Yesterday I posted about the brewing severe weather coverage controversy. Today I will write my opinion on the matter. Print this and take it, along with a few dollars, to Starbucks and you can buy a cup of fancy coffee.
The controversy over what kind of severe weather coverage television stations should provide has reared its head again in Alabama. On Saturday, a very slow moving storm system drifted through the state, training over the same areas, producing numerous tornado warnings but little if any damage. Sunday a major derecho event moved across the state along with 7 confirmed tornadoes. Six of the tornadoes were rated EF1 and one was rated EF0. There were numerous trees down across mostly rural areas of Central Alabama. The greater Birmingham metropolitan area was brushed with several close calls with wall clouds and funnels reported.
On Monday, Paul Finebaum, a popular sports radio talk show host dedicated his four hour program to the issue of severe weather coverage. Sporting events including the NBA playoffs, PGA golf, and a NASCAR race were all preempted for severe weather coverage in the Birmingham and Huntsville television markets. Brad Huffines, Chief Meteorologist with WAAY 31, the ABC affiliate in Huntsville added fuel to the fire by calling in to the Finebaum show, making some not so subtle digs at other stations in the Huntsville and Birmingham markets for overdoing the severe weather coverage.
I have been an observer of weather and mass media in Alabama for over 35 years. I have a degree in communication. Other than that, I have no real claim to fame. I know several people in the weather community and they are some of the most sincere, dedicated, and passionate people I know when it comes to taking their jobs seriously.
I think it is time to take some of the emotion out of this issue and look at some facts, and let the conclusions follow. It is hard to argue that there are certainly a lot of false alarms. Approximately 80 percent of tornado warnings are not later verified by a confirmed touchdown. On top of that, 75 percent of all tornadoes are EF0 and EF1, and produce only 4 percent of all deaths. 96 percent of all tornado-related deaths occur within 25 percent of the tornadoes (EF2-5). So, let’s take a closer look at what we are dealing with here:
100 tornado warnings
20 tornadoes confirmed
15 EF0-EF1
5 EF2-EF5
What that tells us is that out of 100 tornado warnings, approximately five or six are likely to result in deaths. If broadcast meteorologists could identify the “correct” five or six percent of warnings, then coverage could be scaled back the other 95 percent of the time. That sounds like a great idea, but is it possible in 2009?
Has technology and spotting improved significantly enough to accomplish that? I am going to say “not usually”. NEXRAD really improved lead time on warnings by showing meteorologists where storms are rotating. Street level mapping and other enhancements have been invaluable tools. But the fact remains that NEXRAD does not show what is going on in the lower levels of the atmosphere close to the ground where a tornado would be occurring. NWS Skywarn spotters and skywatcher teams like James Spann has assembled at ABC 33/40 in Birmingham have helped. Storm chasers such as John Brown and Brett Adair, along with skycam networks have really enhanced the ability of forecasters to obtain “ground truth.” Improved communication with cellular phones and “smart phones” has made almost every Alabamian a “storm spotter” with the ability to immediately call in a report or send an actual image back to television stations. All of these things are great, but they are still not quite enough to tell broadcast meteorologists all they need to know.
Some might suggest that one can look at the severe parameters for a given day and say that the conditions are not favorable for significant tornadoes. Some would also say that there are obvious signatures on radar that accompany a significant tornado. I would like to believe these things, but it simply isn’t always true. How many “high risks” have busted? How many “slight risks” have turned into higher-end events? As far as radar, there have been numerous times when major rotation was showing up on radar and nothing happened at the ground.
Since meteorology is an inexact science this is where prudence and common sense need come into the picture. James Spann is famous for saying that the meteorological community needs more humility. Retired Birmingham NWS forecaster J.B. Elliott is famous for saying, “when it comes to severe weather, expect the unexpected”.
The caution I would have at discontinuing the policy for long form, continuous coverage is that it is better to be safe than sorry. Another thing James Spann has said to prospective meteorologists is “to be ready for the defining moment in your career.” The truth is, no one in weather knows exactly when that will or will not happen.
Some have proposed alternatives, such as double-box programming. That will work somewhat for sports events but not for much else. What about the fact that most programs are not live and can be shown at a different time? What about the fact that most programs can be seen online? What about asking Congress to remove the legal barriers so that satellite and cable providers could offer two feeds of every network broadcast? Sports fans, what about using alternative feeds on satellite when available? What about listening to the game on radio, when available? Finally, what about putting the lives of others as a higher priority than an Alabama game or “Desperate Housewives”? By the way, I am a big Alabama fan. I would hate to miss half of the Iron Bowl because of a warning, but I could work around it.
What about the “customers/viewers”? In America we like to say the customer is always right. But which customers do we listen to most closely? Do we listen to chronic whiners who call and email the station and cuss out the staff because their “story” or their NASCAR race was interrupted? Or do we listen to the ratings? It seems to me that ratings are a better measure of the customers’ overall opinions. In Huntsville, Dan Satterfield at WHNT 19 and Brad Travis at WAFF 48 usually have the highest ratings. In Birmingham James Spann at ABC 33/40 has generally had the highest ratings. Is it a coincidence that these stations provide the most extensive coverage of storm events? I think not.
Finally, here is a hypothetical situation to ponder. Pretend it is May 28, 2009. The SPC places the Tennessee Valley of North Alabama under a slight risk. Instability levels are high but there is a strong cap in place across the state. Models did not predict much shear in the atmosphere but a renegade boundary from storms the previous day is reenergized in the heating of the day around Interstate 20. At about 2:00 storms begin to develop along the line and the SPC issues a Severe Thunderstorm Watch. Meteorologists have an eye on the radar but are not really in full severe weather mode, going about typical tasks. Suddenly rotation is seen in a storm that has developed on the Bibb/Shelby County line, southwest of the Birmingham suburb of Hoover. The NWS issues a Tornado Warning. Television stations put a “crawl” across the bottom of the screen and break in momentarily before going back to regular programming. No one at the station really wants to hear little old ladies complaining about missing a critically important episode of “General Hospital” that day. Very quickly this isolated storm goes into rotation in the lower levels and produces a tornado which moves along Highway 150. It produces EF3 damage for 5 miles and damages numerous businesses, schools, churches and homes in the Hoover area. Sadly, because it is a populated area, there are ten fatalities. Broadcast meteorologists only begin coverage in earnest after the tornado has dissipated and the damage reports start coming in. Will they wish they had been more prepared to provide wall to wall coverage the moment the tornado warning was issued? Will they be criticized for not “doing their jobs”? Will the Birmingham News headline read, “Tornado Strikes Hoover Without Warning, 10 Killed”? Will families ask for an investigation? Will there be a grieving parent who will always wonder “what if” their beautiful 10 year old daughter had been able to take cover in time? Will the public then demand wall to wall coverage during every tornado warning? I think the answer to all of those questions is “yes”, or “very likely”.
The question is not whether a significant tornado will cause fatalities in Alabama but rather when will it happen. The other question is will we be ready? I would like to see a modified version of continuous “wall to wall” coverage, if it were feasible. I am not sure that it is. Even if it was feasible, people would still complain about the frequent interruptions. I vote for broadcast media outlets in Alabama to continue continuous coverage during tornado warnings in their market areas.
...
Video: Your 3-Day National Weather Forecast
-
Watch what the experts at The Weather Channel ® have to say about the
weather trends in the United States for the next 3-days.
12 minutes ago
Posts
