I was just watching MeTV to catch Part Two of a two part episode of The Big Valley when a local news agency broke in just to report about severe thunderstorms in Volusia County, FL! Wow, big news to interrupt over 15 minuets of regular programing! I did not know thunderstorms, especially in Florida, is the story of the day considering thunderstorms have been happening since the world began. Heck here in the Sunshine State thunderstorms are the norm and not an acception.
Now it cannot be about ratings as special reports do not get sponsored. In fact the commercials that the sponsors paid for never get aired. If its about safety, they can do it in the ticker on the bottom of the screen or just break in for a second. Then again its only the past few years. Storms of greater magnitude has never warranted such attention from the local news over the decades since TV began, yet lately it is breaking news.
No wonder why this world is the way it is! Too much nonsense and not enough worry on the important stuff.
Quote from: roadman65 on May 15, 2014, 03:30:27 PM
I was just watching MeTV to catch Part Two of a two part episode of The Big Valley when a local news agency broke in just to report about severe thunderstorms in Volusia County, FL! Wow, big news to interrupt over 15 minuets of regular programing! I did not know thunderstorms, especially in Florida, is the story of the day considering thunderstorms have been happening since the world began. Heck here in the Sunshine State thunderstorms are the norm and not an acception.
Now it cannot be about ratings as special reports do not get sponsored. In fact the commercials that the sponsors paid for never get aired. If its about safety, they can do it in the ticker on the bottom of the screen or just break in for a second. Then again its only the past few years. Storms of greater magnitude has never warranted such attention from the local news over the decades since TV began, yet lately it is breaking news.
No wonder why this world is the way it is! Too much nonsense and not enough worry on the important stuff.
I'm betting that the nets are hoping that increased storm coverage will lead to increased viewership for their regular newscasts.
This reminds me of two really annoying things my cable provider does. They have frequent tests of their emergency systems, sometimes several times in one day. This has already trained me to automatically ignore an alert whenever it comes across. Also, when there's a real emergency, severe weather, they play the stupid alert sound and completely block out the television audio, even if it's actual useful information from the television weathercaster.
The weekly test should be weekly, maybe late at night. There should never be four or five "weekly" tests in one day. And the alert sound shouldn't completely block the audio so that we miss useful information being reported.
I miss the quiet ticker at the bottom of the screen, and breaking in only during really serious situations. A year ago today, we had major damage in this area from a large tornado outbreak, something worthy of interrupting programming. However, the frequent alerts blocked the audio for several seconds at a time when it was really important to hear it. I agree that they don't need to break programming for 15 or 20 minutes to talk about broken windows and downed tree limbs.
Have you seen the Weather Channel or their website? Normally, I'm not one to speculate on the interests of news media, but there seems to be a hidden agenda of "scaring people". Here are the 14 Front page stories on the Weather Channel today:
- Is This a Threat to America?
- Massive Oil Spill Coats LA Streets
- EVACUATIONS ORDERED (full caps)
- Photos: California Burning
- Conditions Expected to Worsen
- Flooding Ends in Tragedy, Hundreds Evacuated
- What You Need to Know About the Flower Moon (what?)
- Year-Round Wildfire Threat Ahead?
- This House Has a Secret
- Measles Vaccine Clears Woman's Cancer
- Are We Ready for a New Threat?
- MINE DISASTER: Families Burying Victims
- Tornado Levels Farmstead: 2 Injured
- Flooding Plagues Several States
As you can see, the stories get slightly less "frightening" as you click away, but of course you are too glued to the ridiculous over-the-top headlines.
My point being, your local news agency is just doing what the cool thing is now.
"If it bleeds, it leads."
Quote from: jake on May 15, 2014, 04:02:29 PM
Have you seen the Weather Channel or their website? Normally, I'm not one to speculate on the interests of news media, but there seems to be a hidden agenda of "scaring people". Here are the 14 Front page stories on the Weather Channel today:
- Is This a Threat to America?
- Massive Oil Spill Coats LA Streets
- EVACUATIONS ORDERED (full caps)
- Photos: California Burning
- Conditions Expected to Worsen
- Flooding Ends in Tragedy, Hundreds Evacuated
- What You Need to Know About the Flower Moon (what?)
