Storm Chasing and Media Coverage Ethics

[sojitodd]

He documented an historical event, He did not get in the way of anyone or take any resources away from anyone. He did not harm-in fact, he tried to help save lives. And he got out without taking anything away from anyone-there was room on that plane-I saw the pics-plus he had no control over whether or not he would get on that plane-someone else made that decision so blame them.  And as tragic as it is, the people who died would have died anyway whether he was there or not. I believe he mentioned advising people before the storm to seek higher ground-particularly at that first hotel by the water-also trying to save the lives of people too oblivious to or unaware of the danger they faced. 

 

And he did all of that, and looked totally hot during the whole thing! Who does that? His arms looked great when he was doing that rescuing.(could not help it with this)

 

And yeah, set up some legit donation thread on here and I will donate some money for relief there-and I am a poor as **** full time student with loans up the ass. 

 

 

In other words, people get the **** over it.

[LocoAko]

Oh; is that why? I'm a chaser myself, and I don't even know whether that attitude is widespread among chasers or not. I've seen evidence of it in a few people, but a clear minority. I can't imagine the general public has the faintest clue what percentage enjoy the death and destruction. Perhaps they believe it's a large problem based on misinformation or knee-jerk emotional reactions, which is a different issue. If you can point to high-profile public appearances or interviews where someone conveyed this attitude, I'm all ears.

 

Furthermore, I completely stand by my opinion about mainstream behavior getting a pass. Why does CNN always over-inflate the body count in the moments after a plane crash or mass shooting is reported? Because millions of Americans are glued to the TV getting their "disaster porn" -- and the bigger the number, the more likely they get off! How about rubberneckers that snarl traffic in every major city every single evening while passing fatal crashes?

 

Neither of those behaviors is really defensible, and my point is not to defend storm chasing by placing it in the same category. Disaster porn and rubbernecking are unequivocally worse; yet, they're viewed as completely acceptable and a minor nuisance, respectively, by the public at large.

 

I know for a fact that destruction has zero to do with why I enjoy chasing, and I have a strong suspicion (through experience) that the same holds true for a solid majority of chasers. Field an anonymous, private survey of 100 chasers, and I'd wager most would be delighted to have every tornado strike wheat fields, if only because the logistics involved in seeing it are so much simpler.

 

There are always a few bad apples, though, and I don't doubt there exist chasers like you describe -- as with any group of more than two or three people.

Great post -- couldn't have said it better myself. I've never met (personally) a chaser that valued their chase on the amount of destruction that it caused. That seems like a total misconception...

[WNash]

He documented an historical event, He did not get in the way of anyone or take any resources away from anyone. He did not harm-in fact, he tried to help save lives. And he got out without taking anything away from anyone-there was room on that plane-I saw the pics-plus he had no control over whether or not he would get on that plane-someone else made that decision so blame them.  And as tragic as it is, the people who died would have died anyway whether he was there or not. I believe he mentioned advising people before the storm to seek higher ground-particularly at that first hotel by the water-also trying to save the lives of people too oblivious to or unaware of the danger they faced. 

 

And he did all of that, and looked totally hot during the whole thing! Who does that? His arms looked great when he was doing that rescuing.(could not help it with this)

 

And yeah, set up some legit donation thread on here and I will donate some money for relief there-and I am a poor as **** full time student with loans up the ass. 

 

 

In other words, people get the **** over it.

 

To the last part, no.

 

But to your other question, poster Tulliox -- apparently an American expat in the Philippines who works with educating children of Badjaos -- is planning to bring badly needed medical supplies to a hard hit, isolated area very soon, and is asking for contributions from AMWX posters: http://www.americanwx.com/bb/index.php/topic/41654-relief-effort-for-those-affected-by-typhoon-haiyan/. 

[WNash]

He documented an historical event, He did not get in the way of anyone or take any resources away from anyone. He did not harm-in fact, he tried to help save lives. And he got out without taking anything away from anyone-there was room on that plane-I saw the pics-plus he had no control over whether or not he would get on that plane-someone else made that decision so blame them.  And as tragic as it is, the people who died would have died anyway whether he was there or not. I believe he mentioned advising people before the storm to seek higher ground-particularly at that first hotel by the water-also trying to save the lives of people too oblivious to or unaware of the danger they faced. 

