Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Mr_Cleanish t1_j6dun40 wrote

Saved you a click. They played the emergency broadcast tone for a football commercial. You aren't allowed to use the tone to protect its integrity.

2,464

HandstandsMcGoo t1_j6dxdjk wrote

If that's the sound, I'm surprised the fine isn't higher

810

cbbuntz t1_j6dykrf wrote

Maybe it's a flat fine? You can't expect a local TV channel to pay a million bucks. That fine is nothing to Fox

264

InappropriateTA t1_j6e9xyt wrote

Doesn’t seem like it. The article mentions:

> The Federal Communications Commission, which polices use of the sound to protect its integrity, now wants to fine the organization $504,000 – just as it did for Hollywood action film Olympus Has Fallen ($1.9 million, 2014) right down to Jimmy Kimmel Live ($395,000, 2019).

195

cbbuntz t1_j6ealnp wrote

Seems pretty pointless to fine a multinational corporation a half million. Not much of a deterrent

116

Zarathustra30 t1_j6eqw81 wrote

Eh. I doubt that using this specific tone profits FOX half a million more than any other tone.

89

Sokobanky t1_j6fc9zl wrote

I mean, we’re all talking about it.

5

Zarathustra30 t1_j6fe5pr wrote

Point, though is r/television really the demographic who cares about sports?

19

ThomB96 t1_j6h9jyx wrote

All kinds of people care about sports

2

officeDrone87 t1_j6i9n3h wrote

Reddit is the largest hub for sports discussion in America.

1

Locke_Moghan t1_j6f684e wrote

Given that they could have used a slightly different tone and not get a fine, it still seems like a decent enough deterrent.

59

orangemaroon25 t1_j6g0h85 wrote

I thought it was the tone you hear before the national weather service reports that you can't use. The one with the three short repeats.

9

AidanAmerica t1_j6gjigr wrote

It’s those three short tones, one long beep, then three (slightly different) short tones again. this

20

UniqueMeasurement161 t1_j6el351 wrote

If it wasn’t much of a deterrent then it would happen more often.

28

44problems t1_j6ncn40 wrote

I would hope if Fox repeatedly ignored this warning that harsher penalties would arise.

1

MarcusLiviusDrusus t1_j6ezlxq wrote

As John Rogers says, "A fine is a price."

You might even expand it to "A fine is a price that you only occasionally have to pay."

10

Anchor689 t1_j6eh9w7 wrote

Yeah, I wish we would stop fining large corporations. Nullify their patents/trademarks or something like that instead. That might be a bit extreme in this case, but when large fines and maybe sending executives to jail are the worst punishments we give large corporations, it's insane that we think they'll learn any kind of lesson.

9

WhileNotLurking t1_j6fu1u4 wrote

Eh. Mistake happen. A one time mistake like this is perfect for a fine.

Now repeat offenses or blatantly ignoring the law - I'm with you.

Wells Fargo / HSBC makes a business out of breaking the law. Making billions then paying a few hundred thousands in fines.

22

whoooocaaarreees t1_j6ibtth wrote

Up vote for calling out HSBC and Wells Fargo on systemic shitty and often illegal behavior.

3

apply_induction t1_j6fbyyt wrote

Play the emergency tone, now your bosses’ bosses’ boss gets solitary? Sounds like a plan!

7

MissDiem t1_j6fersd wrote

If risk of executives or board members doing any jail or prison time for things was actually on the table, we could fix so many things.

4

ktElwood t1_j6hdcv0 wrote

They will put the blame on some employee and claim they had not been informed and have no information.

4

PaxNova t1_j6hyf8d wrote

I doubt they review all footage. It would be the truth here.

1

MissDiem t1_j6idqze wrote

What I'm saying is if we could create legislation that states company executive and board members go to prison if X happens, you'll find they have miraculous solutions and previously unrevealed projects that guarantee X won't happen.

1

ktElwood t1_j6ix93a wrote

Yeah but you'll never have that because politicians are heavily influenced by lobbyists, who get hired by executives.

The amount of Senetor's and Rep's children in managing roles of big tech is astonishing...seems like they always should have second thoughts while voting on bills...