- Year-Round Wildfire Threat Ahead?
- This House Has a Secret
- Measles Vaccine Clears Woman's Cancer
- Are We Ready for a New Threat?
- MINE DISASTER: Families Burying Victims
- Tornado Levels Farmstead: 2 Injured
- Flooding Plagues Several States
As you can see, the stories get slightly less "frightening" as you click away, but of course you are too glued to the ridiculous over-the-top headlines.
My point being, your local news agency is just doing what the cool thing is now.
IMO, The Weather Channel started its network decay when NBC bought it in 2008. After that, they began adding more non-news to the schedule (IIRC, there is at least one SCRIPTED show on the schedule), and became far more sensationalistic in its reporting style. It gets particularly bad during Hurricane Season, when even weak storms with little threat to land are treated as harbingers of the apocalypse. Hurricanes Irene and Sandy did nothing to help the situation.
Quote from: Thing 342 on May 15, 2014, 04:47:56 PM
..even weak storms with little threat to land are treated as harbingers of the apocalypse. Hurricanes Irene and Sandy did nothing to help the situation.
I'm still trying to figure out where the name "Super-Storm" came from. Was it invented for Sandy because it wasn't a hurricane? Once again blowing things out of proportion, it seems.
And yes, once NBC bought the joint, things fell apart. I remember when Jim Cantore was just some chrome-dome reporting on thundersnow. Now, thanks to NBC, he's practically a celebrity, up there with the ranks of Al Roker. And for what? I'm not saying he's a bad meteorologist, but I think he's enjoying the spotlight shining on him a little too much.
Quote from: jake on May 15, 2014, 05:32:34 PM
I'm still trying to figure out where the name "Super-Storm" came from. Was it invented for Sandy because it wasn't a hurricane? Once again blowing things out of proportion, it seems.
Sandy was a hurricane but quickly died off after reaching land. Eventually the storm was simply an extra-tropical cyclone and finally a simple low pressure system, but that doesn't roll off the tongue as well as "super-storm."
Quote from: tdindy88 on May 15, 2014, 05:47:50 PM
that doesn't roll off the tongue as well as "super-storm."
That's news media in a nutshell, IMO.
Quote from: jake on May 15, 2014, 05:32:34 PM
I'm still trying to figure out where the name "Super-Storm" came from. Was it invented for Sandy because it wasn't a hurricane? Once again blowing things out of proportion, it seems.
While I don't care for media hype, I do think that Sandy was in a special category. Besides the fact that it hit a densely populated area, the storm itself was fascinating to watch. It retained an internal warm core even while combining with an extratropical cyclone. This very unusual evolution enable the storm to hit with the force of a hurricane and the size of a winter storm. Hurricanes, warm-core storms, are rarely associated with snow. This was an exceptional storm which I believe was worthy of an exceptional designation (like NASA Road 1 in Texas).
Quote from: Brandon on May 15, 2014, 04:17:31 PM
"If it bleeds, it leads."
Lately, even if it drools, spits, leaks, winks, or snores...it leads.
Quote from: wxfree on May 15, 2014, 07:08:16 PM
Quote from: jake on May 15, 2014, 05:32:34 PM
I'm still trying to figure out where the name "Super-Storm" came from. Was it invented for Sandy because it wasn't a hurricane? Once again blowing things out of proportion, it seems.
While I don't care for media hype, I do think that Sandy was in a special category. Besides the fact that it hit a densely populated area, the storm itself was fascinating to watch. It retained an internal warm core even while combining with an extratropical cyclone. This very unusual evolution enable the storm to hit with the force of a hurricane and the size of a winter storm. Hurricanes, warm-core storms, are rarely associated with snow. This was an exceptional storm which I believe was worthy of an exceptional designation (like NASA Road 1 in Texas).
On second thought, after doing a bit of research, it appears that Sandy was pretty destructive. It killed a lot more people than I thought it did. Maybe living on the west coast I just didn't pay attention when it occurred.
