3 ms·

I am not a fan. We’re heading to naming all the major weather which happens often and is just going to desensitize people. The NOAA already doesn’t recognize w

I am not a fan. We’re heading to naming all the major weather which happens often and is just going to desensitize people. The NOAA already doesn’t recognize winter storm names and I would expect them to use the same rationale for not naming heat waves, cold waves or any other extreme weather events that don’t bring destruction. (Not arguing against the danger of heatwaves).

Cthulhu_ 6y ago
That's exactly it, it's the "boy crying wolf" issue and everyone will just shrug. I found them starting to give "regular" storms already overly dramatic, or that they have started to hand out "yellow", "orange" weather alerts. Those are just not actionable for me as an average regular citizen. Mind you they probably mean that measures are being put in place for others though.
- elmo2you 6y ago
  I fully agree with that, but I think it's a manifestation of a far wider trend that might be far more worrying. In this age of information overload, where the struggle for people's attention has become nothing short of warfare, I see both advocacy groups and commercial entities ever so further seek to dramatise their message, just to "maximize their reach" and not get drowned out in the sea of other sensationalized/polarized information. While this motivation or a even sense of need is understandable, with everyone "competing" only for their own interests in relationship to everything else, it essentially is a race to the bottom. The (psychological) effects of it do (already) go a bit further than people just shrugging. On the population as a whole, it (significantly) increases stress levels, general distrust (certainly warranted), and maybe even cause a constant sense of danger or a believe that this world has gone mad. The effects of which should not be underestimated. All of which can cause both individuals and groups of people to make really poor decisions.
  - luckylion 6y ago
    It's essentially the tragedy of the commons, with the commons being the audience's attention and stress level.
- finnthehuman 6y ago
  People have a bad relationship with the uncertainty of forecasts, I think it's the most inescapable example of how the media's incompetence and desire for attention should be considered malice. The boy crying wolf effect is a result of a media that can't even inform viewers how to weigh a weather forecast. The NWS has been issuing forecasts for over 100 years, and their predictive accuracy moves at a glacial timescale compared to anything else in the news. If they can't competently communicate THAT, what the hell can they effectively inform us about?
tosser0001 6y ago
I think they're a bit to aggressive in naming tropical storms as it is. Currently any tropical storm that reaches 39mph/63kph gets a name, which to me is pretty low threshold. Maybe if every two-bit storm didn't get a name people would pay a bit more attention.
shireboy 6y ago
Agree. Maybe I'm too cynical, but I strongly suspect this is more motivated by weather news marketing and ad revenue strategy than an altruistic desire to "raise awareness".
- sandworm101 6y ago
  There is a practical use for the names. It isn't all marketing. Internally, a hurricane starts as a little swirl on the other side of the ocean and is watched/tracked as an interesting object. Designators are used to track these structures. They are given formal names at a particular point once they hit certain milestones. This naming triggers certain processes (more attention, greater tracking fidelity, inclusion in daily briefs etc). These are no different than military operations, which have to be of a particular size before they are formally 'named'. The fact that the media promulgates these internal designators to the public is but an extension of a useful internal process.
  - phkahler 6y ago
    >> This naming triggers certain processes (more attention, greater tracking fidelity, inclusion in daily briefs etc). Right, but you mention the key thing places like The Weather Channel want - increased attention via daily briefs. The public doesn't need that, TWC does.
    - sandworm101 6y ago
      They might appear to want it, but I think the weather channel simply takes whatever is available. With hours of time to fill each day, they will make hay with whatever data the government weather people put on the website.
      - leetrout 6y ago
        Not quite true. > In November 2012, TWC began naming winter storms ... > The U.S. government-operated National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) ... and ... the National Weather Service (NWS)—did not acknowledge TWC's winter storm names and asked its forecast offices to refrain from using the TWC names > The National Weather Service has since stated that "no plans to consider naming winter storms" are in progress.[25] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_storm_naming_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_storm_naming_in_the_Uni...
HumblyTossed 6y ago
> I am not a fan. We’re heading to naming all the major weather which happens often and is just going to desensitize people. I agree. This is just going to turn into a media nightmare and people will simply tune out.
fatnoah 6y ago
>I am not a fan. Also agree. I've stopped watching the Weather Channel because I can't stand all of the stupid storm names. Naming everything doesn't raise awareness, it just creates fatigue and reduces the impact of "named == you'd better pay attention".
Zenst 6y ago
> I am not a fan. We’re heading to naming all the major weather which happens often and is just going to desensitize people. I have to concur and the prospect of some small town having a welcome Heatwave Karen parade is one that will sadly only go to normalise attitudes towards climate change and may even become counter productive. More so as the demographic they are going for that would warm to naming such weather events are equally more inclined to be less believing of climate change.