1

MadeByTango t1_j6glu5n wrote

It may be based on the size of the potentially harmed audience, not the finances of the offender (which feels fairer, honestly, even if I don’t care to stand up for Fox)

Audience size would likely be:

  1. Box office movie
  2. Fox show
  3. Jimmy kimmel
3

bearsheperd t1_j6gwgce wrote

Even these big corporations like to nickel and dime. If someone uses the tone without realizing they were going to be fined then it’s a screw up and someone will get fired. If they did it knowing full well they’d get fined and got the go ahead anyway, then yes they should fine them more.

3

ranhalt t1_j6fywsf wrote

It’s low enough that they won’t pay to fight it. But the real question is where does that money go.

2

chpr1jp t1_j6ga2n6 wrote

Article says that three have been fined. It seems that the deterrence factor is there.

2

Agariculture t1_j6gkq23 wrote

More like government grifting. Its cost of doing biz for the corps. But significant money to the department. If you watch you will see this type of grift all over the globe. All governments are doing it.

0

unsaltedbutter t1_j6elw30 wrote

It's almost just a very expensive licensing fee. They already pay licensing fees to play short clips of music. Same thing.

12

ballrus_walsack t1_j6eu2h1 wrote

Except they don’t get to keep using it. Each use is a new fine.

14

Archangel9731 t1_j6ezh94 wrote

So it’s pay-as-you-go

−1

ballrus_walsack t1_j6f1fb1 wrote

I guess so… but fines can ratchet up if they are meant to deter a behavior or action. So if they tried to budget for it then it would be very uncertain.

2

lego_office_worker t1_j6f4ldm wrote

no its like a speeding ticket. you kow what happens after you get enough speeding tickets?

2

orangemaroon25 t1_j6fzz2n wrote

Why can't Hollywood use it, especially given that it would be entirely appropriate within the context of what is going on in Olympus Has Fallen?

−3

cold08 t1_j6g5g3i wrote

It's an alert, so if it's used often you get desensitized to it and may not pay attention to alerts in the future because you assume it's a TV show or movie.

12

orangemaroon25 t1_j6g7n99 wrote

Yeah, but a movie isn't a live broadcast so that's a totally different situation.

−11

SirCB85 t1_j6h1qxh wrote

You are aware that movies also get broadcast on TV?

7

MasterPlanPenguin t1_j6g27h3 wrote

As others have said it’s to protect the integrity of it. If it’s being used in movies and TV shows then people get use to hearing it and it loses its impact and people won’t listen to it when it is real and just ignore it as being a movie on tv or something like that. Even if it makes sense in the context of the movie you are still using something that is only meant for emergencies and that’s it. The more it gets used outside of that though the less impact it has and so emergencies won’t be listened to as much or brushed off and ignored as not being the real deal.

11

orangemaroon25 t1_j6g2nf2 wrote

But if I'm watching a movie then I know it's not really breaking in to deliver an actual message. The concern would be with live broadcasts. I suppose airing a movie on cable you might have to edit that, but in a theater or on a home edition it shouldn't matter.

I already am desensitized to it because the tornado warnings on the radio use the same sound and the listening area of the radio station is such that I hear warnings for folks three counties away which does not affect me in the slightest.

−15

MasterPlanPenguin t1_j6g3f8v wrote

Others may not though. The point remains that it should never be used except for emergencies and as others have pointed out this tone can trigger other things to happen as well which can then in turn create an emergency.

Well obviously not because you still recognise it and know it to be in use for an emergency. You aren’t desensitised. Just because you may not react doesn’t mean you are desensitised. You still know “that’s an emergency”. If it’s being played all the time in movies and tv and such you eventually hit a point where you stop thinking emergency and think “eh just a movie”. Your brain stops recognising it as an emergency sound and as just a sound that’s recognisable but not anything to worry about.

8

TheElusiveFox t1_j6f9mvy wrote

Not sure why fines like this aren't stated as a percent of the value/revenue of the entity that committed the crime to ensure they stay relevant.

1

SirCB85 t1_j6h1u7d wrote

Because doing that might actually hurt the companies and we can't hurt the masters!

−2

Kahoots113 t1_j6ew9th wrote

Even if it was, that means that large companies could use it and pay the "tax" on using it. There is definitely a balance where the fine won't outweigh the sales boom from the attention it is causing. Imo this was absolutely a calculated maneuver.

0

tahlyn t1_j6dzpfs wrote

Back when it was first created in the 1970s or '80s, 500,000 was a lot more money. I imagine the fine has not gone up in 50 years and therefore is now just the cost of doing business.

34

ronearc t1_j6e7evx wrote

They should raise the fine to one meeeeeellllllliiiooonn dollars.

