you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 31 points 2 years ago (2 children)

The issue is that AM radio is far more reliable in an emergency:

in a true emergency, seven former FEMA administrators wrote in a letter to Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg, the signals that power AM radio are more reliable than FM, phone service, and internet connection. Most of the 75-odd stations with backup communications equipment and generators that allow them to broadcast in a crisis are AM stations, and AM radio covers 100 miles or more, far more territory than FM or any other widely accessible alternative. Source

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] -18 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    For the 1% of people who look to AM for emergency information. ;)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 2 years ago*

    The idea is that AM is more rugged, it'll be up when other more common forms of emergency communication is down. Internet and TV are both fragile, relatively speaking. FM covers less range. So yeah, while few people use it actively, when a true crisis hits, it's nice to have a stable fallback. ;)

  • source
  • parent