Quote from: jake on May 15, 2014, 07:22:26 PM
Quote from: wxfree on May 15, 2014, 07:08:16 PM
Quote from: jake on May 15, 2014, 05:32:34 PM
I'm still trying to figure out where the name "Super-Storm" came from. Was it invented for Sandy because it wasn't a hurricane? Once again blowing things out of proportion, it seems.
While I don't care for media hype, I do think that Sandy was in a special category. Besides the fact that it hit a densely populated area, the storm itself was fascinating to watch. It retained an internal warm core even while combining with an extratropical cyclone. This very unusual evolution enable the storm to hit with the force of a hurricane and the size of a winter storm. Hurricanes, warm-core storms, are rarely associated with snow. This was an exceptional storm which I believe was worthy of an exceptional designation (like NASA Road 1 in Texas).
On second thought, after doing a bit of research, it appears that Sandy was pretty destructive. It killed a lot more people than I thought it did. Maybe living on the west coast I just didn't pay attention when it occurred.
A hurricane/blizzard with a tunnel-flooding storm surge and three feet of snow in the mountains is quite a beast, not easily categorized.
Plus northeast insurance companies won't pay for hurricane/tropical storm/etc. damages. I believe that's the primary reason for the term "super storm".
Quote from: roadman65 on May 15, 2014, 03:30:27 PM
I was just watching MeTV to catch Part Two of a two part episode of The Big Valley when a local news agency broke in just to report about severe thunderstorms in Volusia County, FL!
So which was it? A "simple thunderstorm" as your subject states, or a severe thunderstorm?
Quote from: formulanone on May 15, 2014, 07:10:23 PM
Quote from: Brandon on May 15, 2014, 04:17:31 PM
"If it bleeds, it leads."
Lately, even if it drools, spits, leaks, winks, or snores...it leads.
"We all know that crap is king" -Don Henley
Quote from: US71 on May 15, 2014, 09:26:53 PM
Quote from: formulanone on May 15, 2014, 07:10:23 PM
Quote from: Brandon on May 15, 2014, 04:17:31 PM
"If it bleeds, it leads."
Lately, even if it drools, spits, leaks, winks, or snores...it leads.
"We all know that crap is king" -Don Henley
Amen, brother. Glad I do not own a television.
Quote from: hbelkins on May 15, 2014, 09:20:57 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 15, 2014, 03:30:27 PM
I was just watching MeTV to catch Part Two of a two part episode of The Big Valley when a local news agency broke in just to report about severe thunderstorms in Volusia County, FL!
So which was it? A "simple thunderstorm" as your subject states, or a severe thunderstorm?
In Oklahoma, at least, there's little difference. A severe thunderstorm is the usual kind.
I get my weather direct from the National Weather Service for this reason. NOAA is much less likely to sensationalize than a commercial weather station. I can think of a number of instances where the commercial stations have forecasted apocalyptic conditions while NOAA issues a Slight Risk HWO, and then nothing actually ends up happening.
Quote from: Scott5114 on May 15, 2014, 09:59:45 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on May 15, 2014, 09:20:57 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 15, 2014, 03:30:27 PM
I was just watching MeTV to catch Part Two of a two part episode of The Big Valley when a local news agency broke in just to report about severe thunderstorms in Volusia County, FL!
So which was it? A "simple thunderstorm" as your subject states, or a severe thunderstorm?
In Oklahoma, at least, there's little difference. A severe thunderstorm is the usual kind.
I get my weather direct from the National Weather Service for this reason. NOAA is much less likely to sensationalize than a commercial weather station. I can think of a number of instances where the commercial stations have forecasted apocalyptic conditions while NOAA issues a Slight Risk HWO, and then nothing actually ends up happening.
It's less likely, but it does happen. I remember a discussion from NOAA, either NHC or the local NWS office, that New Orleans could "cease to exist" as a result of an approaching hurricane. I think it was Ivan.
In the storms that hit around here a year ago, one of the warnings described an "extremely large and incredibly dangerous tornado." These tornadoes were EF-3 and EF-4, with some well-built houses swept clean down to the foundation, so this wasn't hype.
