The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

Talk About Tulsa => Other Tulsa Discussion => Topic started by: sgrizzle on January 08, 2008, 07:20:49 am



Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: sgrizzle on January 08, 2008, 07:20:49 am
If I remember correctly, it wasn't that long ago that a meteorologist from one station was fired for preempting programming for a weather report, at the same time, some stations can't seem to stop preempting programming.

Last night I was watching American Gladiators. Not great programming but with the writer's strike, what else is there to watch? Anyway, they broke in no less than 5 times in an hour to talk about a storm in eastern oklahoma. Each break ran 5-10 minutes. At one point they played five commercials, and when the program was coming back on, they broke in. They even took time to show viewer pictures of hail in lawns and the obligatory 10 second intro and tag "this has been a channel 2 weather report" at the end.

I understand the need to get weather information across, but you don't need to show hail pictures, ramble forever and if you're going to preempt part of the program, don't skip the actual competitions and come back in time for the recaps. Most of the show, all that was aired was people talking about what just happened and you got to see very little of the actual contest.

/RANT


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: inteller on January 08, 2008, 07:48:13 am
quote:
Originally posted by sgrizzle

If I remember correctly, it wasn't that long ago that a meteorologist from one station was fired for preempting programming for a weather report, at the same time, some stations can't seem to stop preempting programming.

Last night I was watching American Gladiators. Not great programming but with the writer's strike, what else is there to watch? Anyway, they broke in no less than 5 times in an hour to talk about a storm in eastern oklahoma. Each break ran 5-10 minutes. At one point they played five commercials, and when the program was coming back on, they broke in. They even took time to show viewer pictures of hail in lawns and the obligatory 10 second intro and tag "this has been a channel 2 weather report" at the end.

I understand the need to get weather information across, but you don't need to show hail pictures, ramble forever and if you're going to preempt part of the program, don't skip the actual competitions and come back in time for the recaps. Most of the show, all that was aired was people talking about what just happened and you got to see very little of the actual contest.

/RANT



Yeah, I was watching that too...since it was in HD.  I'm sick of Threlkeld and his cadre of weather fearmongers.  The only consolation would be if they put Krista Flasch on there to fearmonger instead of nerdorks named 'George'


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: breitee on January 08, 2008, 08:37:43 am
I am sick of ALL of these so called "experts" on the weather. Do we really need to have these morons stay on the air hour after hour breathlessly describing what is going on at the Arkansas border? And these "storm chasers", what a joke. A bunch of would be weathermen. Typical dialog:
Mike, this is Trav. What do you see?
Trav, this is Mike. It's dark, I don't see anything unless there is lightning, then I see rain falling.


These stations need to get a grip. There is no need to cut in on programming unless there is a MAJOR LIFE THREATENING weather event! Run a crawl at the bottom and stop taking up 1/4th of the screen with your weather advisory and your logo.


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: safetyguy on January 08, 2008, 08:49:01 am
Yeah, the "Breaking News" for weather for hours on end last night was very annoying. I was trying to watch the national championship game on FOX. It's a good thing that they had the score at the top because I couldn't see hardly any of the graphics that were being flashed at the bottom of the screen thanks to the weather stuff. I also don't get the whole thing about they couldn't show the game in HD last night because of the weather stuff. What's up with that?

When I went to bed around midnight they were all still talking their heads off about the storms that had already passed through and were into KS and MO.

It was George Flickinger that was canned after interrupting an NFL game on FOX a few years back.


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: Wilbur on January 08, 2008, 09:23:54 am
If I heard one of Channel 8's storm spotters say one more time "I see a lowering" I was going to throw up.

I understand the need to broadcast weather issues for more then just Tulsa, but lets have weather issues to broadcast first.  Lowering don't qualify.


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: Breadburner on January 08, 2008, 09:41:37 am
I wonder how much lotion the local weather guys went through last night......


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: Ibanez on January 08, 2008, 09:50:22 am
quote:
Originally posted by breitee

I am sick of ALL of these so called "experts" on the weather. Do we really need to have these morons stay on the air hour after hour breathlessly describing what is going on at the Arkansas border? And these "storm chasers", what a joke. A bunch of would be weathermen. Typical dialog:
Mike, this is Trav. What do you see?
Trav, this is Mike. It's dark, I don't see anything unless there is lightning, then I see rain falling.


These stations need to get a grip. There is no need to cut in on programming unless there is a MAJOR LIFE THREATENING weather event! Run a crawl at the bottom and stop taking up 1/4th of the screen with your weather advisory and your logo.



