Storm Chasing and Media Coverage Ethics

[nwburbschaser]

I agree with the bolded on here. When I hear people on here getting all giddy about large severe weather outbreaks, and hoping that large tornados and outbreaks do occur, I cringe.

I understand we are all weather enthusiasts, and that we find this all very fascinating....but it makes me scratch my head when I hear constant whining if there is a predicted large outbreak, and for whatever reason, it does not occur. 

Whether you find it interesting or not, if a set up breaks down or a Hurricane weakens before landfall, we should all be happy....not meltingdown because you wanted to see it happen. This isn't a snowstorm where unless you are incredibly stupid, and get yourself in a situation that can get you killed, you will be fine...the people in the paths of these storms you want to see have no way sometimes of getting out of the way or staying safe.

I don't really want to get into the debate between people who like severe and people who like snow, but to say that snowstorms aren't deadly is just fiction.  Any sort of extreme weather can be deadly so let's avoid the, 'my favorite type of weather is safer then yours and it's ok for me to wish for it' type of statements. Weather happens, we have no control over it.  

[Paweatherguy1]

I don't really want to get into the debate between people who like severe and people who like snow, but to say that snowstorms aren't deadly is just fiction.  Any sort of extreme weather can be deadly so let's avoid the, 'my favorite type of weather is safer then yours and it's ok for me to wish for it' type of statements. Weather happens, we have no control over it.  

 

Please. Snowstorms, in their own sense, can be deadly. However, snowstorms don't level whole communities. Generally, when someone is killed in a snowstorm, it is because they are out driving, and even at that, driving in a stupid manner. If snowstorms were as dangerous and damaging as a hurricane or tornado, wide chunks of the nation would be obliterated.

 

If most people had a 20 inch snowstorm heading their way, they would not feel as if their life or property is threatened.

 

If someone as a Cat 2 or 3 Hurricane, or EF 2 or EF 3 tornado heading their direction, I think 100% of people feel their life and property are in legitimate danger.

 

Don't get me wrong, I would love to experience a Hurricane first hand, or chase a tornado, from a safe distance of a couple miles, but I am talking about the people who meltdown when a hurricane weakens or doesn't strengthen as forecasted, or do the same when a tornado outbreak does not come to fruition.

[nwburbschaser]

Not going to get into it.  I saw in your post what you were trying to imply and I just don't think its necessary, that's all. 

[Paweatherguy1]

Not going to get into it.  I saw in your post what you were trying to imply and I just don't think its necessary, that's all. 

 

I think it is. Part of the group of people, whether we admit it or not, who crave that "money shot" is us. More so than any other group. I won't lie and say I didn't seek out the Mike Bettes video becasue I was interested in seeing footage as close to the Tornado as possible.

 

Everyone is to blame for the situation. Chasers, the media, and yes, the general public who wants to see borderline death situations like that.

[ct_yankee]

Of course he is fleeing the tornado to avoid death.  It is also clearly shown that he made the mistake of staying too close for too long and they nearly paid the ultimate price for it.

 

Regarding the inflow winds, they were driving south and the debris came from the right side of the road.  The wind was westerly (NOT inflow) and was part of the circulation itself, i.e., being TOO CLOSE.

 

I don't think there is any good way to regulate storm chasing.  You can't prevent people from doing stupid things, you can only educate them and hope that they take your advice.  It is up to them, just like someone mentioned climbers dying on Mt. Everest.  It is a choice, and for some it is worth the risk.  We can just hope and pray that their actions don't put others who are trying to flee at risk of being killed.

 

 

While I am not expressing approval of their actions or condoning what they did, I don't think you can tell from the TornadoTitan's video that they were definitely hit by the outer circulation of the tornado itself, at least not on the basis of strong winds out of the west just south of a tornado. Your analysis of the wind field doesn't allow for the possibility that a strong RFD could have destroyed the barn and tossed the debris across the road. Driving on a southbound road just south of a large and violent tornado you would expect strong RFD winds from the right, and it's well known RFDs can caused significant damage. Would such an RFD be classified as inflow? I don't know the answer to that, some RFDs probably do get partially or wholly ingested into the tornadic circulation, but not all or even most of them, that would be my guess, so I would say outflow. Regardless, they were probably too close, plain and simple.

 

The Bettes video is more convincing. I had heard this was supposedly caused by a satellite tornado, but it sure looks like they were in the actual circulation of the big multivortex, so it was likely a suction spot that hit them. Again, though, it's hard to argue that they weren't just a bit too close to begin with.  

[nwburbschaser]

I agree that there is an issue with the media wanting to see death and destruction because thats just disgusting.  It doesn't matter what type of weather brings that havoc though because the media will be all over it wherever they can find it. They want ratings, and destruction brings ratings which sucks, but that's how our society works.  I just don't like the idea of being on the so called moral high ground because someone enjoys one type of extreme weather over the other which was what I got from your post earlier. 

