Topic: Fox News: Is Television Weather Coverage Too Dangerous?

[HailHunter]

The following comes from FoxNews.com

The newest extreme sport: covering the weather for TV. In an effort to satisfy the public's appetite for footage of blizzards, hurricanes and, most recently, the devastating tornadoes in Oklahoma, reporters as well as professional and amateur chasers are heading straight into the eyes of the storms.

After Tim Samaras, Paul Samaras and Carl Young, the stars of Discovery's "Storm Chasers" series, died while filming the El Reno, Oklahoma, tornado on May 31, some in the industry are wondering if the competition to get the scariest shot has gone too far. Weather Channel meteorologist Mike Bettes thinks so. While following the same twister, his car was lifted off the ground and dumped 325 feet away. "This is a wake-up call about the safety of people chasing weather," says Bettes, who suffered cuts from broken glass (his cameraman cracked a vertebrae in his neck).

"The weather community should operate under a standard set of guidelines," he says. "I think the Weather Channel would recommend that we don't chase on those rare days deemed a PDS [particularly dangerous situation]. It's great to get the pictures, but if it's too dangerous, I think our mantra should be, 'Let's call it off.' I would love to see more chasers develop that mentality."

Josh Wurman, a tornado and hurricane expert and the founder of Boulder's Center for Severe Weather Research, agrees there are "daredevils" in the weather-chasing community but says that, despite the death of his friend Tim Samaras, covering extreme weather "isn't that dangerous statistically." Wurman, who has appeared on "Storm Chasers," says the media should avoid "branding normal weather with terms like 'snowpocalypse' and 'superstorm.' It's a misleading sort of entertainment that fuels the chasers to take reckless chances to find dramatic video to sell to TV."

Says Bettes, "Viewers are very desensitized, and they want to see the most extreme things. It's our responsibility to show people what weather is and what it's doing, but in a responsible manner."


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2013/06/12/has-tv-weather-coverage-become-too-dangerous/#ixzz2W4heD6D5

[BigOkie]

Hindsight is surely 20/20. But I agree.

But until you take take the big payday out of bidding for that extreme footage, I fear it will just get worse.

[WeatherHost]

Yet, people keep watching The Worst Channel and mainstream media outlets continue to buy from tornado tourists and disaster debutants.

[Timay]

I agree with Josh Wurman:

Josh Wurman, a tornado and hurricane expert and the founder of Boulder's Center for Severe Weather Research, agrees there are "daredevils" in the weather-chasing community but says that, despite the death of his friend Tim Samaras, covering extreme weather "isn't that dangerous statistically." Wurman, who has appeared on "Storm Chasers," says the media should avoid "branding normal weather with terms like 'snowpocalypse' and 'superstorm.' It's a misleading sort of entertainment that fuels the chasers to take reckless chances to find dramatic video to sell to TV."

Tim

[K3JAE]

In my opinion, the so-called "weather channel" is one of the biggest farces in the weather community and worst culprits in assisting the need for footage. These clowns, think they know more than NOAA/NWS and attempt at every turn to sound like they are the authority on weather....

Funny thing is, they get their radar info etc. from the ones they try to seem more superior to.... Screw that channel, one I never watch or put one little ounce of trust, respect or importance to. I dare say more and more people are watching it only for the "extreme" footage by those who have no regard for their lives... that is after you get through the 45 minutes of ridiculous advertisement each hour.