 

 

 

This may all be true. But it's also true that:

 

• Talking about the "beauty" of death and destruction (I shouldn't need to link to this, but rating the "hawtness" of storms is an example) is aestheticization and talking about "storm porn" is literally sexualization of deadly storms, which is frankly morally repellent by most standards, especially in the wake of one such as Haiyan
• There is a lot of BS about a scientific agenda used to obscure the thrill-seeking inherent in chasing, yet no scientist who studies, say, tumors would talk of a tumor as being "hawt"-- layman-style chasing uses a language that is just alien to the "legitimate" purposes that chasers like to use as cover
• The issue of profiteering is an open one that has not been addressed with regard to Haiyan-- and that is one that, if examined by outsiders, could be very ugly for our community.

I do think that there are just a very small number of people who truly don't give a damn, but I also think that we have developed a discourse that we refuse to examine, a discourse that is full of rationalizations that don't hold up, and we would do well to practice SOME sort of self-reflection and honest debate, instead of characterizing any discussion of the presentation of the ramifications and appearances of chasing as out of bounds.

 

It's ridiculous that the discussion of this issue has been marginalized to the "Central/Western States" subforum, one of the least read wx subforums here (nothing personal, guys, just pointing out the numbers). Having a separate topic within the "General Forecasting and Discussion" subforum -- where it would have prominence alongside all of the hurricane "hawtness" posts-- would be a step in the right direction.

 

At least we have this thread, so those of us who find this sort of thing morally troubling can raise our objections to the community at large.

[The_Global_Warmer]

http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/11/world/asia/typhoon-haiyan/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

 

 

 

I just can't get passed how people can feel "good" about chasing devastation and suffering to get a thrill or high.  

 

but yet I will get a response of well people don't feel good about it. 

 

Then why are you there?  Of course you feel good about it.  You feel great, your having the time of your life while people are dying and suffering.  And on top of that you are going to get the hell out as soon as you can while the human suffering is immeasurable.  

 

What does this say about our species as a whole.  How can we claim to be so advanced when we still take pleasure from suffering.  

 

 

I am sorry but the weather isn't a game. It's the foundation of life on Earth.  It's so much more than a drug or thrill.  And to marginalize it and rationalize using it to get high which almost always only comes from major destruction and death is a bad thing to me.  

 

Some people will make money and gain fame from the chase of a lifetime.  In and out quickly.  While mass human suffering is now underway. 

 

 

 

How can that be celebrated or even respected?  I try to be open minded because I have had run ins with substance abuse.  I have thrill seeked threw weather.  But meteorology only exists to protect lives and property.  If not it would be very crude or just left to randomness.  

 

I don't like a science being used as a tool to get high.  I can't dig it.

[The_Global_Warmer]

How can anyone feel good about getting high off this.  I don't get it.  Would we chase nuclear war if we had the technology to live through a blast while others got roasted or would it be different because humans would of been responsible for it.

 

I don't see how nature being responsible for it makes it better.  

 

To me there is right reasons for doing something and wrong ones.  

 

If folks went to this place before hand with resources to ride it out then stay and use those resources to offer aid and help that is a right reason.

 

If it's the media going in to get out what happened to the world so we know how much help needs to be done, again right reason.

 

if it's a bunch of dudes going to document the storm to make money and get high, well?  Profiting from others suffering.  I can't dig it.  How does it not make you feel like ****.  

 

 

[nwburbschaser]

http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/11/world/asia/typhoon-haiyan/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

 

 

 

I just can't get passed how people can feel "good" about chasing devastation and suffering to get a thrill or high.  

 

but yet I will get a response of well people don't feel good about it. 

 

Then why are you there?  Of course you feel good about it.  You feel great, your having the time of your life while people are dying and suffering.  And on top of that you are going to get the hell out as soon as you can while the human suffering is immeasurable.  

 

What does this say about our species as a whole.  How can we claim to be so advanced when we still take pleasure from suffering.  

 

 

I am sorry but the weather isn't a game. It's the foundation of life on Earth.  It's so much more than a drug or thrill.  And to marginalize it and rationalize using it to get high which almost always only comes from major destruction and death is a bad thing to me.  

 

Some people will make money and gain fame from the chase of a lifetime.  In and out quickly.  While mass human suffering is now underway. 

 

 

 

How can that be celebrated or even respected?  I try to be open minded because I have had run ins with substance abuse.  I have thrill seeked threw weather.  But meteorology only exists to protect lives and property.  If not it would be very crude or just left to randomness.  

 

I don't like a science being used as a tool to get high.  I can't dig it.

