Skip to footer

4 ways to get phone service the next time a hurricane Sandy calls

In the aftermath of a disaster such as superstorm Sandy, two-way communication is essential. Here are four ways to better prepare our phones and other devices for the next disaster:

4. Promote compatible cellphone networks

The decision by AT&T and T-Mobile to open their mobile networks to each other in the aftermath of Sandy provided some relief for subscribers in affected areas. This allowed individual subscribers to use either network.

But Verizon and Sprint did not participate in the roaming agreement. Even if they had wanted to, it would have been impossible because their networks use technology that is incompatible with AT&T's and T-Mobile's systems.

Interoperable networks improve resiliency (in case one network goes down, another can be used), and they drive down equipment costs through economies of scale. The FCC needs to do more to promote and further interoperability, either through dual-technology devices, or in the ongoing development of new standards.

These four steps will not solve all the problems. For instance, severe flooding and extended power outages might overwhelm even the limits of the backup power supply, or the physical damage to cell sites might render too many of them inoperable. But taken together, they are capable of improving the resilience of communications systems, making disaster recovery after the next storm a little easier, and the return to normal a little faster.

Tolu Odumosu is a research fellow in the Science, Technology and Public Policy Program at the Harvard Kennedy School. Venkatesh "Venky" Narayanamurti is the Benjamin Peirce Professor of Technology and Public Policy and professor of physics at Harvard.


4 of 4
Mark Sappenfield
Editor

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

Subscribe to insightful journalism

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.