Hell they can't even run a crawl anymore. Whenever they do that, like for school closings during the ice storm, they have the crawl at the botton and then graphics along the left side of the screen that end up shrinking the window for what you are actually watching down to a box about the size of a stamp. Even on our 60" TV it makes it too damn small to see the score & etc during a football game.


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: Ibanez on January 08, 2008, 09:52:53 am
quote:
Originally posted by Breadburner

I wonder how much lotion the local weather guys went through last night......



I believe the term you are looking for is Stormgasm.

A friend of mine worked at Channel 2 back in the early 90's and constantly laughed at how excited the weather staff, I think Gary Shore was still there then, would get whenever a line of storms would pop up.


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: restored2x on January 08, 2008, 10:48:51 am
Thanks to all for this thread. In the 14 or so years I've been in OK, I never cease to be amazed at the manifest self-importance the weather guys have here. I guess if you spend millions, or hundred-thous on weather radar stuff, you need to get on the air every time it's cloudy so as to justify the expense (?).

A few friends of mine have a running joke about this situation - we used to run up and down the halls flapping our arms screaming, "It's raining in Kansas! It's raining in Kansas!" just to show how stupid it looks to interrupt regular programming at every hint of a possible wind above 20 MPH accompanied by some precip.

American Idol starts in a week and a half - sure hope it's not raining in Kansas then.


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: Breadburner on January 08, 2008, 10:51:28 am
quote:
Originally posted by wavoka

quote:
Originally posted by Breadburner

I wonder how much lotion the local weather guys went through last night......



I believe the term you are looking for is Stormgasm.

A friend of mine worked at Channel 2 back in the early 90's and constantly laughed at how excited the weather staff, I think Gary Shore was still there then, would get whenever a line of storms would pop up.



Stormgasm...heh...Good work....


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: patric on January 08, 2008, 10:57:09 am
Biggest problem seems to be the inability of local stations to insert crawls or tickers into High-Definition programming.  Next problem will be to wean them away from non-essential promotional graphics that eat up so much of the screen real estate.


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: Ibanez on January 08, 2008, 10:57:51 am
quote:
Originally posted by Breadburner

quote:
Originally posted by wavoka

quote:
Originally posted by Breadburner

I wonder how much lotion the local weather guys went through last night......



I believe the term you are looking for is Stormgasm.

A friend of mine worked at Channel 2 back in the early 90's and constantly laughed at how excited the weather staff, I think Gary Shore was still there then, would get whenever a line of storms would pop up.



Stormgasm...heh...Good work....



I can't take credit for it. My friend that worked at Channel 2 came up with it.


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: RecycleMichael on January 08, 2008, 11:31:34 am
We interrupt this thread with this breaking news bulletin. From our most accurate rated double doppler 8000 WARN live radar Weather Center...this just in.

Tonight it will be dark, followed by periods of lightness and darkness throughout the next week.

Stay tuned on this thread for more updates...


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: inteller on January 08, 2008, 11:59:34 am
quote:
Originally posted by patric

Biggest problem seems to be the inability of local stations to insert crawls or tickers into High-Definition programming.  Next problem will be to wean them away from non-essential promotional graphics that eat up so much of the screen real estate.



no channel 2 can do HD crawls....they just keep cutting in so the crawls are useless.


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: Wrinkle on January 08, 2008, 12:05:52 pm
I appreciate good weather reporting as much as anyone. But, it's gotten ridiculous when all three network stations have 3-4 hours of continuous live weather coverage, preempting all programming. Sure, there was public safety issues last night, in the VIEWING AREA (Tulsa was not affected). But, it could've been handled differently.

It's like the station manager left at 5:00pm and tossed the keys to the weather guys.

Here's an idea, how 'bout all three/four local affiliates get together and operate a local 24-hr Weather Channel? Then, a simple crawl on the regular station could refer to it. Those who want weather can get it. Each affiliate gets 15-20 minutes to rant about weather.

IF it becomes really serious (and, I mean a tornado on the ground) a program break may be sensible. This shouldn't happen unless the sirens are also going.



Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: breitee on January 08, 2008, 12:28:31 pm
I wonder if the local station managers are reading this? That is assuming these idiots can read of course. If they can, DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS PROBLEM!


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: grahambino on January 08, 2008, 12:37:13 pm
all i know is that quad-doppler XL viper v. 2.0
keeps me and my family safe.

not like that piece of sh*t quad-doppler XL viper v. 1.0 that other station has.


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: inteller on January 08, 2008, 01:03:34 pm
quote:
Originally posted by Wrinkle

IF it becomes really serious (and, I mean a tornado on the ground) a program break may be sensible. This shouldn't happen unless the sirens are also going.





oh, but they will tell you IF THE SIRENS ARE GOING ITS TOO LATE< YOU ARE ALL GONNA DIE!!!11!