[brettjrob]

I agree that there is an issue with the media wanting to see death and destruction because thats just disgusting.  It doesn't matter what type of weather brings that havoc though because the media will be all over it wherever they can find it. They want ratings, and destruction brings ratings which sucks, but that's how our society works.  I just don't like the idea of being on the so called moral high ground because someone enjoys one type of extreme weather over the other which was what I got from your post earlier. 

 

Well said. The snow vs. severe weenie snipefest is so played out and myopic. We have enough real drama from yesterday that we shouldn't even start down that road right now.

[phlwx]

I agree that there is an issue with the media wanting to see death and destruction because thats just disgusting.  It doesn't matter what type of weather brings that havoc though because the media will be all over it wherever they can find it. They want ratings, and destruction brings ratings which sucks, but that's how our society works.  I just don't like the idea of being on the so called moral high ground because someone enjoys one type of extreme weather over the other which was what I got from your post earlier. 

 

Seeing some of the tweets out there, it's not just the media. They're giving the idiots what they want.

 

https://twitter.com/search/realtime?q=Mike%20Bettes&src=typd

[Derecho!]

EVERYONE wants to see death and destruction, because it's interesting and exciting.  Blaming the desire on others is hypocritical. The media likes it because we like it. 

 

I am absolutely certain that there have been far more views of the Bettes and Sullivan videos by people on this thread than of the Piotrowski video. 

 

Everyone on this thread that didn't watch at least a dozen different videos of the Japanese tsunami, raise your hand. 

 

This is one of the reasons I find the "thought police" (How DARE you show signs of excitement!) that have been on all weather boards since the Internet started so tiresome.

 

Yes, people should show some discretion regarding the specifics of what they post, which can be offensive if it's stuff like "Wow that was so cool how Greensburg was flattened!"

 

But let's face it, none of the people on the tropical thread are genuinely hoping for a sudden massive El Nino. ALMOST nobody on any of the severe weather threads are checking the SPC 1630 outlook and hoping it's dropped a medium to a slight, whether they are a chaser, or not. 

 

And of course, what people are excited by or hope for has absolutely no effect on what  actually happens. 

[SmokeEater]

Of course he is fleeing the tornado to avoid death. It is also clearly shown that he made the mistake of staying too close for too long and they nearly paid the ultimate price for it.

Regarding the inflow winds, they were driving south and the debris came from the right side of the road. The wind was westerly (NOT inflow) and was part of the circulation itself, i.e., being TOO CLOSE.

I don't think there is any good way to regulate storm chasing. You can't prevent people from doing stupid things, you can only educate them and hope that they take your advice. It is up to them, just like someone mentioned climbers dying on Mt. Everest. It is a choice, and for some it is worth the risk. We can just hope and pray that their actions don't put others who are trying to flee at risk of being killed.

While I am not expressing approval of their actions or condoning what they did, I don't think you can tell from the TornadoTitan's video that they were definitely hit by the outer circulation of the tornado itself, at least not on the basis of strong winds out of the west just south of a tornado. Your analysis of the wind field doesn't allow for the possibility that a strong RFD could have destroyed the barn and tossed the debris across the road. Driving on a southbound road just south of a large and violent tornado you would expect strong RFD winds from the right, and it's well known RFDs can caused significant damage. Would such an RFD be classified as inflow? I don't know the answer to that, some RFDs probably do get partially or wholly ingested into the tornadic circulation, but not all or even most of them, that would be my guess, so I would say outflow. Regardless, they were probably too close, plain and simple.

The Bettes video is more convincing. I had heard this was supposedly caused by a satellite tornado, but it sure looks like they were in the actual circulation of the big multivortex, so it was likely a suction spot that hit them. Again, though, it's hard to argue that they weren't just a bit too close to begin with.

That wasn't RFD that hit Brandon, they were in the circulation of the main tornado itself. There's video from Aaron Tuttle who passes the red truck that was behind Brandon, sitting on the side of the road watching the tornado, obviously just before they felt the need to run, and Aaron VERY narrowly escapes the circulation. I'll link it here when I get home. It's like Brandon's apology states, he lost situational control, was more worried about getting "the shot" and almost paid for it dearly.

[andyhb]

Well said. The snow vs. severe weenie snipefest is so played out and myopic. We have enough real drama from yesterday that we shouldn't even start down that road right now.

 

I don't even see why it was brought up in the first place, it has nothing to do with the content being discussed in this thread.

[Ian]

Count me in for death and destruction

[SP]

Exactly what came to mind.

[JoMo]

I don't even see why it was brought up in the first place, it has nothing to do with the content being discussed in this thread.

I disagree. I think It has everything to do with the content in this thread as it shows that people find that kind of thing exciting and that's what drives the media response. The media typically doesn't cover or buy video of tornadoes out in fields because that isn't interesting or exciting enough for their viewers. There's no 'story' to it. There's no human effect or response. I remember someone on this forum mentioning that one of the media outlets didn't want a video unless it showed some kind of destruction or something that had not been seen before. The TIV2 video inside a tornado was on my local TV station the night it happened. The Rozel, KS tornado for all its beauty didn't make headlines anywhere because it was out in a field. 

