Hurricane Watch

[karlhenning]

Tactically done, Sara.

[karlhenning]

It's pretty obvious the media need a big story every week

Probably not in Holland (nor in Atlanta), but it's pretty obvious that Irene has been, in fact, a big story.

But here, let's have one of my old high school classmates take up the tale:

For all you people saying that is a "non-event", I just took a drive around Northern New Jersey to survey the damage and check on my father's house. First off, there are downed trees, branches, and live wires everywhere. Half the streets AND HIGHWAYS are closed due to major flooding. My street, which was passable when I left, is now closed: a down live wire, a down tree, and a house fire. So don't give me any crap about a non-event!

[karlhenning]

But no, I don't expect any here to change their tune as a result of this post of mine. "My mind is made up, don't confuse me with the facts" . . . .

[Gurn Blanston]

This morning, all was back to summer. Hardly any trace of a storm.

In 2005 when Rita was fixin' to kick our butts, it had been a very warm September to date, temps in the 105°F (40°C+) area for weeks. Then the storm rolled through on a Saturday, the temp stayed around 70, it was lovely (well, except for all the trees and power poles getting knocked down). Sunday dawned clear and sunny, like nothing had happened, except that it was now 105 again, and there wasn't (and wouldn't be for nearly 2 weeks) any electricity now. No a/c, no fans even, no refrigeration, a dozen trees down in the driveway. Other than that, you would never have known it was hurricane day +1.   

[karlhenning]

Oof, Gurn!

[springrite]

Heavy rain last night that flooded the street near the hotel I am staying. In the morning I went to visit my aunt about 10 miles away. It did not rain a bit there all night. When I arrived, the first thing my 80 year old aunt complained about was the ridiculous forecast about heavy rain storm. Apparently she cancelled a card game because of it and she sure was mad about it.

[drogulus]

How naive. The media are about making you watch tv, not about information.

      It would be naive to think a normal person doesn't know this. But if you say it in a high whiney voice it will break the monotony.

[Todd]

My question to self appointed media experts on this forum is how, exactly, should a hurricane be covered?  Irene was not Andrew or Katrina, sure, but there have been 20 deaths, hundreds of millions or billions in damage, and millions without power.  Not the end of the world by any stretch - well, except for the few dead people - but it was and is a notable and possibly significant event in the lives of millions.  That's the very definition of news.  It certainly seems to be responsible to cover the story and follow the path of the storm, and from what I have seen and read, the various local governments acted responsibly, and FEMA prepped for the storm as they should, and I didn't really get a sense of panic anywhere, but then I watch relatively little news, relying more on on the written word.  Not too surprisingly, online news sources covered the hurricane extensively, too. 

Why do I get the sense that the same self appointed experts would be outraged, indignant, and appalled if the storm were worse, with much more damage and death?  I can almost read the pointed critiques about how people weren't prepared, there was not enough useful information, etc, etc, etc. 

What other stories should the media in the US have covered instead? 

[Gurn Blanston]

Just my .02c, Todd, but I think that what bugs people is that all of the news coverage that I saw (and I only get NYC stations, I don't have local TV) leaned totally on 'worst case' eventualities. I didn't see anything that owned up to that either. So the eventual results (which are rarely, if ever, 'worst case'), don't match the pre-event hype. AT least in my case, I am not 'disappointed' since I never expected worst case anyway, but I am frequently pleased that it wasn't as bad as it could have been. Of course, I have ridden out 6 hurricanes in the last 30 years here. Generally, they sucked but were never as bad as predicted.

[Herman]

Here's an eyewitness story from the NY Times:

"At 9:00 a.m. EDT, CNN is still calling Irene a hurricane (it's not), and the stammering, stuttering Anderson Cooper is still madly searching for some flooding or wind damage to report.

He stands, bewildered, somewhere he can't see anything and can't communicate with any of his reporters except to plaintively, continually ask questions about what they are seeing - which is not much. At one point, he actually suggested everyone go out and take a look around! while another correspondent on the same screen protested, "NO!"

The CNN interface looked like a giant pinball machine, with flashing lights, a half-dozen radar insets, reporter windows, info crawls - and they consistently covered the things the reporters were talking about with graphics.

MSNBC was even worse -their reporters were completely unprepared and uninformed, spouting falsehoods, opinions, and drivel at will."

[karlhenning]

. . . At least in my case, I am not 'disappointed' since I never expected worst case anyway, but I am frequently pleased that it wasn't as bad as it could have been. Of course, I have ridden out 6 hurricanes in the last 30 years here. Generally, they sucked but were never as bad as predicted.

It is well.

[Todd]

I think that what bugs people is that all of the news coverage that I saw (and I only get NYC stations, I don't have local TV) leaned totally on 'worst case' eventualities.

Worst case often gets the most air time and attention.  Hell, read just about any political or economic post on this very forum and you see the same thing in another arena.  (That's no doubt justified is the probable rejoinder.)  Perhaps I was just reading and watching the wrong coverage, because everything I saw showed multiple storm paths, kept accurate track of the actual status of the storm (class, winds, etc), and addressed specific possibilities for different locales, with a big focus on North Carolina early on, and rightly so.  I think it makes perfect sense for the press to cover these events, and if they err, better to err on the side that produces the most caution.  Much better to say "it was nothing" than "if we had only known."