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: restored2x on January 08, 2008, 01:17:07 pm
quote:
Originally posted by grahambino

all i know is that quad-doppler XL viper v. 2.0
keeps me and my family safe.

not like that piece of sh*t quad-doppler XL viper v. 1.0 that other station has.




HAHA!
Now THAT is funny!


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: Samalicious on January 08, 2008, 02:24:45 pm
I agree that some of the coverage is often over the top, but I think also that the local stations are in a no-win situation when it comes to pleasing everyone with severe weather coverage. Last night there were times when there were nine counties under a tornado warning at once. I am sure people who live in those counties wanted all the information they could get, just like people in Tulsa County want when there is severe weather threatening here. Everyone wants wall to wall coverage when it affects them. No one wants it when it does not. I have worked for local stations in the market for a long time and have heard the same complaints ever since I moved to Tulsa in 1981. The reason local stations cover tornado warnings is because tornados kill people here. Local weather coverage on television saves peoples' lives. Don't like it, don't watch.


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: Ibanez on January 08, 2008, 02:26:53 pm
quote:
Originally posted by Wrinkle

I appreciate good weather reporting as much as anyone. But, it's gotten ridiculous when all three network stations have 3-4 hours of continuous live weather coverage, preempting all programming. Sure, there was public safety issues last night, in the VIEWING AREA (Tulsa was not affected). But, it could've been handled differently.

It's like the station manager left at 5:00pm and tossed the keys to the weather guys.

Here's an idea, how 'bout all three/four local affiliates get together and operate a local 24-hr Weather Channel? Then, a simple crawl on the regular station could refer to it. Those who want weather can get it. Each affiliate gets 15-20 minutes to rant about weather.

IF it becomes really serious (and, I mean a tornado on the ground) a program break may be sensible. This shouldn't happen unless the sirens are also going.




That will never work...it is entirely too logical.


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: sgrizzle on January 08, 2008, 02:28:36 pm
quote:
Originally posted by wavoka

quote:
Originally posted by Wrinkle

I appreciate good weather reporting as much as anyone. But, it's gotten ridiculous when all three network stations have 3-4 hours of continuous live weather coverage, preempting all programming. Sure, there was public safety issues last night, in the VIEWING AREA (Tulsa was not affected). But, it could've been handled differently.

It's like the station manager left at 5:00pm and tossed the keys to the weather guys.

Here's an idea, how 'bout all three/four local affiliates get together and operate a local 24-hr Weather Channel? Then, a simple crawl on the regular station could refer to it. Those who want weather can get it. Each affiliate gets 15-20 minutes to rant about weather.

IF it becomes really serious (and, I mean a tornado on the ground) a program break may be sensible. This shouldn't happen unless the sirens are also going.




That will never work...it is entirely too logical.



There are already two 24/7 local weather channels.


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: Ibanez on January 08, 2008, 03:05:26 pm
quote:
Originally posted by sgrizzle

quote:
Originally posted by wavoka

quote:
Originally posted by Wrinkle

I appreciate good weather reporting as much as anyone. But, it's gotten ridiculous when all three network stations have 3-4 hours of continuous live weather coverage, preempting all programming. Sure, there was public safety issues last night, in the VIEWING AREA (Tulsa was not affected). But, it could've been handled differently.

It's like the station manager left at 5:00pm and tossed the keys to the weather guys.

Here's an idea, how 'bout all three/four local affiliates get together and operate a local 24-hr Weather Channel? Then, a simple crawl on the regular station could refer to it. Those who want weather can get it. Each affiliate gets 15-20 minutes to rant about weather.

IF it becomes really serious (and, I mean a tornado on the ground) a program break may be sensible. This shouldn't happen unless the sirens are also going.




That will never work...it is entirely too logical.



There are already two 24/7 local weather channels.



I meant his plan of only showing a crawl on the main stations.


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: inteller on January 08, 2008, 03:21:59 pm
quote:
Originally posted by Samalicious

I agree that some of the coverage is often over the top, but I think also that the local stations are in a no-win situation when it comes to pleasing everyone with severe weather coverage. Last night there were times when there were nine counties under a tornado warning at once. I am sure people who live in those counties wanted all the information they could get, just like people in Tulsa County want when there is severe weather threatening here. Everyone wants wall to wall coverage when it affects them. No one wants it when it does not. I have worked for local stations in the market for a long time and have heard the same complaints ever since I moved to Tulsa in 1981. The reason local stations cover tornado warnings is because tornados kill people here. Local weather coverage on television saves peoples' lives. Don't like it, don't watch.