Around Granbury this was a mass casualty event. There weren't enough ambulances for all the injuries, so they were reserved for serious injuries. School buses were brought in to ferry less severely injured people to hospitals. Thinking back on that night, it was quite an event.
I've known local media to interrupt scheduled programming for severe weather for my whole life. Granted, I'm younger than the majority of the members of this forum, but I still find it odd that that's abnormal in some parts of the country. If the storm is bad enough that it produces crazy wind, hail, and tornadoes, it makes perfect sense to me to stop airing prime time TV to inform people of the potentially harmful weather.
It should be noted that our local NBC affiliate only interrupts programming for the worst of storms. On more than one occasion, I have been surprised to see scheduled shows air instead of the breaking weather news.
Quote from: formulanone on May 15, 2014, 07:10:23 PM
Quote from: Brandon on May 15, 2014, 04:17:31 PM
"If it bleeds, it leads."
Lately, even if it drools, spits, leaks, winks, or snores...it leads.
Or if it's on Twitter - which seems to be the "investigative source" most media outlets rely on these days
There's a video making the rounds on Facebook this week (I haven't seen it yet) that shows an anchor going off on people who complained about severe weather warnings interrupting a television show.
It reminded me of someone I used to work with about 13 years ago. She recorded soap operas on the VCR during the day to watch later, so it was rare that she got to see them live when they aired. We are in the Lexington, Ky. TV market, which covers a big chunk of central, south-central and southeastern Kentucky. We were off for July 4th and it just so happened there was a severe weather outbreak that day, with several tornado warnings issued for areas to the south of Lexington. Naturally the normal programming was interrupted with the bulletins. The next day, this co-worker came in complaining about the weather warnings interrupting her soap operas, and one of her biggest complaints was that the bad weather wasn't even where she lived but a few counties away.
It is true that local TV stations will try to outdo one another for weather coverage. There's a running joke in Kentucky about the way the Louisville stations do it. I've been in Louisville for conferences a few times when bad weather hit the area and I got to see first-hand how over the top they are.
It could be worse...at least WKYT-TV (CBS) channel 27 isn't naming winter storms. WFSB-TV (CBS) channel 3 of Hartford and the old Traveler's Weather Service before them always have. At least 40 years, long before The Weather Channel even existed!
Quote from: vdeane on May 15, 2014, 08:20:06 PM
Plus northeast insurance companies won't pay for hurricane/tropical storm/etc. damages. I believe that's the primary reason for the term "super storm".
Insurance companies don't pay out claims based on how the media categorizes them. Insurance claims are paid or rejected based on the coverage the homeowner purchased. Typically, flooding isn't a covered loss. Wind damage is generally covered, unless the storm was declared a hurricane based on the National Weather Service's determination where the center of the storm made landfall, and/or what the recorded wind speeds were near the location of the damage. At that point, the claiment would need hurricane coverage to be covered.
This storm...Insurance Companies paid out over $25 Billion.
Quote from: roadman65 on May 15, 2014, 03:30:27 PM
I was just watching MeTV to catch Part Two of a two part episode of The Big Valley when a local news agency broke in just to report about severe thunderstorms in Volusia County, FL! Wow, big news to interrupt over 15 minuets of regular programing! I did not know thunderstorms, especially in Florida, is the story of the day considering thunderstorms have been happening since the world began. Heck here in the Sunshine State thunderstorms are the norm and not an acception.
Now it cannot be about ratings as special reports do not get sponsored. In fact the commercials that the sponsors paid for never get aired. If its about safety, they can do it in the ticker on the bottom of the screen or just break in for a second. Then again its only the past few years. Storms of greater magnitude has never warranted such attention from the local news over the decades since TV began, yet lately it is breaking news.
No wonder why this world is the way it is! Too much nonsense and not enough worry on the important stuff.
Two points - those were severe storms, not just simple thunderstorms. And also there were tornado warnings for south Volusia and north Brevard.
Quote from: hbelkins on May 16, 2014, 12:05:27 PM
There's a video making the rounds on Facebook this week (I haven't seen it yet) that shows an anchor going off on people who complained about severe weather warnings interrupting a television show.