 

Although I can understand the point you are trying to make, I think your comparison to getting "high" off of it is a little too far because of the way you portray that. Going on and comparing it to substance abuse is off base and doesn't really make sense to me. You can't judge other people and base that judgement off of negative things that happened in your past. How do you know what people are thinking, or the motivations that people have? On top of that, why do you care about what people do when it doesn't affect you? People want to be on this high horse and judge everyone else, but I don't quite understand what the purpose behind that is.  Obviously, this subject will be debated for as long as people storm chase, but I just wonder why people like to call out others for being immoral when what they do harms no one. If I like to drive and sit on the side of the road in the middle of Kansas, how does that impact you and why is it wrong for me to do that?  Being immoral for witnessing nature just doesn't add up to me.  Maybe I'm just rationalizing though. Either way, I will continue to do it and I don't see anything wrong with it. 

[LocoAko]

This may all be true. But it's also true that:

• Talking about the "beauty" of death and destruction (I shouldn't need to link to this, but rating the "hawtness" of storms is an example) is aestheticization and talking about "storm porn" is literally sexualization of deadly storms, which is frankly morally repellent by most standards, especially in the wake of one such as Haiyan

I don't know if this is going to come across as purely semantical, but when people talk about the "beauty" of storms, they're never referring to the death and destruction. Both that and the "storm porn" are more reflections of how well formed and "perfect" these systems can be -- not struggling with dry air, outflow, etc., not unlike how people gawk at models/adult film actors who look "perfect". Obviously the analogy isn't perfect, but I don't see anyone directly enjoying the destruction. It is an acknowledged byproduct that can't be helped.

I guess, from a meteorological standpoint, it seems arbitrary to decide whether or not it is okay to call a storm "beautiful" by whether or not it hits someone. How many people does it have to kill before it becomes morally repugnant? Is it okay to marvel at a hurricane's beauty if it only hits a few inconsequential islands rather than a city? Is the same mothership supercell and accompanying tornado beautiful only until it hits a town?

[WEATHER53]

Josh did not roll in there post storm just to tweak his curiosity. He went through the storm, saw the horror afterward, helped out as much as he could, and got out of Dodge before he started to look like a tasy morsel. I too will criticize the "tourists" who go down post event and take pictures then get in their limo and leave. That's not what Josh did, he deserves praise.  I do wonder how, if at all, this has altered his fascination with these storms.

[andyhb]

How can anyone feel good about getting high off this.  I don't get it.  Would we chase nuclear war if we had the technology to live through a blast while others got roasted or would it be different because humans would of been responsible for it.

 

I don't see how nature being responsible for it makes it better.  

 

To me there is right reasons for doing something and wrong ones.  

 

If folks went to this place before hand with resources to ride it out then stay and use those resources to offer aid and help that is a right reason.

 

If it's the media going in to get out what happened to the world so we know how much help needs to be done, again right reason.

 

if it's a bunch of dudes going to document the storm to make money and get high, well?  Profiting from others suffering.  I can't dig it.  How does it not make you feel like ****. 

 

You still don't get it, do you?

[Big Jims Videos]

There is a lot of money to be made in getting exclusive video of anything if you market it the correct way. Don't think those tornado and hurricane videos popping up on news stations get aired with a simple thank you. I work in the industry. I know how much I can get for a 10 second wild racing car crash at some dirt track in the middle of nowhere that no one else gets on camera. There's good money to be made besides getting a thrill.

[somethingfunny]

I think that ultimately while every concern raised about the ethics of chasing this storm and taking up valuable resources in the aftermath is valid, ultimately there would not be as much money being donated to the relief effort had they not gotten and publicized their mind-numbing video and photos that are all over the news now.

[WNash]

I think that ultimately while every concern raised about the ethics of chasing this storm and taking up valuable resources in the aftermath is valid, ultimately there would not be as much money being donated to the relief effort had they not gotten and publicized their mind-numbing video and photos that are all over the news now.

Their storm videos are a fraction of the coverage of the emerging horror of the storm, provided by genuine journalists, not thrill chasing dilettantes. Yes, the pictures of Josh pushing people through a lobby on a mattress are dramatic, but nothing compared to the thousands of images of death and destruction we are now seeing.

Had he stuck around to document the true aftermath instead of cutting and running, he might be contributing more. But you are offering up another cliched rationalization.