Thanks for the response Dan Threlkeld.


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: pmcalk on January 08, 2008, 03:36:52 pm
quote:
Originally posted by Samalicious

I agree that some of the coverage is often over the top, but I think also that the local stations are in a no-win situation when it comes to pleasing everyone with severe weather coverage. Last night there were times when there were nine counties under a tornado warning at once. I am sure people who live in those counties wanted all the information they could get, just like people in Tulsa County want when there is severe weather threatening here. Everyone wants wall to wall coverage when it affects them. No one wants it when it does not. I have worked for local stations in the market for a long time and have heard the same complaints ever since I moved to Tulsa in 1981. The reason local stations cover tornado warnings is because tornados kill people here. Local weather coverage on television saves peoples' lives. Don't like it, don't watch.



I hear over and over that local weather coverage saves peoples' lives.  Maybe it does, but I don't think that constant coverage, as opposed to brief interruptions every 15 minutes or so, saves any more lives.  Yes, they should broadcast if there is a tornado warning.  They should come on, show where it is located, where it is heading, and who should take cover.  Do they need to keep saying this over and over for 3 hours straight?  Do they need to flash up the radar every 2 minutes (when the storm has moved only inches), zoom in, zoom out, zoom over a few feet, zoom out again, and then do it all over again until viewers are left with a headache?  Do they need to show constant pictures of dark skies and lightening?  Is that saving lives?  No, that is just drumming up hysteria.  It's for ratings.

Everyone should know, if there is a storm with tornados in it and its heading your way, take cover.  You don't need to know that it will hit at 9:03 or 9:08 or 9:12, or what the wall clouds look like, or what the "storm trackers" are seeing.  Go take cover--period.  And, if you are at risk of a tornado, you shouldn't be watching TV (unless you have a TV in your safe room/closet/basement).


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: carltonplace on January 08, 2008, 04:23:15 pm
"The end of the world will come Two Days Before the Day After Tomorrow...

good God that's...

TODAY!!!"


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: breitee on January 08, 2008, 04:36:33 pm
quote:
Originally posted by pmcalk

quote:
Originally posted by Samalicious

I agree that some of the coverage is often over the top, but I think also that the local stations are in a no-win situation when it comes to pleasing everyone with severe weather coverage. Last night there were times when there were nine counties under a tornado warning at once. I am sure people who live in those counties wanted all the information they could get, just like people in Tulsa County want when there is severe weather threatening here. Everyone wants wall to wall coverage when it affects them. No one wants it when it does not. I have worked for local stations in the market for a long time and have heard the same complaints ever since I moved to Tulsa in 1981. The reason local stations cover tornado warnings is because tornados kill people here. Local weather coverage on television saves peoples' lives. Don't like it, don't watch.



I hear over and over that local weather coverage saves peoples' lives.  Maybe it does, but I don't think that constant coverage, as opposed to brief interruptions every 15 minutes or so, saves any more lives.  Yes, they should broadcast if there is a tornado warning.  They should come on, show where it is located, where it is heading, and who should take cover.  Do they need to keep saying this over and over for 3 hours straight?  Do they need to flash up the radar every 2 minutes (when the storm has moved only inches), zoom in, zoom out, zoom over a few feet, zoom out again, and then do it all over again until viewers are left with a headache?  Do they need to show constant pictures of dark skies and lightening?  Is that saving lives?  No, that is just drumming up hysteria.  It's for ratings.

Everyone should know, if there is a storm with tornados in it and its heading your way, take cover.  You don't need to know that it will hit at 9:03 or 9:08 or 9:12, or what the wall clouds look like, or what the "storm trackers" are seeing.  Go take cover--period.  And, if you are at risk of a tornado, you shouldn't be watching TV (unless you have a TV in your safe room/closet/basement).




Just another example of much the local stations SUCK!


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: inteller on January 08, 2008, 06:38:58 pm
well, it is obvious channel 2 reads this site.  I noticed that they are going to rebroadcast american gladiators.

Hi Channel 2.  Oh and put Krista Flasch on TV more.


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: mr.jaynes on January 08, 2008, 08:39:24 pm
quote:
Originally posted by inteller

well, it is obvious channel 2 reads this site.  I noticed that they are going to rebroadcast american gladiators.

Hi Channel 2.  Oh and put Krista Flasch on TV more.



Who is Krista Flasch?


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: inteller on January 08, 2008, 09:39:48 pm
quote:
Originally posted by mr.jaynes

quote:
Originally posted by inteller

well, it is obvious channel 2 reads this site.  I noticed that they are going to rebroadcast american gladiators.