[Gurn Blanston]

Worst case often gets the most air time and attention.  Hell, read just about any political or economic post on this very forum and you see the same thing in another arena.  (That's no doubt justified is the probable rejoinder.)  Perhaps I was just reading and watching the wrong coverage, because everything I saw showed multiple storm paths, kept accurate track of the actual status of the storm (class, winds, etc), and addressed specific possibilities for different locales, with a big focus on North Carolina early on, and rightly so.  I think it makes perfect sense for the press to cover these events, and if they err, better to err on the side that produces the most caution.  Much better to say "it was nothing" than "if we had only known."

Here's an eyewitness story from the NY Times:

"At 9:00 a.m. EDT, CNN is still calling Irene a hurricane (it's not), and the stammering, stuttering Anderson Cooper is still madly searching for some flooding or wind damage to report.

He stands, bewildered, somewhere he can't see anything and can't communicate with any of his reporters except to plaintively, continually ask questions about what they are seeing - which is not much. At one point, he actually suggested everyone go out and take a look around! while another correspondent on the same screen protested, "NO!"

The CNN interface looked like a giant pinball machine, with flashing lights, a half-dozen radar insets, reporter windows, info crawls - and they consistently covered the things the reporters were talking about with graphics.

MSNBC was even worse -their reporters were completely unprepared and uninformed, spouting falsehoods, opinions, and drivel at will."

Well, that about covers it all. I saw more good coverage from the local newsies who knew where they were talking about and kept their wits about them. The nationals were all over the map with their coverage. We actually saw a reporter speculate on whether it would be the end of the world!   

In any case, I am not reviewing various news organizations, I am merely speculating on what it is about some media coverage that drives people crazy. It is the media capitol of the world, after all, you would like to think that they could hit a home run in their own ballpark.

[snyprrr]

ok, can we officially change this to the, What Is UP With the Gov These Days, Actin' All I (me and my endless middle managers) Knows Best?

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-irene-not-over-211932407.html

Really??






Really?



Please don't paint me as a gov-hater just because this is ridiculous. Thank you.

However,... Obama,... puh-leeze . Never before... in HISTORY has the leader of any nation ever treated his... peeps like so many preschoolers. You sir, are a sincerely phony assistant principal

Let me be clear.









You all should be proud of me that I'm not going further with this now. GRRRR , sorry, but idiot ideology like what we have between Obama and whomever he's up against,...

ok, stop

goodnight

[Todd]

Obama is right in that it is not over, and that one of the biggest problems that will be coming up is the remaining flooding, and then dealing with the results of the flooding.  The biggest financial problem will be how to deal with flood damage in areas not designated as being in flood zones by FEMA.  Large areas affected by the storm are not in flood zones.  This will be no little problem, especially for those affected.  It will takes years to sort out in some cases. 

[Szykneij]

All the criticism of the storm news coverage doesn't surprise me. It's an inevitable rant whenever stormy weather approaches these days. People used to complain about the weather. Now they complain about how the media covers it. If a predicted storm doesn't pan out, people complain about it. If bad weather happens without warning, people complain about it. The crotchety old lady at the restaurant bar on Friday night beat everyone here to the moaning even before Irene ever arrived . She probably remembered the script from the last storm.

I'm located in what was the predicted path of Irene, so I'm not sure how the coverage played to the rest of the world. For me, it was spot on. The first forecasts had Boston as possibly, but not most likely, in the direct path of the storm. A bit later on, predictions were it would hit as a tropical storm with the center in western Massachusetts. That's what happened.

As I followed the storm on radio and TV, I reacted accordingly. I got an early start putting the patio furniture away and picking up small stuff around the yard (usually a post-Labor Day activity). As the storm weakened on it's path north, I knew I'd be OK leaving the bird feeders up and the tomato plants alone in the garden. I'm going to spend the rest of the day raking up the small branches and leaves strewn across my property.

Neighbors on my street who moved their cars from where two large Norway maple limbs came down were pleased with the coverage. My brother-in-law who secured his sailboat in Salem Harbor was pleased with the coverage. Sure, there's a lot of hype in the media motivated by ratings. But

      It would be naive to think a normal person doesn't know this.

(By the way, Ernie, I hope you told your cab to pick you up an hour earlier than necessary to get to work on time.)

[DavidW]

All the criticism of the storm news coverage doesn't surprise me. It's an inevitable rant whenever stormy weather approaches these days.

It's kind of silly.  Despite sensationalism isn't it cool to have a constant flood of information when these things happen?  I think people complain too much.  Hope things are fine for you Tony.

[Szykneij]

It's kind of silly.  Despite sensationalism isn't it cool to have a constant flood of information when these things happen?  I think people complain too much.  Hope things are fine for you Tony.

Thanks, David. We weathered the weather well, although there was more damage around here than I initially thought.

  In MA, people are used to eating donuts, lobsters and driving very badly.

Yes!     As I just zoomed up the street by our favorite seafood restaurant on my way to Dunkin' Donuts, I passed through the Tufts University campus where some beautiful ancient pine trees were uprooted on the hill.

[Opus106]

Despite sensationalism isn't it cool to have a constant flood of information when these things happen?

Despite my opinion of much of news media, an optional information flood is preferable to a water flood, I agree.

Oh, and the weatherman a few days ago said that there was a cyclone forming off the coast. Apart from a few evening showers, nothing big.

[karlhenning]

Thanks, David. We weathered the weather well . . . .

Good to know it, Tony!