[WNash]

I don't know if this is going to come across as purely semantical, but when people talk about the "beauty" of storms, they're never referring to the death and destruction. Both that and the "storm porn" are more reflections of how well formed and "perfect" these systems can be -- not struggling with dry air, outflow, etc., not unlike how people gawk at models/adult film actors who look "perfect". Obviously the analogy isn't perfect, but I don't see anyone directly enjoying the destruction.

The aestheticized/sexualized discourse of the storm enthusiast community is more than just a "semantic" problem-- it drives a whole producer/consumer exploitation model, and has a very ugly appearance from an outside perspective. We need to examine our use of this discourse.

[Chicago Storm]

Oh; is that why? I'm a chaser myself, and I don't even know whether that attitude is widespread among chasers or not. I've seen evidence of it in a few people, but a clear minority. I can't imagine the general public has the faintest clue what percentage enjoy the death and destruction. Perhaps they believe it's a large problem based on misinformation or knee-jerk emotional reactions, which is a different issue. If you can point to high-profile public appearances or interviews where someone conveyed this attitude, I'm all ears.

 

Furthermore, I completely stand by my opinion about mainstream behavior getting a pass. Why does CNN always over-inflate the body count in the moments after a plane crash or mass shooting is reported? Because millions of Americans are glued to the TV getting their "disaster porn" -- and the bigger the number, the more likely they get off! How about rubberneckers that snarl traffic in every major city every single evening while passing fatal crashes?

 

Neither of those behaviors is really defensible, and my point is not to defend storm chasing by placing it in the same category. Disaster porn and rubbernecking are unequivocally worse; yet, they're viewed as completely acceptable and a minor nuisance, respectively, by the public at large.

 

I know for a fact that destruction has zero to do with why I enjoy chasing, and I have a strong suspicion (through experience) that the same holds true for a solid majority of chasers. Field an anonymous, private survey of 100 chasers, and I'd wager most would be delighted to have every tornado strike wheat fields, if only because the logistics involved in seeing it are so much simpler.

 

There are always a few bad apples, though, and I don't doubt there exist chasers like you describe -- as with any group of more than two or three people.

This.

[wxman9]

As I posted in the main forum:

 

This topic has shown up in threads here, but seems to get quashed pretty quickly as inappropriate. Not true in other places around the Web, where some of the victims' families on this side of the Pacific are unabashedly voicing some rather vitriolic thoughts about the N American chase crews. For too long, the notion of "weather weenie" has been intertwined with "disaster-monger," and it is high time those in the industry, and observers alike, who gain great joy from observing this planet's ever-changing atmosphere separate ourselves from those who are seeking to peddle disaster porn, a weather-based "Faces of Death" if you will (an analogy that most of you under the age of 40 may miss). To the video crews just-returning from Haiyan-affected regions, I beg, please make your disaster relief contributions as public as your storm footage. This is especially true if you are in any way benefiting from the bodies rotting in the streets of Tacloban and dozens of other Philippine cities this Monday afternoon. To this site's moderators: this is a discussion that needs to happen and this is a good forum for it. That said, if you do not allow this discussion to take place here, this same open letter will appear in several media outlets both here in the United States and in the Philippines.

[andyhb]

That said, if you do not allow this discussion to take place here, this same open letter will appear in several media outlets both here in the United States and in the Philippines.

 

Threatening members of the site like this isn't going to go over well.

[bluewave]

I believe storm chasers and any other citizen journalists perform a more important role that the traditional media since they are in a position to document the storm details more accurately. It's

only on very rare occasions that the commercial media outlets are able to capture the most

important an memorable images of the storms while they are actually in progress. Most of the

seminal storm images that we have were taken by people in the path of the storms and chasers

which positioned themselves to capture the essence of what actually happened. 

 

Hurricane Sandy was an important event that my area experienced where the video from

average citizens in the path of the storm was essential to convey the actual fury of the storm

for the historical record. Youtube and social media were by far the best sources for stories, photos,

and video of the impact in my area. I would have welcomed as many storm chasers that could

have possibly came to my community to document Sandy in the greatest detail possible. There

are just too few members of the commercial media outlets to capture all the important angles

of the story while it was in progress.

 

The strength of the commercial media is in warning the public ahead of time about the impending  

threat and keeping the attention focused on the aftermath to insure that relief flows in. People have

to realize that commercial media outlets primary goal is to make a profit like most other endeavors 

in our society. Many journalists get into TV and print media due the excitement and the adrenaline

rush. Others enter the media to make the world a better place. Some are in it for a combination

of both. But I don't hear people complaining about wall to wall storm post coverage as being

part of some kind of thrill seeking behavior. This is why I think that people are holding the storm

chasers to an artificial standard that doesn't exist in the wider media community. 