Hi Channel 2.  Oh and put Krista Flasch on TV more.



Who is Krista Flasch?



holy **** you haven't seen Krista Flasch?  Man, crawl out of your cave and bask in her hawtness!

http://www.kjrh.com/content/aboutus/bios/story.aspx?content_id=f67ce643-1764-4618-9450-876d9aaa44c2


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: Breadburner on January 08, 2008, 09:45:07 pm
How many people have been killed by Tornadoes in Tulsa lately....How bout a murder warning or robbery warning or rape warning...It's tabloid weather at it's finest....


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: sgrizzle on January 09, 2008, 09:14:23 am
quote:
Originally posted by inteller

well, it is obvious channel 2 reads this site.  I noticed that they are going to rebroadcast american gladiators.

Hi Channel 2.  Oh and put Krista Flasch on TV more.



When? or did I re-miss it?


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: citizen72 on January 09, 2008, 02:15:17 pm
quote:
Originally posted by Samalicious

I agree that some of the coverage is often over the top, but I think also that the local stations are in a no-win situation when it comes to pleasing everyone with severe weather coverage. Last night there were times when there were nine counties under a tornado warning at once. I am sure people who live in those counties wanted all the information they could get, just like people in Tulsa County want when there is severe weather threatening here. Everyone wants wall to wall coverage when it affects them. No one wants it when it does not. I have worked for local stations in the market for a long time and have heard the same complaints ever since I moved to Tulsa in 1981. The reason local stations cover tornado warnings is because tornadoes kill people here. Local weather coverage on television saves peoples' lives. Don't like it, don't watch.



No one will debate the dangers of severe weather. However, all the local stations turn a particular weather event into some kind of morase entertainment opportunity.

One could successfully debate the methods of the weather reporting as being well over the top. Breaking into normal programming to show hail in yards and clouds in the sky exemplifies the point. This is not to ignore their going over and over the same information during a break to the point of extreme tedium.


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: BriefRighter on January 09, 2008, 03:34:48 pm
I have been reading and enjoying this forum for some time now and had to join.

The weather break-ins remind me of the Roosevelt E. Roosevelt character Robin Williams did in "Good Morning Vietnam"...

RW: How is the weather Roosevelt?
RR: It's hot, damn hot!
RW: How hot is it?
RR:  You got a window? Open it!

Very simple and to the point weather reporting.


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: TUalum0982 on January 09, 2008, 03:50:01 pm
I personally love how after a "major storm" they run an advertisement saying they were the most accurate, most dependable, most watched news station during the so called "storm".  They run for weeks! what a joke.


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: breitee on January 09, 2008, 03:54:17 pm
I thought Frank Mitchell was above this sort of childish reporting but I guess he is right in there with the rest of them.

The dumbing down of America!


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: YoungTulsan on January 10, 2008, 01:05:40 am
Listen to Gary England, he's gonna let us know its' ok....

http://youtube.com/watch?v=ty_eBwbL9ig


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: btrost74 on January 10, 2008, 02:03:42 pm
Here's the real problem - MIKE MORGAN!!

Mike is the head weather man at KFOR-Channel 4 in Oklahoma City.

I grew up in Owasso, but I lived in the OKC metro for 11 years before moving back to Owasso about a year ago. When I was growing up, I don't remember Channels 2,6,8 and 23 falling all over themselves like they do now when a small cloud formed in the sky.

When I lived in OKC, Mike Morgan had a sky is falling mentality. It didn't matter if it was sunny, rainy, windy or whatever...something dramatic was happening in weather every day. Well, before Dan Therkeld became head weather man at Channel 2, he was second in command at Channel 4 in OKC and learned the sky is falling mentality from Mike Morgan.

When Dan came to Tulsa, he brought Mike Morgan's style with him.

And the stormgasm climaxed in Tulsa.


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: breitee on January 10, 2008, 02:17:11 pm
Yeah, we had the weatherteller on the NBT building to let us know what was going on!



Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: citizen72 on January 10, 2008, 11:06:15 pm
quote:
Originally posted by pmcalk

quote:
Originally posted by Samalicious

I agree that some of the coverage is often over the top, but I think also that the local stations are in a no-win situation when it comes to pleasing everyone with severe weather coverage. Last night there were times when there were nine counties under a tornado warning at once. I am sure people who live in those counties wanted all the information they could get, just like people in Tulsa County want when there is severe weather threatening here. Everyone wants wall to wall coverage when it affects them. No one wants it when it does not. I have worked for local stations in the market for a long time and have heard the same complaints ever since I moved to Tulsa in 1981. The reason local stations cover tornado warnings is because tornados kill people here. Local weather coverage on television saves peoples' lives. Don't like it, don't watch.



