Local weather coverage: Too much of a good thing?

[PUGalicious]

In times of severe weather, especially with the threat of significant threat to life and property, few people object to weather coverage pre-empting regular programming.

But are there times when the weather coverage is excessive or overhyped?

Example: Yesterday afternoon, KFOR continually interrupted sports programming (not always waiting for commercial) to give weather updates about thunderstorms that were not severe.

[mranderson]

It depends on the situation and who the meteorologist is. If my house is in the direct path of a tornado (which it has been on more than one occasion), then I want constant coverage. If it is a small storm, then it is too much.

Then, on the scheduled casts, if the meteorologist is a bad one (most are), then I want them on and off as fast as possible.

[Dungeon Master]

I agree to some point.
All channels are guilty of it but I like channel 5 when they show the warning areas in the upper right corner and then it shows the radar of movement of the storms without the need of interuptions but they still go crazy just for a few thunderstorms.
If it's tornadoes, OK. But for storms poping up and nothing severe, please. Just scroll it at the top of the screen.

[pdjr]

It is excessive and overkill much of the time. I am especially peeved when the stations cover areas served by another affiliate. I understand that storms develop rapidly, but if a storm is in Amarillo moving east at 15 miles per hour, the on-screen graphic does the job....Wait until it gets at least a hundred miles away to break the news to me.

[HOT ROD]

I think OKC needs another hobby besides severe weather fanaticism. While it is great to be informed, there is more to life than chasing tornadoes; not everyone is interested in that.

Just an Observation!

[ladyfalcon]

I moved here from Michigan last year. I was glued to my TV during every little rain shower, sure they would all turn into tornadoes and blow me away. I'd heard about Oklahoma! I was so grateful for such wonderful coverage. FAST FORWARD a couple of months. I started writing back home to tell the Michiganders how wonderful it was to always know what storm was heading where. I found severe weather coverage as interesting as whatever program it interrupted. TWO MONTHS AFTER THAT and I was getting mildly irritated when my shows were interrupted for weather that had nothing to do with me and was not severe. FLASH TO NOW. I can't believe they do this!!! I agree it is foolish and unnecessary to go on and on about storms that aren't even in Oklahoma yet and may never get here! DRIVING ME CRAZY!!!!

[venture]

Couple things we need to remember. The OKC based stations cover most of the state and are in some cases the only media coverage they have. So even though a few people here who think they are elite and some town Oklahoma doesn't matter...deal with it. People and lives in Cordell, Wakita and Sayre are just as important as OKC, Norman and Edmond.

Do they go overboard sometimes? Sure. Idealy if it is still out of state but expected to bring severe conditions to the state - they should advise with minor break ins during commercials. If there are portions of the state experiencing severe conditions, the stations have a duty to break in and advise of the situation.

This year has been a down here tornado wise, but Oklahomans should feel privledged with the coverage weather gets here. Originally from Ohio...you couldn't pay the stations to break in even for a tornado going through the main parts of town.

[Karried]

ladyfalcon, that is so funny! I moved here from California and was fascinated in the beginning - glued to the TV all night during a storm - now, a few years into it, I'm feeling sort of p.o'd when all of the programming gets interrupted and the storm is nearly in Kansas!

I do know that if and when the next tornado watch happens, I'll be glued to the TV -
I've seen Twister! LOL

[mranderson]

"I do know that if and when the next tornado watch happens, I'll be glued to the TV -
I've seen Twister! LOL"

And I have seen the "Twister" attraction at Universal. A lot more realistic.

To those who tire of extensive weather coverage. When that F5 tornado is about 100 miles away and headed for your house, and after you take cover because that extended coverage only to find your house a pile of toothpicks, you will thank God for giving you that coverage.

Think about that.

[venture]

I think most forget May 3rd too quickly. That tornado likely would have killed more if the media wasn't running wall to wall coverage. The fact that they were covering the storm that would eventually produce the tornado that would hit the OKC metro area (formed just south of Amber) for nearly 2 hours...gave an unprecidented lead time for tornado safety precautions to be put to use.

What a lot of people don't see, are the public yet internal (to the weather community) comments on the severity of the situation. We hear things such as "Slight Risk or Moderate Risk" of servere weather...but most in the public don't understand what it means. Then there is the level of watches. We all know the Tornado Watches and Severe Thunderstorm watches...but there is another higher level for those that is rarely broadcasted. They are called PDS Watches or Particularly Dangerous Situation watch boxes. May 3rd was an example where a PDS Tornado watch was put into effect. This past spring/summer...we've had a couple of these PDS watch boxes including the rare PDS Severe Thunderstorm watch. That even was June 16th...when they were expecting a derecho event of widespread severe winds with a line of storms. Winds were recorded up to 103 mph that day in some areas with widespread 50-70 mph winds.

My whole point...yeah it may seem over kill to the general public, but usually it is because in the background the weather community is monitoring a situation that can become very explosive and dangerous - a PDS day.

