a header called ‘Government Alerts’ at the bottom of their Notifications screen in their device settings,” he said. “On iPhone interfaces, an on/off toggle switch accompanies ‘AMBER Alerts,’ ‘Emergency Alerts,’ ‘Public Safety Alerts,’ and ‘Test Messages,’ which are presented with no description.”