Every year during the spotter training class I attend a local TV meteorologist tells a story just like that. He ends his with a couple who visited the station to thank him for being on the air when there house in "the middle of nowhere" was destroyed.
Here's today's Weather Channel Story:
50 Places Straight Out of Nightmares (http://www.weather.com/travel/creepiest-places-nightmare-photos-20140514?cm_ven=FB_JK_51514_1)
The Weather Channel is the next Gizmodo, apparently.
Quote from: jake on May 15, 2014, 04:02:29 PM
Have you seen the Weather Channel or their website? Normally, I'm not one to speculate on the interests of news media, but there seems to be a hidden agenda of "scaring people". Here are the 14 Front page stories on the Weather Channel today:
- Is This a Threat to America?
- Massive Oil Spill Coats LA Streets
- EVACUATIONS ORDERED (full caps)
- Photos: California Burning
- Conditions Expected to Worsen
- Flooding Ends in Tragedy, Hundreds Evacuated
- What You Need to Know About the Flower Moon (what?)
- Year-Round Wildfire Threat Ahead?
- This House Has a Secret
- Measles Vaccine Clears Woman's Cancer
- Are We Ready for a New Threat?
- MINE DISASTER: Families Burying Victims
- Tornado Levels Farmstead: 2 Injured
- Flooding Plagues Several States
As you can see, the stories get slightly less "frightening" as you click away, but of course you are too glued to the ridiculous over-the-top headlines.
My point being, your local news agency is just doing what the cool thing is now.
Sort of takes the potency out of "EVACUATIONS ORDERED."
Quote from: wxfree on May 15, 2014, 03:56:49 PM
The weekly test should be weekly, maybe late at night...And the alert sound shouldn't completely block the audio so that we miss useful information being reported.
Weekly tests must be run in all dayparts, not buried at night, and both audio and video must be interrupted with the test message and data bursts (that's what those strange sounds are - 300-baud data)...all per FCC regulations.
Having said that: Complain to the cable company. They may have an automated system running the multiple "weekly" tests and may be unaware there's a malfunction.
Quote from: jake on May 16, 2014, 08:21:25 PM
Here's today's Weather Channel Story:
50 Places Straight Out of Nightmares (http://www.weather.com/travel/creepiest-places-nightmare-photos-20140514?cm_ven=FB_JK_51514_1)
The Weather Channel is the next Gizmodo, apparently.
Now they're doing places to survive the apocalypse.
Surprised at all the hate, I make it a point to drop everything and watch when ever a local station breaks in for weather. Then again stations around here only interrupt when a warning has been issued by the NWS.
Quote from: on_wisconsin on May 17, 2014, 05:08:56 PM
Surprised at all the hate, I make it a point to drop everything and watch when ever a local station breaks in for weather. Then again stations around here only interrupt when a warning has been issued by the NWS.
I wouldn't call it hate, more like burnout. Most of us live fairly uneventfully through most weather, even the harsh kinds. The weather media, however, would prefer to justify their continued expansion by spinning tales of drama each time the weather changes. It's tiring after a while, and it muddles the line between actually serious and merely interesting.
And there is just nothing to be gained by anyone but the weather media by this silliness of arbitrarily picking winter weather events to name (don't get me started on the choices of names).
Quote from: Pete from Boston on May 17, 2014, 06:24:52 PM
I wouldn't call it hate, more like burnout. Most of us live fairly uneventfully through most weather, even the harsh kinds. The weather media, however, would prefer to justify their continued expansion by spinning tales of drama each time the weather changes. It's tiring after a while, and it muddles the line between actually serious and merely interesting.
^ This.
How often do major news outlets warning you of
BREAKING NEWS multiple times a day? That's the kind of thing that should be reserved for "Danger: The Sky Is Falling" or "Actual Cure For Cancer" or "Salvador Dali Just Woke Up From The Dead".
When you start to sensationalize many things (especially things unrelated to weather events) on your site and TV station, it seems a little over the top, and hard to take seriously. It's not just The Weather Channel; many other networks and websites do the same thing.