18

boardattheborder t1_j6evacl wrote

The eighties was only like ten years ago though… oh… oh god

10

tahlyn t1_j6evrp2 wrote

You're older than you've ever been...

And now you're even older...

And now you're even older...

And now you're older still...

5

Lork82 t1_j6f0jch wrote

Yeah 500k is only the cost of a halfway decent house these days.

1

mr_ji t1_j6e61zi wrote

Fines go up. The threshold for meeting that fine is what never changes.

If you're ever unsure, just ask yourself, "Which way is more advantageous to the State?" You'll have your answer.

−15

zorbathegrate t1_j6f31yw wrote

I bet it’s been around for a long time and this is the first time it’s been used. So when it was made in the 40s or 50s it was a big deal.

At least that’s what I hope

1

PIWIprotein t1_j6fp0fe wrote

It should be, but this is america, corporations always get a break

1

yersofunny t1_j6g5tih wrote

Im not surprised at all that in 2023 a huge company doesn’t pay a fair fine.

0

Leather-Heart t1_j6e5ort wrote

They pulled the fire alarm during a Super Bowl ad then?

49

Huuuiuik t1_j6e9zmo wrote

Just to own the libs.

16

Leather-Heart t1_j6eihpl wrote

Let’s talk about that - wtf is that all about? Why are we trying to own each other? Shouldn’t we be working together?

−7

Sinsid t1_j6eoy2m wrote

So was it a lawyer review failure? Or the fine is worth the cost?

6

Locke_Moghan t1_j6f5y83 wrote

You saved me no such click. The Register is worthy of anybody's read, and the article was informative.

3

proxyproxyomega t1_j6gp18i wrote

and, ironically, then getting fined is actually promoting the advertisement even more.

1

ehsteve23 t1_j6hida2 wrote

should be the same case for all emergency sirens

1

igg73 t1_j6gts8i wrote

Thanks. Fuckin clickbait

−1

randelung t1_j6dy43v wrote

> The use of the sound is prohibited to prevent people becoming desensitized to something you should only hear in the most dire circumstances.

Please include emergency service sirens in that, too.

482

jackofslayers t1_j6ebmo9 wrote

It is illegal to use sirens in radio ads but seemingly no one cares

184

orangemaroon25 t1_j6g0qof wrote

I'm pretty sure I've heard drunk driving PSAs or the "click it or ticket" ads (some of which are made *by the government/law enforcement themselves) use sirens.

41

supercoffee1025 t1_j6e2uyl wrote

Living in DC I’m already quite desensitized to sirens going off every few minutes

61

mcg1997 t1_j6f9cyw wrote

Oh if this isn't the truest thing. Moved here less than a year ago, sirens have lost all meaning.

19

WeeklyManufacturer68 t1_j6hw4b7 wrote

What a shit hole. Sorry.

−3

supercoffee1025 t1_j6hzi8h wrote

Eh it’s not the worst I love the walkability but the sirens are kinda like “really? how many of these are real emergencies?”

3

WeeklyManufacturer68 t1_j6keq2f wrote

Probably all of them. I don’t know the laws there but here cops have some sort of rule to only have 1 unit on at a time, something like that.

1

nutsotic t1_j6f9062 wrote

Maybe they shouldn't run weekly tests then

7

AmishAvenger t1_j6i7upz wrote

It’s not just about desensitizing people. The tones include information that can activate systems.

4

cogra23 t1_j6g73iz wrote

Emergency services sirens can and should be used in movies and TV series. They are banned from radio because a driver may mistake a real siren for a radio siren or vice versa

7

renegadecanuck t1_j6gp2n0 wrote

We should send that memo to the Canadian government so our cops will stop using our emergency sound for fucking amber alerts.

3

[deleted] t1_j6dykup wrote

[deleted]

−4

DedTV t1_j6dziex wrote

Eg. Radio commercials that use things like police sirens to get people to pay attention.

45

bflaminio t1_j6e2nl9 wrote

There was a local radio station near me that used the sound of screeching tires to announce their traffic (on the 8's) broadcast. Every time I thought there was some car careening into me.

Of course, I stopped listening to that station.

36

jackofslayers t1_j6ebpwp wrote

Screeching tires on the radio is also illegal crazy that so many radio stations pull this crap

15

DedTV t1_j6exlfd wrote

It's not illegal (In the US. The UK and much of Europe is more sensible). Just about the only sound that can't be used is the US is the EBS Tone. Sirens, screeching tires, gunshots... anything you hear on broadcast TV, can also legally be used on the radio.

