686
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 04 Jan 2025
686 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
60605 readers
2741 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I wonder why such an important piece of info is posted on social media but not on a dedicated webpage that can be linked to any social media posts.
Yay, privatization? Just post it to a social media platform so the official org doesn’t have to dedicate IT resources or further effort to it?
Social media has a very good ratio of information spreading versus effort required. It's also why it's a popular thing for misinformation and influence campaigns.
In contrast, if a government agency wants to make a website for this, it probably needs a proposal, budget request, approval by a commission, a bidding process, and other bureaucatic procedures put in place by politicians that wanted to lower spending.
And we got news like this.
Addition: Difficult, cumbersome, and bureaucratic to do doesn't mean they shouldn't do it. Those are just purely excuses.
How hard is it to hire some 23 year old who just graduated in IT and ask them to do it? Static webpages aren't hard, drag learned how to make them in high school.
Governments are probably a bit hesitant to go that route after a few pages like that got hacked and ended up full of Russian propaganda.
I mean, it's not like people would check that dedicated webpage on their own, and they are less likely to click on that webpage to get the additional details. Just put it on the platform most people are using and don't add extra steps to see what's needed.
If they're looking to Xitter it could be copy/pasted instead, but then updates get harder to manage.
if you read the article, you'd find out that the alert linked to the X post. it could be linking to a dedicated webpage instead, which wouldn't require logging in.
It should be linked to another page. Social media should never the be the primary source for anything like this.
Yes, use the POSSE principle: post own site, syndicate elsewhere
Especially Musk's far-right propaganda platform. Public and media organizations need to stop using it.
Social media should never be someone’s primary website too. IMO. But people are lazy.
They don’t even want email anymore, they want you to message them with Twitter or Instagram or whatever.
Not even another page should be the primary source. That page should be a secondary for updates. The alert itself should have included all the actionable details.
can/should the protocol used to deliver emergency alerts support images/video, if so what formats and size limits?
Doesn't have to, I think. Text is actually quite adequate. Sure, images are great but that's only for a subset of alerts, like AMBER, but that can be achieved by secondary distribution channels like a dedicated webpage or social media. There won't be network congestion during those alerts. You don't really need images or video for alerts like floods, hurricanes, or even missile incoming alerts. For those you only need an address or coordinates that can point people to the closest shelter. Yeah, not all people are familiar with the surroundings (like traveling) but in that kind of scenarios every people around you will pool together and get to the same location.
The whole core functionality that the alert system must achieve is a near 100% delivery rate that uses minimal bandwidth of the network. You don't want to stress the network because there are more important traffic need to be routed, like 911.
Most, but not all people should be a deal breaker for a public service announcement.
That was my take. Still is, but was before, too, although I have concerns about it. I don't even use xitter. It's an unfortunate conundrum and I don't know the answer. We are clearly seeing the results of channeling government communications through private platforms where information can be gatekept. But what's the alternative? I agree that the government website should be the primary source and private platforms the secondary source, but, much in the way US-market cars hide the "real" tail lights in/under the trunk in order to put "aux" tail lights on moving trunk/tailgate panels, that's just not how the general public will use it.
People want to be entertained. Getting info through private media is the most we can hope for. People don't want to get real news media, let alone their local government's attempt at a blog site. I know we get amber alerts direct from the cell network to some unique software on phones, but I imagine rolling out some more-frequent alert system will cause a ton of privacy/freedom backlash crying about being one goosestep away from China.
Posting the information on an official page and creating links with summaries on social media.
the government hosting their own social media like how some college campus' have their own mastadon server specifically for their universities news. It's not like other organizations haven't already done it before. Spin your own server, and in your alerts, link your own mastodon server, which should not require user login to read. The platform doesnt matter as long as the information and where to send additional information for help is functional for them. spinning their own servers gives them full control of the outcome.
And remember the attempt to abandon AM radio as a standard for diseminating emergency information.