I hear over and over that local weather coverage saves peoples' lives.  Maybe it does, but I don't think that constant coverage, as opposed to brief interruptions every 15 minutes or so, saves any more lives.  Yes, they should broadcast if there is a tornado warning.  They should come on, show where it is located, where it is heading, and who should take cover.  Do they need to keep saying this over and over for 3 hours straight?  Do they need to flash up the radar every 2 minutes (when the storm has moved only inches), zoom in, zoom out, zoom over a few feet, zoom out again, and then do it all over again until viewers are left with a headache?  Do they need to show constant pictures of dark skies and lightening?  Is that saving lives?  No, that is just drumming up hysteria.  It's for ratings.

Everyone should know, if there is a storm with tornados in it and its heading your way, take cover.  You don't need to know that it will hit at 9:03 or 9:08 or 9:12, or what the wall clouds look like, or what the "storm trackers" are seeing.  Go take cover--period.  And, if you are at risk of a tornado, you shouldn't be watching TV (unless you have a TV in your safe room/closet/basement).



So then a logical extension of what you are saying is that when Channel 2 began their over reacting thing all the other station fell into line to protect their market share. Sounds about right


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: TheTed on March 27, 2008, 05:50:32 pm
Weather 80 miles east of here is pre-empting the NCAA tournament right now.

Aren't those people over by the Arkansas border out of our TV market? Fayetteville is certainly much closer.


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: nathanm on March 27, 2008, 07:28:44 pm
quote:
Originally posted by TheTed

Weather 80 miles east of here is pre-empting the NCAA tournament right now.

Aren't those people over by the Arkansas border out of our TV market? Fayetteville is certainly much closer.


No, the Tulsa DMA extends to the Arkansas border.


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: patric on March 27, 2008, 10:12:44 pm
quote:
Originally posted by nathanm

Quote
Originally posted by TheTed

the Tulsa DMA extends to the Arkansas border.



...and includes counties in Kansas and Arkansas that border Oklahoma.  A lot of cable systems depend on Tulsa stations, as well as rural viewers with antennas.


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: Breadburner on March 27, 2008, 10:38:00 pm
First Stormgasm of the year multiple ones to follow....


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: TheTed on March 27, 2008, 11:01:50 pm
I wish they could at least put whatever they're pre-empting on channel 6.2


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: CoffeeBean on March 27, 2008, 11:02:13 pm
CBS paid 6 billion . . . with a "B" . . . to televise the NCAA championships.  

While life-threatening weather is always more important than basketball, the stations can, and should, find a way to provide the information necessary without killing the games.  

For example, Channel 6 kept showing video and photos of the storm, which may be interesting for people watching the weather channel, but the people watching channel 6 are trying to watch basketball . . . give your warning and move on.  Leave the fluff for commercial breaks or the evening news (if it's not amazing enough to make the evening news, don't waste my time showing it in the middle of a basketball game).

Why not inset the warning over a corner of the game and let it be?!  



Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: Breadburner on March 28, 2008, 10:03:59 am
People have 3 other channels to watch storm coverage on.....


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: Conan71 on March 28, 2008, 10:32:02 am
Channel 8 stayed in the newsroom for ages last night while 2,6, & 23 all had normal programming with a bug in the lower RH corner of the screen.

A co-worker told me it was all re-runs of "Lost" last night.  I thought they were supposed to have a 16 week season with no re-runs (except for the first hour replay of the prev. week's episode).



Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: CoffeeBean on March 28, 2008, 01:53:44 pm
Last nights episode of Lost (at the 8pm time slot) was new.  You can watch it uninterrupted (along with every other episode of Lost going back to season 1) on ABC.com - for free.


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: Conan71 on March 28, 2008, 03:52:46 pm
quote:
Originally posted by CoffeeBean

Last nights episode of Lost (at the 8pm time slot) was new.  You can watch it uninterrupted (along with every other episode of Lost going back to season 1) on ABC.com - for free.



I kept waiting for them to go to "Lost" got tired of it and watched "Antique Road Show" instead.



Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: citizen72 on March 28, 2008, 05:34:05 pm
Talking about camera hogs Frank Mitchell is the worst of he lot. My wife and I were amused at him, last night, milking that little storm in the Southeast corner of the state for all it was worth. True it had some hail and possibly a tornado. But, do we need to warn the citizens down there over and over and over again to the point of becoming nauseous? Then too, saying the same thing over and over again. Sad, sad.