I was referring to LOCAL stations only, not the noise on cable and they typically break in for real things like NWS issued severe t-storm/ tornado warnings or (extremely rare) gas main explosion/ disrupting major police incident type stuff.
Around here at least, local stations almost never break in, unscheduled, for winter weather events.
Quote from: formulanone on May 17, 2014, 10:57:09 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on May 17, 2014, 06:24:52 PM
I wouldn't call it hate, more like burnout. Most of us live fairly uneventfully through most weather, even the harsh kinds. The weather media, however, would prefer to justify their continued expansion by spinning tales of drama each time the weather changes. It's tiring after a while, and it muddles the line between actually serious and merely interesting.
^ This.
How often do major news outlets warning you of BREAKING NEWS multiple times a day? That's the kind of thing that should be reserved for "Danger: The Sky Is Falling" or "Actual Cure For Cancer" or "Salvador Dali Just Woke Up From The Dead".
When you start to sensationalize many things (especially things unrelated to weather events) on your site and TV station, it seems a little over the top, and hard to take seriously. It's not just The Weather Channel; many other networks and websites do the same thing.
And ^ This
It's becoming a "boy who cried wolf" scenario. I remember a couple of days ago,
BREAKING NEWS Someone got shot overnight in Seattle, and they are in hospital now. Of course people getting shot isn't good, but people get shot all the time, and if it was breaking news every time somebody got shot, it'd be breaking news every 50 minutes.
There was another breaking news case when Microsoft elected their new CEO, Satya Nadella. That's pretty cool (and local), but...if that's breaking news, what are the rest of the stories?
The problem is, local news still has to compete with cable.
Quote from: realjd on May 16, 2014, 12:42:52 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 15, 2014, 03:30:27 PM
I was just watching MeTV to catch Part Two of a two part episode of The Big Valley when a local news agency broke in just to report about severe thunderstorms in Volusia County, FL! Wow, big news to interrupt over 15 minuets of regular programing! I did not know thunderstorms, especially in Florida, is the story of the day considering thunderstorms have been happening since the world began. Heck here in the Sunshine State thunderstorms are the norm and not an acception.
Now it cannot be about ratings as special reports do not get sponsored. In fact the commercials that the sponsors paid for never get aired. If its about safety, they can do it in the ticker on the bottom of the screen or just break in for a second. Then again its only the past few years. Storms of greater magnitude has never warranted such attention from the local news over the decades since TV began, yet lately it is breaking news.
No wonder why this world is the way it is! Too much nonsense and not enough worry on the important stuff.
Two points - those were severe storms, not just simple thunderstorms. And also there were tornado warnings for south Volusia and north Brevard.
This. Of course news agencies are gonna break in for these types of storms. I was watching this unfold and that storm looked extremely good for tornadic potential before I left.
Last year, thunderstorms through Chicago that lasted about 20-30 minutes, they were reported on for 1 hour and 30 minutes. The Formula 1 race was on NBC and the entire thing was blocked out. it was like this :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:
I was just watching News 10 today and they're already advertising themselves as first to warn people about the tornado. I'm guessing that they harp on minor storms in the hope that they become big unexpectedly and then the station can advertise as the leader in storm reporting for months.
Quote from: jake on May 15, 2014, 05:32:34 PM
I'm still trying to figure out where the name "Super-Storm" came from. Was it invented for Sandy because it wasn't a hurricane? Once again blowing things out of proportion, it seems.
I believe they called it a superstorm because the hurricane merged with an approaching low pressure center and cold front as it made landfall, which intensified its effects at the coast as well as spreading those effects much further inland than would have been the case if the hurricane had just come inland and died out.
Local stations do interrupt programming more frequently and for longer periods than they used to. "Breaking News" used to be called a "Special Report" and was done only when something extraordinary happened. Now they do it in part so they can compile footage for the next commercial designed to persuade us to watch Station X instead of Station Y.
Last night, my local news station preempted primetime for nearly 3 hours for some tiny storms on the very fringes of the viewing area that had "rotation" in them. Granted, there was a tornado warning, but it lasted for about 45 minutes.