When ever there is a question about the weather...I would always highly recommend getting the information yourself. This not only educates you on understanding the difference between events, but you know how to prepare by the terminology being relayed.

http://www.spc.noaa.gov/

http://www.srh.noaa.gov/oun/enhanced.php

Those are the two best links for the general public to use, and you'll have access to most of the thoughts and forecasts by the NWS.

[kahloist]

I can understand that the weather is something we all have to deal with, but the weather anchors tend to be over telling and making a big deal out of rain and wind. Tornadoes and floods are probably the most common natural disasters in Oklahoma and they are treated like an apocalypse coming to wipe the state from the map. I am not down playing these serious environmental events, however I feel that it's being made into bigger happenings than they should be.

[okcerintul]

I think most forget May 3rd too quickly. That tornado likely would have killed more if the media wasn't running wall to wall coverage. The fact that they were covering the storm that would eventually produce the tornado that would hit the OKC metro area (formed just south of Amber) for nearly 2 hours...gave an unprecidented lead time for tornado safety precautions to be put to use.

What a lot of people don't see, are the public yet internal (to the weather community) comments on the severity of the situation. We hear things such as "Slight Risk or Moderate Risk" of servere weather...but most in the public don't understand what it means. Then there is the level of watches. We all know the Tornado Watches and Severe Thunderstorm watches...but there is another higher level for those that is rarely broadcasted. They are called PDS Watches or Particularly Dangerous Situation watch boxes. May 3rd was an example where a PDS Tornado watch was put into effect. This past spring/summer...we've had a couple of these PDS watch boxes including the rare PDS Severe Thunderstorm watch. That even was June 16th...when they were expecting a derecho event of widespread severe winds with a line of storms. Winds were recorded up to 103 mph that day in some areas with widespread 50-70 mph winds.

My whole point...yeah it may seem over kill to the general public, but usually it is because in the background the weather community is monitoring a situation that can become very explosive and dangerous - a PDS day.

When ever there is a question about the weather...I would always highly recommend getting the information yourself. This not only educates you on understanding the difference between events, but you know how to prepare by the terminology being relayed.

http://www.spc.noaa.gov/

http://www.srh.noaa.gov/oun/enhanced.php

Those are the two best links for the general public to use, and you'll have access to most of the thoughts and forecasts by the NWS.

Sorry to be so "late to the dance on this".

I'm an OU meteorology student interning at a Tulsa TV station right now. Even most TV meteorologists will agree that severe weather coverage is too crazy. But, you have to keep up with what the guy next door is doing. Gary England probably said it best in his book "Weathering The Storm". I'll paraphrase, but he essentially said that he once interrupted programming to assure viewers that a storm that other stations were doing on air warnings about was not severe and had no risk of becoming severe. He then received a phone call from a viewer who said, "If it isn't severe, why are YOU on the air?".

May 3rd is always brought up as a defense when people say that there are too many on-air interruptions. May 3rd was a major aberration in the world of weather. Chances are, we will never see a day with kind of concentrated severe weather again in our lifetimes.

Meteorologists should not interrupt programming for storms that are not severe. But, if someone does, so will everyone else.

The bottom line for television...it's all about ratings. Severe weather in Oklahoma generates HUGE ratings. So, the viewer is in a bit of a fix. They want the severe weather information, but not if it is affecting their tiny little area. Then again, if the viewer gets to see a tornado ravaging a community live from a helicopter, it's time to get the popcorn. In short, the viewers have no one to blame but themselves for the onslaught of severe weather coverage.

[venture]

Good points. Sort of like this winter storm for tomorrow. LOL Reminds me of a Lewis Black skit...."Its the worse storm ever, the worse storm ever....theres going to be an inch of snow, ITS THE WORST INCH OF SNOW."

Ah well. Life goes on. May 3rd was a memorable event...saying we won't see it again is probably not accurate. We may not see it in OKC...but it will happen again - somewhere.

[okcerintul]

Ah well. Life goes on. May 3rd was a memorable event...saying we won't see it again is probably not accurate. We may not see it in OKC...but it will happen again - somewhere.

I said we probably won't see it again in our lifetimes. Weather is naturally cyclical. Certainly there will be similar tornado outbreaks in the future. May 3rd definitely wasn't the worst ever, and there will be stronger outbreaks to come. But these are mostly generational events. The last event similar to May 3rd (in strength of tornadoes and deaths caused) was proabably the super outbreak in 1974. There have been other outbreaks that caused more tornadoes and caused more damage than May 3rd since 1974 (the November 1992 outbreak in the SE U.S. comes to mind).

[james sheldon]

Where is Ann Halloran working now?

[drumsncode]

March 20th from 4pm to 5:30pm was virtually non-stop coverage. You'd think they'd want to take a break or something. After a while, it gets mind-numbing and you stop paying attention. That's when you miss the fact that a twister is right outside your window.

[okcerintul]

March 20th from 4pm to 5:30pm was virtually non-stop coverage. You'd think they'd want to take a break or something. After a while, it gets mind-numbing and you stop paying attention. That's when you miss the fact that a twister is right outside your window.

This is true, but more people are tuned in than not. Local ratings jump during wall-to-wall severe weather coverage.