Per the FCC: "licensees should be aware of possible adverse consequences of the use of sirens and other alarming sound effects."

Which pretty much means "We DGAF. It's up to a judge to decide if you're liable if there's a problem."

5

[deleted] t1_j6e04io wrote

[deleted]

1

DedTV t1_j6e0qot wrote

Use of emergency service sound effects isn't prohibited. Currently.

6

krazy_kat_laddie t1_j6duvid wrote

>US media titan Fox stands accused of playing the Emergency Alert System attention tone to promote an NFL show on dozens of TV channels

Should be more. Nothing will be learned other than that it's merely the fee for pulling this type of stunt.

332

akaMichAnthony t1_j6dybvy wrote

You’re right, for big companies like Fox it’s not a fine. It’s no different than a billionaire getting a parking ticket, it’s not a deterrent, that’s just how much it costs to park there.

64

ToxicBanana69 t1_j6e2iqq wrote

Yeah, but to be fair I doubt any company, mega or not, would willingly use it knowing it’ll cost half a million dollars, especially when there’s alternatives to using it.

24

akaMichAnthony t1_j6e3vou wrote

You’re not wrong, but they also have been giving away $100,000 every week for an NFL pick’em contest. Which I’m pretty sure is just data collection racket at its core anyway. So what’s another $500,000.

If any business is able to just print it’s own money, it’s the NFL and it’s broadcast partners. I would not be at all shocked if it was 100% intentional.

8

sonofsmog t1_j6e7puw wrote

It's another 500K that's what.

4

mindofdarkness t1_j6gd4s4 wrote

A fox movie that makes $500k at the box office would be considered a commercial failure. Yes it’s actual money, but it is effectively nothing for a corporation, a rounding error.

If you are trying to actually protect anything it shouldn’t be a rounding error.

2

jakeba t1_j6e8eco wrote

The point of a commercial is to draw attention to a product. Any company would use it if they think the attention is worth the cost.

4

hoxxxxx t1_j6e536d wrote

i like the idea behind scaling up traffic tickets for someone's wealth/income, a few countries do that and it make sense. should happen with a lot of fines or else the fines don't even matter.

like that walmart heiress that keeps getting duis. what a dui in the end, like 20-30k? that's literally nothing to her. there is no incentive to change her behavior. but that amount is absolutely devastating to a working or lower-middle class person, achieving it's goal.

14

Wafkak t1_j6ealyp wrote

Finland does this, and they set the record for the biggest trafic fine in the world when a Nokia exec gor caught speeding.

14

sleepnandhiken t1_j6e9ilp wrote

I feel like this fine is plenty of incentive for them to stop doing it in the end, though

−2

mindofdarkness t1_j6ggjag wrote

It’s not really. Fox’s regional sports network is valued at $22 billion (from a few minutes of googling). So they are fined about 0.002% of their value. It’s not even worth writing down, it’s less than a rounding error for the corporation.

2

sleepnandhiken t1_j6gvnkw wrote

Right, but if they don’t stop it becomes more of a thing. They aren’t stoked about just pissing away the money.!There are people above the people who made the decision who are probably hella embarrassed. Although imagining the top go “Let’s play the Emergency Alert Sound” is amusing.

But hey if there’s a new headline tomorrow I guess they didn’t give a shit.

2

sleepnandhiken t1_j6ine3q wrote

Alright so new day. Turns out we didn’t need to wait. This is old news and Fox already stopped broadcasting this ad. Their line was essentially “Yeah, we kinda have a rule against this and we’re looking into who did this.” Perhaps should be taken with a grain of salt but is still an acceptance that they have to stop.

Which I think is fine. The law makes sense to have. The fine is the gov politely saying “listen here you little shit” and it worked fine.

Edit to include what I read: https://www.insideradio.com/free/fox-sports-admits-it-used-fake-eas-tones-on-radio-as-well-as-tv/article_6b18d2f0-9e1c-11ed-ab28-c7b167cea819.html

1

VitaminPb t1_j6e9efv wrote

I kind of like how people are acting like this was some boardroom decision about an ad for a show. This was made by a creative, then approved by probably a mid-level executive, maybe as part of a committee, but probably not, depending on his/her title.

26

meep6969 t1_j6ejzwq wrote

Few people actually understand how the world of business works lol.