[wxman9]

You still don't get it, do you?

No, I don't get it, in the same way that I don't "get" those Americans who routinely mow each other down with automatic weapons. Your position is morally bankrupt, just accept that and stop being an apologist for those men in our culture who sexualize/fetishize gore. 

[Chicago Storm]

You still don't get it, do you?

Friv is never going to get it.

[nwburbschaser]

I really must be missing something because I don't understand why this is such a big deal.  Now we have someone threatening to go to the media outlets if we can't have a discussion here?  

 

This discussion has been ongoing for a long time, many years.  This is nothing new and I can only guess that people need someone to hate and blame when things go wrong.  This is getting silly now. 

[andyhb]

No, I don't get it, in the same way that I don't "get" those Americans who routinely mow each other down with automatic weapons. Your position is morally bankrupt, just accept that and stop being an apologist for those men in our culture who sexualize/fetishize gore. 

 

You are off your rocker.

 

How does gun violence have any relevance in this discussion whatsoever?

 

And how are Josh and co sexualizing or fetishizing gore? Maybe if you would read some of the discussion on his facebook page, but I'm sure this is asking too much.

[WNash]

Threatening members of the site like this isn't going to go over well.

The answer shouldn't be to push this discussion to the margins, in the Central/Western subforum. I would expect that a thread like this be pinned on the main Weather Forecasting and Discussion page, given equal billing as long as the likes of the iCyclone thread are tolerated on that subforum. There's an issue of how visible dissent from the apparent consensus tolerance of a morally unsustainable position will be, and what sort of consequences that will have for this forum as a whole, if public attention is given to the fact that we salivate over deadly storms.

[LocoAko]

I really must be missing something because I don't understand why this is such a big deal.  Now we have someone threatening to go to the media outlets if we can't have a discussion here?  

 

This discussion has been ongoing for a long time, many years.  This is nothing new and I can only guess that people need someone to hate and blame when things go wrong.  This is getting silly now.

I read his post not as a "threat" but just mentioning that a lot of people are going to have these same concerns and they are inevitably going to appear in national media outlets, places much more publicly visible than this board.

[WNash]

I read his post not as a "threat" but just mentioning that a lot of people are going to have these same concerns and they are inevitably going to appear in national media outlets, places much more publicly visible than this board.

That's the way I see it too.

[nwburbschaser]

I read his post not as a "threat" but just mentioning that a lot of people are going to have these same concerns and they are inevitably going to appear in national media outlets, places much more publicly visible than this board.

 

That's what I thought at first, but the open letter part made it sound otherwise. 

[andyhb]

That's what I thought at first, but the open letter part made it sound otherwise. 

 

This.

[wxman9]

You are off your rocker.

 

How does gun violence have any relevance in this discussion whatsoever?

 

And how are Josh and co sexualizing or fetishizing gore? Maybe if you would read some of the discussion on his facebook page, but I'm sure this is asking too much.

OK, I'm off my rocker, though some might argue that the relevance lies in believing violence and the resulting destruction of life, whether man-made or natural, is a form of entertainment. With regard to fetishizing, any number of posts in this forum have referred to satellite images, etc...as "sexy", "hawt" so on, so forth.  Am I really off my rocker because my fascination with meteorology doesn't cross over into my sex life?

[andyhb]

OK, I'm off my rocker, though some might argue that the relevance lies in believing violence and the resulting destruction of life, whether man-made or natural, is a form of entertainment. With regard to fetishizing, any number of posts in this forum have referred to satellite images, etc...as "sexy", "hawt" so on, so forth.  Am I really off my rocker because my fascination with meteorology doesn't cross over into my sex life?

 

So describing a satellite shot of a storm as "impressive", which is what "sexy" or "hawt" is meaning in this case, is equivalent to meteorology crossing into someone's sex life?

[WNash]

So describing a satellite shot of a storm as "impressive", which is what "sexy" or "hawt" is meaning in this case, is equivalent to meteorology crossing into someone's sex life?

This is what I mean by the problematic discourse that is often used by chasers. Combined with the thrill chasing and release, there is a sexualization of the chase experience that is -- to my eyes -- horrifying when contrasted with death and suffering. And then the selling of videos is brought into the dynamic.

If you step outside the chaser community, it's hard to dispute that this looks awful.

If you mean "impressive," say "impressive"-- NOT "sexy."