Thing is though the weather channels, with all their expensive equipment, are no better at forecasting than they were thirty years ago. Sadly in this market we obviously do not have the top of the heap weathermen as does say Chicago or Kansas City.

For me though I really liked it as a kid on the farm to wake up and find it had snowed. This event having happened overnight without one single "expert" telling me it was going to. That is what snow is all about.Textis


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: bugo on March 28, 2008, 06:05:06 pm
quote:
Originally posted by citizen72

Quote
Originally posted by Samalicious

One could successfully debate the methods of the weather reporting as being well over the top. Breaking into normal programming to show hail in yards and clouds in the sky exemplifies the point. This is not to ignore their going over and over the same information during a break to the point of extreme tedium.



I grew up in western Arkansas near the border and lived there most of my life, and I also lived a couple of years in Kansas City, both places either in or on the fringes of Tornado Alley.  One of the first things I noticed after moving here is how exaggerated the weather coverage is, even compared to Arkansas and Missouri/Kansas.  The level of coverage last night during the Xavier/WVU game would only be equalled on Little Rock TV if an F4 or stronger were headed for Little Rock.  If a possible tornado were headed for, say, Searcy or Camden, you'd see a scroll at the bottom and possibly one break in.  I guess Okies are scared of the weather (for good reason) and the local television stations' weather departments exploit this fear for ratings.  Shame on them.


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: breitee on March 31, 2008, 02:04:37 pm
The weather morons have been at it ALL DAY LONG!


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: CoffeeBean on March 31, 2008, 03:32:27 pm
BREAKING NEWS:

Channel 6 just received video from a storm chaser.  It showed some rain, a hilly road, a few cars and possibly . . . a fire truck!  

Travis Meyer added his own sound effects as he rolled the fire truck video *boom* said Travis.

BREAKING NEWS:

Maps!  We have more colorful maps!  If you can't read, and you're also deaf, these brightly colored maps will help you know if a tornado is on your house . . . maybe.  

BREAKING NEWS:

Katie is drving on highway 270.  She's near Krebs.  (It has good food - according to Travis).  She sees "scary" clouds.  Travis is pointing out the trees - not trees damaged by a tornado - these trees were damaged by the ice storm.  

BREAKING NEWS:

Darren is near Whitefield on Highway 2 - he's been overtaken by  . . . "precip"  . . . oh the humanity!!!  Travis is now showing us the precip on the pretty map.  Travis says this spring is "absolutely crazy."  More Darren video of gray clouds.

More Katie video;

More pretty maps;


. . . Oprah!


Title: Weather preempting programming
Post by: breitee on April 01, 2008, 10:16:05 am
They are all absolute dumbasses!


Title: Re: Weather preempting programming
Post by: patric on October 22, 2019, 12:03:35 pm
Questions raised after Dallas TV station airs NFL game instead of breaking tornado coverage
The station acknowledged “we made a mistake.”

A Dallas television station apologized to viewers after airing a football game — rather than severe weather coverage — as a powerful tornado tore through the city on Sunday night.

The incident has brought renewed attention to the dilemma TV stations face when severe weather strikes during popular programming. If they break in and interrupt shows and sporting events, they can often expect a rush of calls from angry viewers. At the same time, it’s not yet clear whether, in the case of a damaging tornado, offering severe weather coverage via online streaming services is an effective alternative to traditional televised weather coverage.

Shortly after 9 p.m. Sunday, a powerful tornado began plowing its way through the northwest suburbs of Dallas. As thousands scrambled to seek more information, they turned to their local television station for the latest.

Folks who turned on Channel 5 — NBC Dallas-Fort Worth — did not see informative weather maps or urgent pleas to seek shelter. Instead, a tense game between the Dallas Cowboys and Philadelphia Eagles flashed across the screen. There were no meteorologists, no radar plots and little indication that a 140 mph EF-3 funnel had been churning through northwest Dallas since 8:58 p.m.

At 9 p.m., the National Weather Service issued a tornado warning, yet the football game played on. By 9:02 p.m., a “debris ball” appeared on radar where the tornado was lofting building supplies from damaged or destroyed structures.

It wasn’t until 9:06 p.m. that the station preempted the football broadcast to deliver a “weather alert.” This was eight minutes after the twister touched down, six minutes after a warning was issued, and two minutes after the National Weather Service described it as a “particularly dangerous” and “life-threatening” situation, in which “flying debris may be deadly.”

“Folks, we have a developing dangerous weather situation,” began NBC 5 Dallas-Fort Worth chief meteorologist Rick Mitchell when the station finally cut in. “We believe that this is an actual tornado that is occurring,” he said, emphasizing the twister is north of Love Field. Less than 10 seconds later, he again stated that “the National Weather Service is confirming a tornado is occurring in that area.”