15

highdefrex t1_j6flmq6 wrote

When I was young and working in retail, I had a lady argue with me because she swore the CEO of the company is the one who manually approves/sets the individual prices on everything, and that I, as a minimum wage-working teenager, somehow had a direct line to call him so she could complain to him. I worked at Target. How some people get through life with rocks between their ears is beyond me.

10

meep6969 t1_j6fq4rk wrote

Lmaooo I work in retail (wholesale building supplies, big box stores) and had a lady in receiving say she was going to personally call our CEO about late deliveries. Said go for it lol, don't think she was able to reach him.

People are literally so stupid it blows my mind. Like blows my mind everyday.

5

_WhoisMrBilly_ t1_j6h7eh6 wrote

Yeah… unless you work for Costco. Literally not uncommon for an email to come strait from Craig (formally Jim) with:

>Blah blah blah … my Kirkland Blah blah doesn’t work anymore, and I’m your best customer…. I pay $60 for

…OR scenario 2: some kid in a cell phone kiosk to trick my 90 year old grandma into signing up for Verizon…

Scenario 3: Or My BBQ doesn’t work anymore and you said I could return it, but the manager won’t let me return my rusty-cube…

Or worse-

>Your cable guy fell through my attic/hit on my wife/scared my dog….

Jim’s reply, shortly:

(?!)

Or slightly less common:

“Fu*kin fix this!”

Proceeds to see email forward chain through VP of Merchandising, General Merchandise Manager, Assistant Merchandise Manager, Buyer, Assistant Buyer… down to me… inventory control guy.

Buyer: F*ck… fix this- I’ll help! I don’t want Jim coming down here and yelling at us… I can hear his footsteps already… drop everything!

Us: throws cash card at member, orders “White Glove Service” same-day to pick up their couch, patio gnome, whatever…

Been there. Done that.

3

Pvt_Wierzbowski t1_j6e12zz wrote

Idk how it works in television but having worked in radio, I can tell you that these tones trip the EAS software/hardware to go into alert mode. Using this sound recklessly - like in a commercial - could trip the actual EAS to activate, though very likely without any messaging. You’d effectively be watching/hearing a blank alert. Moreover, “end tones” have to be played to allow the alert to conclude; without those tones, the alert stays active until someone manually ends it.

In short, don’t fucking play around with the EAS tones.

128

lady-kl t1_j6emyt1 wrote

My Dad works in radio and TV signals and has worked one of these cases. He demonstrated to me the episode of Young Sheldon a few years back that played the real tones. He ran it through the decoder and it came up as a Tornado Warning at a specific time for a specific location.

53

Pvt_Wierzbowski t1_j6f0ms7 wrote

I don’t watch that show, but I recall seeing promos for an episode about a tornado. Did the producers just copy a random tornado warning alert and use it on the show? If so, that’s kind of hilarious until/unless the EAS went off.

13

andrwsc t1_j6e22aw wrote

In 2013, some numbskull thought it would be cool to use the EAS tones in the movie trailer for “Olympus Has Fallen”, and it got broadcast on multiple networks before it was pulled.

https://www.vox.com/2014/3/3/11624116/cable-channels-hit-with-nearly-2-million-fine-for-airing-movie-trailer

75

wmansir t1_j6f3wv4 wrote

Yep. I looked it up because the article incorrectly suggests the film makers were fined for using the tone, which doesn't make sense as a film isn't a broadcast. It was actually several cable companies that received the fine for broadcasting a trailer that used the tone.

19

orangemaroon25 t1_j6g10wy wrote

Given the story of that movie it makes complete sense to have the tones in it. And a film isn't a broadcast. You know there's no real alert breaking in to the theater screen.

But I guess I can see why you can't have them in the trailer.

−12

andrwsc t1_j6g1aza wrote

Yeah exactly. That’s what happens when you have someone in cinema post-production making a trailer edit without understanding broadcast standards.

12

DontSleep1131 t1_j6gqyj8 wrote

I mean, you can blame them. but ultimately someone at the network fucked up by not requesting a copy with that edited out (im also assuming they have quality control and review materials before airing them).

honestly i didnt know this about EAS until now, but judging from the comments from people who have worked in broadcasting it seems to be common knowledge, so seems like the blame lies with the network more so than the person chopping movie clips for advertising.

3

UnfeignedShip t1_j6dubp6 wrote

This seems like the sort of thing an executive was likely warned about, but said do it anyway.