Quote from: broadhurst04 on May 23, 2014, 10:09:35 PM
Quote from: jake on May 15, 2014, 05:32:34 PM
I'm still trying to figure out where the name "Super-Storm" came from. Was it invented for Sandy because it wasn't a hurricane? Once again blowing things out of proportion, it seems.
I believe they called it a superstorm because the hurricane merged with an approaching low pressure center and cold front as it made landfall, which intensified its effects at the coast as well as spreading those effects much further inland than would have been the case if the hurricane had just come inland and died out.
Local stations do interrupt programming more frequently and for longer periods than they used to. "Breaking News" used to be called a "Special Report" and was done only when something extraordinary happened. Now they do it in part so they can compile footage for the next commercial designed to persuade us to watch Station X instead of Station Y.
It wasn't a hurricane when it hit the northeast so the media had to come up with some sort of sensational name for it
First "Tropical Storm Sandy" then "remnants of Hurricane Sandy" would be perfectly acceptable. I think people like "Superstorm Sandy" because of the alliteration.
People like catchy names. "The Halloween Storm" worked perfectly well until Sebastian Junger's book came out, and it was retroactively rechristened "The Perfect Storm" two years after the fact because it was catchier.
Quote from: vdeane on May 18, 2014, 08:24:58 PM
The problem is, local news still has to compete with cable.
The problem is that local news THINKS they have to complete with cable. Once upon a time, you had different newscasts for local news and national news. The "breaking news" moniker was reserved for stories like "there's a 27 alarm fire devouring the city - get out of your house now." And the overall coverage was much better and informative.
Quote from: realjd on May 23, 2014, 10:22:59 PM
It wasn't a hurricane when it hit the northeast so the media had to come up with some sort of sensational name for it
On second thought, I wonder if calling it "Tropical Storm Sandy" might have been an initial misnomer; folks in the New York City area might have thought that tropical storms* do not make landfall anywhere north of the Outer Banks of North Carolina. I personally think it got the name "Super Storm" because anything else wouldn't have been befitting for it beating down on New York, rendering it largely immobilized for a week.
The media gets to dub lots of stuff; it's usually the brainchild of one writer, and we all have to hear about it
ad infinitum. We still hear "gate" suffixed to so-called scandals, which forty years on, ought to mean that any paid professional writer or news anchor/reporter using that moniker should be forced to resign upon its usage.
That said, Tropical Storms and Hurricanes are obviously breaking news; although they're usually days away from impact, every little update at 5am-11am-5pm-11pm is even more breaking news. People need to plan, evacuate, and other stuff.
* Hurricanes Ike and Floyd notwithstanding.
Reading back through the archives is interesting. At the time of the advisory before landfall, the storm was already largely converted. The warm core (a tropical characteristic) was minimal and the wind field was expanding, with the strongest winds away from the center (a non-tropical characteristic). It would have been suitable to label it as post-tropical, but for the advisory they called it Hurricane Sandy for the sake of continuity, although there were no tropical warnings by NHC. The warnings were handled by NWS offices as flood watches, coastal flood warnings, high wind warnings, severe thunderstorm watches, winter storm warnings, etc. While technically correct, this may have under-represented the storm, since none of those would get the attention a hurricane warning would get.
The official label can change only at advisory time, and at the next advisory it was called Post-Tropical Cyclone Sandy. It was officially a hurricane until 11 pm, by which time it was well inland, but by 5 pm it was clearly already substantially post-tropical. In the final NHC advisory at 11 pm, it was officially post-tropical and still had hurricane force winds (non-tropical storms don't have to weaken from moving inland, which makes the converted storm worse inland than a regular hurricane which quickly weakens).
I think this discussion is happening mostly because of all the wolf-calling, making people weary of all the overstated labels. However, if there was ever something to call a super storm, I think this is it. Enormous size, high impact due to hitting a densely developed area, hurricane force winds and hurricane-size storm surge, the post-tropical conversion actually made it worse because it brought hurricane-force winds further inland, blizzards and heavy snow, severe cold with snow and downed trees making repair of electric lines take longer, the number of people killed because of there being so many ways to kill them (wind, surge, flooding, prolonged electric failure combined with cold), and the amount of damage due to the location and density, size, and multi-modal means of destruction - to me these factors add up to something special, not covered by regular nomenclature and requiring its own term.