Mitchell appeared rushed, however, briefly outlining safety protocol and urging viewers to a place of safe shelter. “We’re going to put a quick storm track on this,” he said, before reiterating “again, confirmed tornado in this area.” But that’s where things got cut short.

“We’re going to continue our coverage on the website as well as our app," Mitchell concluded. “Stay with NBC 5; we’ll keep you ahead of the storm.” The entire interruption — about eight minutes after the tornado touched down — lasted 62 seconds. The tornado, which at this point had carried debris to a height of more than 20,000 feet, lasted 32 minutes.
The aftermath

The backlash to the TV station’s choice to limit tornado coverage was swift.

“Pushing people to an app or website is inexcusable when they have a broadcast signal,” wrote one Twitter user. “A game isn’t more important than people’s safety and lives,” tweeted another.

The TV station may have been in a no-win situation. In recent instances when stations have interrupted programming, such severe weather coverage has elicited a barrage of hate mail directed at stations and their meteorologists.

In February, a Nashville meteorologist made a collage of the comments she received when covering tornadoes and deadly flooding. An Atlanta meteorologist said she received death threats in April. ESPN’s Michael Wilbon lambasted a D.C. station for interrupting a previously aired golf tournament on the same day. And one Dayton meteorologist decried viewers live on the air, shouting “I’m done with you people” when fans of “The Bachelorette” wrote in to complain during a violent May tornado outbreak.

If you’re a TV station faced with needing to report life-threatening weather during prime time, there’s often no easy answer on what to do. As severe weather generally affects only a fragment of a television market, it’s impossible to satisfy all viewers, regardless of the solution.

NBC 5 Dallas-Fort Worth released a statement Monday, writing that “we made a mistake by not immediately interrupting.”

Mike Smith, a retired AccuWeather executive, urged viewers to support the storm warning system. “If you like receiving tornado warnings regardless of content, call the station. Otherwise, the people who don’t want them will be accommodated.”

NBC 5 DFW had tried to direct folks in the affected areas online and to their mobile app. But KGNS-TV chief meteorologist Richard “Heatwave” Berler said online platforms should complement live on-air coverage — not replace it.

“Social media coverage … is not available or uncomfortable to use for a significant number of elderly folks,” Berler wrote in an email, stressing that it’s imperative that coverage be available without delay.

Matt Serwe, a meteorologist at KETV in Lincoln, Neb., has worked his fair share of tornadoes. He says stations should use every means necessary to get the word out about severe weather.

“Streaming coverage should only enhance a station’s tornado coverage. It should never be an alternative” he wrote via email. “It’s great to have that tool to disseminate information. However, with a confirmed tornado potentially affecting 1.3 million people, one should use every tool possible to get lifesaving information to the people who need it the most.”

Marshall Shepherd, an atmospheric scientist at the University of Georgia, tweeted that “many elderly, low-income, and marginalized [populations] cannot access or consume digital sources/streaming.”

James Spann, the Birmingham, Ala., meteorologist widely regarded as a leader in severe weather coverage, discussed the need for stations to have coverage plans in place before an event like this so as to not be scrambling at the last minute.

“Trust me, [these conflicts] will come up,” Spann wrote in an email. “They were going to be the target of hate and rage no matter what decision they made last night. My position is to do the right thing and provide tornado coverage. A human life is more valuable than any football game or TV program. Go with wall to wall coverage, full screen, or a double box.”

He added: “The decision [Sunday] night was most likely not made in the weather office, but by those in management at some level. Rick Mitchell is an excellent meteorologist and is very good with severe weather coverage.”

NBC 5 DFW wrote that “we look forward to regaining the trust of anyone we may have disappointed,” an apology that seems to have largely been accepted by the community.

“I think it was very admirable they admitted their mistake, and apologized" Spann wrote. “Most companies won’t do that.”

    Thanks @NBCDFW for stepping up and owning this. Not everyone uses social media and special apps, and lives, homes, and livelihood are more important than a game, even a cowboys game. We love your weather coverage and your S Band Radar and will continue to watch and follow you.
    — Twila Loudder (@TwilaLoudderRN) October 22, 2019

Miraculously, there were no serious injuries or fatalities, even though the EF-3 tornado carved out a destructive 16-mile path across a heavily populated region.

It’s a happy ending but will undoubtedly spur more discussion and offers potential lessons for the future.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2019/10/22/questions-raised-after-dallas-tv-station-airs-nfl-game-instead-breaking-tornado-coverage/