56

jawnyman t1_j6h97ew wrote

I’ve worked on fox shows before and this is accurate.

In ‘21, Fox execs were consciously exposing audience members to covid positive and quarantined cast and crew members. They’re awful people and I refuse to work with them or watch Fox shows again.

Who knows how many people could’ve died because an exec at fox wanted a contestant to sit in the background of a shot for 20 seconds.

3

jackofslayers t1_j6drdku wrote

Honestly, it should be 10 times more.

35

Dallywack3r t1_j6dv6qd wrote

500k isn’t even one commercial slot.

28

Handsum_Rob t1_j6ekx9z wrote

I remember when Olympus has Fallen was hitting theaters, we broadcast the trailer with that sound. Soooo many flags went up in our control room, we ran it up the flagpole very quickly and pulled it off our server list, but the damage was done. Don’t mess around with the FCC.

21

Turnup_Turnip5678 t1_j6hjthi wrote

did you work for one of the networks that aired it?

2

Handsum_Rob t1_j6hs7lz wrote

I did, and still do! 👍 It’s the one with the first three letters in the alphabet.

5

Slevinkellevra710 t1_j6dtrl6 wrote

"We'll fine them 1/2 percent of the weekly profit from broadcasting NFL games. That will teach them! What else can we do?"

16

bl8ant t1_j6dumdo wrote

They make 100 million a week broadcasting nfl?

5

GrowABrain3 t1_j6dvyvu wrote

Not just 100 million a week, 100 million in profit a week.

That's 5.2 billion dollars in profit per year.

So you should buy their stock.

10

bl8ant t1_j6dxvxr wrote

Buy their stocks? The only thing I’ll ever give Fox is a Molotov cocktail.

6

Due_Kaleidoscope7066 t1_j6dyixb wrote

When you buy their stock it's not really giving them money. Not directly anyhow. Unless they just happen to be the one selling the shares, but I think most companies are more interested in buying shares than selling right now (from my limited understanding).

3

jawnyman t1_j6h9gka wrote

When you buy stock in Fox, it directly increases the net worth of the Murdoch Family Trust. Hard pass.

1

Due_Kaleidoscope7066 t1_j6humzw wrote

I don’t think it does. Like, for example if I had 100 shares and was selling them and you bought them, you would be increasing my net worth. In a very indirect way you’re making the stock price go up (though likely a minuscule amount) and I guess that technically increases their net worth. But it only really matters if they’re selling stock after you affected the stock price.

1

jawnyman t1_j6j4ioa wrote

If everyone sold their stock in Fox today it would greatly hurt the Murdoch family. They’d still have billions after selling a large position of the company, however.

Buying that stock is investing in the company and the Murdoch family. It justifies their advertising revenue and new developments and keeping the Murdochs in power. I’ve worked for the company before and I’ll never do it again. Maybe I’d work for the branch that Disney owns, but even that’s a stretch.

Rupert Murdoch is a sociopath and easily one of the worst influences on America still living today.

1

Due_Kaleidoscope7066 t1_j6jff0i wrote

Definitely not arguing that the Murdoch family sucks. I guess I just don’t understand the ways in which stock price affects things like advertising revenue and new developments. Oh well, thanks for shining some light on that. :)

1

nicoco3890 t1_j6glfej wrote

Dude, when you buy their stock, you force THEM to give YOU money via dividends. And you didn’t give them nothing, you just bought the stock from another trader.

Even better, if you and a band of other manages to buy 50.001% of the total stock, you are now majority shareholders and can reform Fox as the workers coop it always should have been.

0

bl8ant t1_j6gxorj wrote

Keep dreaming’ kiddo. If you buy stock, you give them clout, you keep their brand alive, you justify their shit. And you’ll never get 50+% of a company like that, they are too important to the people spreading lies that keep the poor battling each other instead of coming for their heads.

0

No-Investigator-1754 t1_j6kgeu9 wrote

Not saying they don't make a ludicrous amount of money off of it, but they don't broadcast NFL every week of the year, so it wouldn't be 100M * 52.

