Skip to main content

View Diary: A brief reminder about winter storm names... (188 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  there's no evidence the WeatherChannel (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tomhodukavich, Hey338Too, wildweasels

    is trying to usurp any of the fed's domain.

    They're not Accuweather. They didn't sign on to Santorum's bill.

    It is true that they've changed from a commercial for-profit educational service to a commercial for-profit entertainment service that's generally crap these days. But to say "oh, they're trying to take the NWS's services over" is not true at all. They can't. Their data comes from the Weather Service and they acknowledge that during weather events. I don't even like the Weather Channel anymore, but there are serious allegations being made here that just don't seem to have any evidence behind them.

    I think it's a cheap shot to link the Bain name, which will cause knees to jerk here, with some nefarious plot that has not been proved that the Weather Channel is part of. That's just me.

    If people say this will affect public safety, well then there's a case to be made. But given that the Weather Channel is now all FEAR FEAR FEAR DOOM DOOM DOOM all the time now, I doubt that. On the other hand there's an argument and a growing body of research that people tune out FEAR FEAR FEAR DOOM DOOM DOOM after awhile. That said, I think TWC and media outlets did pretty well with Sandy, where in some aspects, the Weather Service did not (there's a pretty major discussion going on about this in a lot of venues--and the government will address them over the winter and spring.

    pseudoscience can kill

    by terrypinder on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 05:21:42 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site