Cthulhu_ 6y ago

That's exactly it, it's the "boy crying wolf" issue and everyone will just shrug. I found them starting to give "regular" storms already overly dramatic, or that they have started to hand out "yellow", "orange" weather alerts. Those are just not actionable for me as an average regular citizen. Mind you they probably mean that measures are being put in place for others though.

elmo2you 6y ago
I fully agree with that, but I think it's a manifestation of a far wider trend that might be far more worrying. In this age of information overload, where the struggle for people's attention has become nothing short of warfare, I see both advocacy groups and commercial entities ever so further seek to dramatise their message, just to "maximize their reach" and not get drowned out in the sea of other sensationalized/polarized information. While this motivation or a even sense of need is understandable, with everyone "competing" only for their own interests in relationship to everything else, it essentially is a race to the bottom. The (psychological) effects of it do (already) go a bit further than people just shrugging. On the population as a whole, it (significantly) increases stress levels, general distrust (certainly warranted), and maybe even cause a constant sense of danger or a believe that this world has gone mad. The effects of which should not be underestimated. All of which can cause both individuals and groups of people to make really poor decisions.
- luckylion 6y ago
  It's essentially the tragedy of the commons, with the commons being the audience's attention and stress level.
finnthehuman 6y ago
People have a bad relationship with the uncertainty of forecasts, I think it's the most inescapable example of how the media's incompetence and desire for attention should be considered malice. The boy crying wolf effect is a result of a media that can't even inform viewers how to weigh a weather forecast. The NWS has been issuing forecasts for over 100 years, and their predictive accuracy moves at a glacial timescale compared to anything else in the news. If they can't competently communicate THAT, what the hell can they effectively inform us about?

tosser0001 6y ago

I think they're a bit to aggressive in naming tropical storms as it is. Currently any tropical storm that reaches 39mph/63kph gets a name, which to me is pretty low threshold. Maybe if every two-bit storm didn't get a name people would pay a bit more attention.

shireboy 6y ago

Agree. Maybe I'm too cynical, but I strongly suspect this is more motivated by weather news marketing and ad revenue strategy than an altruistic desire to "raise awareness".

sandworm101 6y ago
There is a practical use for the names. It isn't all marketing. Internally, a hurricane starts as a little swirl on the other side of the ocean and is watched/tracked as an interesting object. Designators are used to track these structures. They are given formal names at a particular point once they hit certain milestones. This naming triggers certain processes (more attention, greater tracking fidelity, inclusion in daily briefs etc). These are no different than military operations, which have to be of a particular size before they are formally 'named'. The fact that the media promulgates these internal designators to the public is but an extension of a useful internal process.
- phkahler 6y ago
  >> This naming triggers certain processes (more attention, greater tracking fidelity, inclusion in daily briefs etc). Right, but you mention the key thing places like The Weather Channel want - increased attention via daily briefs. The public doesn't need that, TWC does.
  - sandworm101 6y ago
    They might appear to want it, but I think the weather channel simply takes whatever is available. With hours of time to fill each day, they will make hay with whatever data the government weather people put on the website.
    - leetrout 6y ago
      Not quite true. > In November 2012, TWC began naming winter storms ... > The U.S. government-operated National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) ... and ... the National Weather Service (NWS)—did not acknowledge TWC's winter storm names and asked its forecast offices to refrain from using the TWC names > The National Weather Service has since stated that "no plans to consider naming winter storms" are in progress.[25] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_storm_naming_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_storm_naming_in_the_Uni...

HumblyTossed 6y ago

> I am not a fan. We’re heading to naming all the major weather which happens often and is just going to desensitize people. I agree. This is just going to turn into a media nightmare and people will simply tune out.

fatnoah 6y ago

>I am not a fan. Also agree. I've stopped watching the Weather Channel because I can't stand all of the stupid storm names. Naming everything doesn't raise awareness, it just creates fatigue and reduces the impact of "named == you'd better pay attention".

Zenst 6y ago

> I am not a fan. We’re heading to naming all the major weather which happens often and is just going to desensitize people. I have to concur and the prospect of some small town having a welcome Heatwave Karen parade is one that will sadly only go to normalise attitudes towards climate change and may even become counter productive. More so as the demographic they are going for that would warm to naming such weather events are equally more inclined to be less believing of climate change.