1

resorcinarene t1_j6dw127 wrote

Something to learn from being on Reddit is people are loose in numbers if they are used for their purpose. $500,000 isn't enough, but it's not 0.5% of weekly profit. Most people here don't understand numbers in general

2

Slevinkellevra710 t1_j6e1h0h wrote

Yes, i made a comment with inaccurate financial numbers on a reddit post. If you expected perfect accuracy and research in numbers, i really don't know what to do for you.
I'm not a journalist or expecting people to source my off-the-cuff reddit comment. However, let's actually do some math since you seem interested.
The latest contract fox signed with the NFL has them PAYING the NFL 2 billion dollars a year for the rights to broadcast. Let's assume 20 weeks of games with playoffs, etc. That means that FOX paid 100 million per week to the nfl. They wouldn't do that if it wasn't profitable. A 500k fine into that 100 million is literally 1/2 of a percent.
I realize i said profit and not revenue. However, the size of the revenues involved here absolutely validate my point, which was this:
A 500k fine for this kind of offense is similar to fining the average person $1. It makes absolutely no difference whatsoever, and it will deter exactly 0 people.

−1

resorcinarene t1_j6e20ep wrote

> Yes, i made a comment with inaccurate financial numbers on a reddit post. If you expected perfect accuracy and research in numbers, i really don't know what to do for you.

What makes you think I'm expecting anything from you? If anything, my comment serves to illustrate I know better than to expect accurate numbers from Reddit

> A 500k fine for this kind of offense is similar to fining the average person $1. It makes absolutely no difference whatsoever, and it will deter exactly 0 people.

So, you wrote all that because you think I'm disagreeing it's not enough when I also said this?

> $500,000 isn't enough...

I'm not really following what's motivating you lol

0

KennyFulgencio t1_j6e3zws wrote

so he comes up with your numbers and this is your reply? you seem like a real prick

0

resorcinarene t1_j6e6jka wrote

Wow, sorry your reading comprehension is limited. Dude stated this:

> Yes, i made a comment with inaccurate financial numbers on a reddit post.

That's what I said. His subsequent explanation was basically a justification of why he made up numbers. I agree that the penalty is too little, which was made clear by the following:

> $500,000 isn't enough...

Somehow, dude still replied to emphasize that his point was still valid because the numbers are large. Where did I disagree that $500K wasn't enough, again? I didn't.

Point is that neither you or numbers guy know how to read, or read too much into whatever I wrote. And yet somehow, I'm the one being harangued lol

Don't expect much from Reddit XD

edit: also, he didn't come with numbers. These are the actual numbers: https://investor.foxcorporation.com/reports/quarterly-reports

1

Slevinkellevra710 t1_j6e24q7 wrote

They PAY the nfl 100 million a week, roughly, to have the broadcast rights. So, my number is probably inaccurate. Is it wrong enough to invalidate the point, though?

1

downonthesecond t1_j6eblv8 wrote

>The use of the sound is prohibited to prevent people becoming desensitized to something you should only hear in the most dire circumstances. "To preserve the unique purpose and effectiveness of the EAS Tones, the Commission enforces laws that prohibit their use or simulation, except for specific permitted uses," the FCC said.

With the number of times I've heard the alerts for their weekly tests, I've already become desensitized to it.

9

DiscoveryOV t1_j6f7v4t wrote

It needs to play often enough people know what it is and don’t panic, but not so often it becomes ignored. Additionally, that tone gets picked up EAS systems which do certain things with it within the broadcast system. So just playing it randomly could potentially affect those systems in more ways than just the tone simply playing.

6

orangemaroon25 t1_j6g1bd0 wrote

I live in a college town and every time in September when the new out of state/international students hear the monthly tornado siren test for the first time is a fun explanation.

2

TVotte t1_j6duziy wrote

Anyone got the link?

7

PicturesqueMemory t1_j6eeedp wrote

Every time something like this happens I have to ask: Does anyone else remember a TV promo for 21 Days later that aired post 9/11 that began with the Emergency Alert sounds and CDC biohazard warnings?

I saw it only once during primetime and had nightmares about it for a month. Been looking for it ever since

5

GDPisnotsustainable t1_j6fqbwz wrote

https://youtu.be/kU7wmFEppj8 starts at 1:00 in

3

PicturesqueMemory t1_j6kghzs wrote

Wow. That was very close to what I remember. Memory could be wrong, but the promo I remember very curtly ended with maybe 5 seconds of info about the US release of 28 Days Later. I remember being livid about it

Did this air on TV? I must know more

1

JL0817 t1_j6hi1yr wrote

CBS got a fine for using an edited version of the alert on an episode of Young Sheldon (it was a scene involving a tornado warning). This was after CBS purposefully made sure the edited version would not activate the EAS, passing it through several filters I believe. But yeah even if you edit it or use something slightly different, FCC gonna fine you.