This is exactly why they shouldn't overstate everything. When something actually big and dangerous comes along people will remember the last 30 times the news people acted that way and remember that almost nothing happened then.
Quote from: on_wisconsin on May 17, 2014, 05:08:56 PM
Surprised at all the hate, I make it a point to drop everything and watch when ever a local station breaks in for weather. Then again stations around here only interrupt when a warning has been issued by the NWS.
It may not be available to all readers here on AAROADS, but where an all-news radio station is available, then that is where I turn for such information - not television.
Quote from: formulanone on May 25, 2014, 11:56:33 AM
Quote from: realjd on May 23, 2014, 10:22:59 PM
It wasn't a hurricane when it hit the northeast so the media had to come up with some sort of sensational name for it
On second thought, I wonder if calling it "Tropical Storm Sandy" might have been an initial misnomer; folks in the New York City area might have thought that tropical storms* do not make landfall anywhere north of the Outer Banks of North Carolina. I personally think it got the name "Super Storm" because anything else wouldn't have been befitting for it beating down on New York, rendering it largely immobilized for a week.
The media gets to dub lots of stuff; it's usually the brainchild of one writer, and we all have to hear about it ad infinitum. We still hear "gate" suffixed to so-called scandals, which forty years on, ought to mean that any paid professional writer or news anchor/reporter using that moniker should be forced to resign upon its usage.
That said, Tropical Storms and Hurricanes are obviously breaking news; although they're usually days away from impact, every little update at 5am-11am-5pm-11pm is even more breaking news. People need to plan, evacuate, and other stuff.
* Hurricanes Ike and Floyd notwithstanding.
And Irene, and Bob, and Gloria, and David...
In other words, mostly folks that can't remember an un-hip Brooklyn might have the ignorance you describe, but there's plenty of hurricane/TS history there.
Depending on the part of the country, a severe thunderstorm can turn into a tornado. That is very important for those living in the area. And, look at how big the broadcast areas are.
A few weeks ago, we had tornado alerts in Placer county, California, and an actual tornado did touch down. It was something like a low F1, but again, this is California. Tornados are an oddity.
But, if it's a weather alert, I'm more likely to hear it as a SAME alert on my weather radio (http://markholtz.info/cl100) than watching it on televison. In fact, I'm more likely to watch a TV show delayed on my DVR than live.
Quote from: JoePCool14 on May 23, 2014, 06:51:35 PM
Last year, thunderstorms through Chicago that lasted about 20-30 minutes, they were reported on for 1 hour and 30 minutes. The Formula 1 race was on NBC and the entire thing was blocked out. it was like this :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:
Well it sounds like they were severe and caused damage. What city was the Form 1 race in?
Quote from: ET21 on May 28, 2014, 05:19:23 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on May 23, 2014, 06:51:35 PM
Last year, thunderstorms through Chicago that lasted about 20-30 minutes, they were reported on for 1 hour and 30 minutes. The Formula 1 race was on NBC and the entire thing was blocked out. it was like this :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:
Well it sounds like they were severe and caused damage. What city was the Form 1 race in?
Monte Carlo, Monaco.
Quote from: formulanone on May 28, 2014, 06:49:57 PM
Quote from: ET21 on May 28, 2014, 05:19:23 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on May 23, 2014, 06:51:35 PM
Last year, thunderstorms through Chicago that lasted about 20-30 minutes, they were reported on for 1 hour and 30 minutes. The Formula 1 race was on NBC and the entire thing was blocked out. it was like this :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:
Well it sounds like they were severe and caused damage. What city was the Form 1 race in?
Monte Carlo, Monaco.
Well as it turns out, during the raceday we had a severe outbreak that included a weak tornado in the far southwest suburbs. Multiple damaging wind reports as well. So that explains why you had no race
Severe weather reports archive from the Storm Prediction Center: http://www.spc.noaa.gov/archive/ (http://www.spc.noaa.gov/archive/)