On Apr 18, 7:48�pm, Steve Bonine wrote:
AF6AY wrote:

You'll pardon me for only picking one part of your article to discuss.

* *Then I would say that the old, out-dated stereotypical
* *"we are the heroes of disasters and emergencies" bragging
* *ought to be put away.

While I do agree that some of the material that comes out of disasters
is overblown, sometimes people do *earn* the right to brag. *When folks
put a lot of hours into helping out in disasters they deserve recognition.

Oh, I agree with that, no sweat. What I didn't make clear were
all the others who haven't worked an "emergency" at all and
attach themselves to one.


Why is it so bad to highlight a positive aspect of the hobby? *It's not
the *only* aspect of the hobby, but hams still do help in disasters.

Yes, some hams do help. I'm not saying none do. But, the
average citizen has been seen helping out in emergencies
and disasters, voluntarily, and get little attention for that.
Why should there be more attention paid to someone who
once took a radio test and has some radio gear available?


*The public that has been IN such
* *events is aware of who helped them and who didn't.

They might have an idea what *agency* helped them. *But the public has
no particular awareness of the infrastructure that facilitated that
help. *They might understand that a Red Cross feeding vehicle provided
them a meal; they don't understand or care how that crew communicated
with their headquarters.

During the 17 January 1994 Northridge Earthquake aftermath,
FEMA set up a "true" bulletin board at one center for victims.
Several TV screens showing slow pan-circle shots moving
across handwritten messages from family and friends. Watchers
could get a very strong ID from the handwriting in the message.
That was a lot more ID than some "radiogram" form or a
stranger relaying a message over the phone.


Don't get me wrong . . . I'm not saying that every ham needs to
participate in emergency communications, or that hams are the major
players in every disaster. *But in spite of the great strides that have
been made in making the communications infrastructure more robust,
Mother Nature can still throw a sufficiently hard punch to cause severe
disruption, and ham radio operators do still play a role in such
situations.

IF and only IF the radio amateur's equipment ALSO survives.

Familiarity with only ham equipment doesn't automatically
mean certain items of "robust" ham equipment will survive
anything. I've been there and seen the REAL robust stuff
pass environmental tests. Consumer electronics grade,
such as most ham gear, isn't going to sail through without
damage.


*If the hobby can benefit from accurate, well-written
accounts of those activities, what's wrong with that?

Of course it can. But, one can also write a news thing
many different ways, arranging words to imply lots of
different things. As a student of wordsmithing, as one
who has gotten pay for writing, and after having read
way too much advertising literature, I can spot most of
those right off. :-(

Look to the ARRL for being masters of the above on
their "Letter" of every week. The ARRL does good as a
membership organization but sometimes they DO "sin
by omission" on news.

News stories have got to get OUT of the insular "news
world" of amateur radio in order to reach the PUBLIC.

73, Len AF6AY