5

44problems t1_j6nczvc wrote

Funny that Hollywood hasn't come up with an alternative. Like how they use a 555 number.

1

nubsauce87 t1_j6f3vm2 wrote

What kinda psychopath thinks its okay to use that sound for a promotion?!

4

ThePopeofHell t1_j6f80ql wrote

There should be a rule about this for police sirens on the radio

4

MassiveStallion t1_j6f92n6 wrote

Fines really need to be percentage based on net worth. But obviously we'll never get that in a plutocrat controlled environment.

4

Milnoc t1_j6f3b13 wrote

Same potential consequences if you play any of Japan's emergency alert tones and chimes in public. They even warn foreign tourists not to use them as ringtones.

3

Toad_Thrower t1_j6fgwbw wrote

I'm glad they're getting fined for this, it's a stupid thing to do. I also hate when commercials play sirens or phone noises while I'm in the car.

3

nflfan32 t1_j6e8gxh wrote

Weird, the article says the audio was used in a promo for a game in November, 2021. So why does the FCC care now?

2

waylandsmith t1_j6jg8te wrote

The FCC can only move quickly only issues when there's a nipple involved.

1

vladtud t1_j6ec24g wrote

Does anyone have a link to the sound? I couldn't find in the article and I'm not from US so I've never heard it.

2

the-hottest-of-damns t1_j6esfu6 wrote

It’s why the bwomp was invented - it’s a sound that sounds very serious and eerie without being an emergency alert.

2

whiteb8917 t1_j6eu0l6 wrote

Article says 18 stations broadcast it, fine should be 18 fines of $500,000, aka $9 Million.

2

BroForceOne t1_j6fhxbq wrote

Why couldn't we have done this for emergency siren noises on broadcast radio? That was so aggravating and certainly more dangerous than hearing the EAS tone.

2

AldoCalifornia t1_j6gl6zl wrote

Like a snickers bar to them. Make it 500 mil

2

Individual_Village47 t1_j6gq9dg wrote

Oh no, a multimillion/billion dollar corporation has to pay half a million dollars? OH NO!!! That’s so mean! 🙄

2

hyperforms9988 t1_j6hpoxo wrote

> The use of the sound is prohibited to prevent people becoming desensitized to something you should only hear in the most dire circumstances.

Can we get the Canadian government to understand this when they use the presidential nuclear disaster siren for everything alert-related on a phone, like Amber Alerts?

2

XOIIO t1_j6ermb8 wrote

So it only cost fox 500k to do what they wanted basically.

1

lifesprig t1_j6ezhos wrote

Is that Staten Island getting nuked?

1

leisaw00 t1_j6f9ok5 wrote

I mean is anyone worried that FOX doesn’t have $500k?😂

1

[deleted] t1_j6fwo06 wrote

[deleted]

1

orangemaroon25 t1_j6g1wg3 wrote

If you live in the US you've heard it. Whenever they break in with a national weather service report like a tornado warning, that uses the same tones that this is talking about.

2

Fatkokz t1_j6gnqri wrote

The news they got promoting that they are the channel to watch football is probably worth more then half a mil to them. Literally nothing.

1

bigmikekbd t1_j6i1zy6 wrote

Oh, you mean a meaningless amount of money to a megacorp?

1

GeauxAllDay t1_j6k2f4p wrote

....How do they feel about all the EAS Scenarios on Youtube?

1

maxwell2112 t1_j6i565l wrote

The FCC is outdated and obsolete in the modern times we are in. Tv and radio have been dead for years. They need to be dissolved (networks). People need to stop clinging to old models that was used to control and manipulate our perceptions of the world around us. The FCC cant wait to try and Regulate the internet to save us all.

−1

CatsDontLikeFancy t1_j6efen3 wrote

They probably factored the fine into the cost while they were making said commercial.

−2

blackchoas t1_j6eqasx wrote

If the government actually wanted people to follow the law maybe the should be giving out real punishments, $500,000 could easily be less than they made by advertise this way

They should be fined much more likely a percentage of corporation's total worth, say 25% and the people directly responsible should face jail time, but you know that would be if we actually wanted to deter people from committing crimes

−2

new-6reddit9 t1_j6f2cg5 wrote

Fox is a right wing propaganda machine that began in 1997

−4