 

As far as what he stated about people wishing for bad weather. My general view is that you can't stop the weather, so it makes no difference how much you 'wish' something will or will not happen, it isn't going to change the outcome. 

[andyhb]

I disagree. I think It has everything to do with the content in this thread as it shows that people find that kind of thing exciting and that's what drives the media response. The media typically doesn't cover or buy video of tornadoes out in fields because that isn't interesting or exciting enough for their viewers. There's no 'story' to it. There's no human effect or response. I remember someone on this forum mentioning that one of the media outlets didn't want a video unless it showed some kind of destruction or something that had not been seen before. The TIV2 video inside a tornado was on my local TV station the night it happened. The Rozel, KS tornado for all its beauty didn't make headlines anywhere because it was out in a field. 

 

As far as what he stated about people wishing for bad weather. My general view is that you can't stop the weather, so it makes no difference how much you 'wish' something will or will not happen, it isn't going to change the outcome. 

 

I meant more the whole snow vs. severe aspect of it, but I see what you're saying.

[Boogieman]

A lot of the problem is the shift in media's basic mission from "reporting the news" to a full-blown "sex, death and drama sells" mentality

[David Reimer]

How much $$ do news stations pay chasers for video?

 

Brandon will make well over $10,000 for his video from yesterday since it will have good documentary/disaster shows. He's already made a few grand. 

[Blue Ridge]

I wonder how long until GM/GMC milks this from a marketing standpoint. According to Bettes, his crew was in a Yukon. 

 

"This is Mike Bettes's GMC Yukon after being hit by a tornado. Mike and crew walked away with only scratches. GMC - the only SUV trusted by Mike Bettes." 

[Bozart]

from Charles Doswell's rant:

 

I look at the videos people claim are fantastic on FB [Facebook] but I see almost no quality video. Most of it is the “edgy” sort of “reality video” that’s all the rage these days. People cheering and having “stormgasms” while they bounce down some road on the way to a close encounter. In those close encounters, for the most part, the video sucks (by my standards)

It seems all these new guys these days want to give us is the screaming parts.

 

But you look at a Tim Marshall video. I've got a lot of his old stuff, going back to the '80s. He'll start off with a synoptic analysis, often with hand-drawn maps, and then he'll check in and step you through the various phases of development throughout the day. What's the wind doing? What's the dewpoint? I like to see what a cell looks like when it first goes up, and each subsequent stage of its life cycle. Tim Marshall gives you all of that, and it is fantastically educational.

 

If anyone is just giving you the chills 'n thrills part, you know they aren't serious about chasing. They've got nothing to teach you, and you'll learn nothing from their ridiculous shrieks.

[Boogieman]

It seems all these new guys these days want to give us is the screaming parts.

 

Reed Timmer. I couldn't stand to watch his shows on TWC because every time I heard him scream in that shrill, whiny tone, I just wished he was right there to backhand.

 

But you look at a Tim Marshall video. I've got a lot of his old stuff, going back to the '80s. He'll start off with a synoptic analysis, often with hand-drawn maps, and then he'll check in and step you through the various phases of development throughout the day. What's the wind doing? What's the dewpoint? I like to see what a cell looks like when it first goes up, and each subsequent stage of its life cycle. Tim Marshall gives you all of that, and it is fantastically educational.

 

Those are great and what chasing is really all about.

 

If anyone is just giving you the chills 'n thrills part, you know they aren't serious about chasing. They've got nothing to teach you, and you'll learn nothing from their ridiculous shrieks.

 

Nothing but drama and hype. That's all they provide.

[Ian]

Timmer brought the backwoods NASCAR set into chasing. They think its like hunting and beer drinking.

I'm willing to give Sullivan the benefit of being young and maybe not staying a douche.

[SmokeEater]

Now that I've watched KFOR's coverage just now, which I refused to yesterday, I see that Reed needs to be blamed just as much as Mike Morgan. I counted at least 4 times he said either get underground, or get south, along with the 3 separate times I heard Mike Morgan say it. And Reed said it as the hook echo was moving THROUGH downtown OKC, not west of it, it was in the city when he kept yelling it. No excuse.

[Cyg]

great blog post today:  http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/wp/2013/06/01/the-night-that-should-change-tornado-actions-and-storm-chasing-forever/

 

 

just a snippet:

 

 

Legendary storm chaser and tornado expert Charles Doswell put it this way in a rant I shared last year:

 

I can’t say I have any wish whatsoever to seek to keep up with what chasing has become…

I look at the videos people claim are fantastic on FB [Facebook] but I see almost no quality video. Most of it is the “edgy” sort of “reality video” that’s all the rage these days. People cheering and having “stormgasms” while they bounce down some road on the way to a close encounter. In those close encounters, for the most part, the video sucks (by my standards)

 

I completely agree. I do editing and videography and many of the videos from these chasers are wobbly, zoomed to far in/out, badly focused, etc. It's like nobody wants to use a tripod or proper settings anymore...probably because if they take the time to muck around with the settings then they'll be run over by the tornado! Personally, I think the 1995 Hoover, TX tornado video, the one near the prison, is one of the best tornado videos taken in terms of aesthetics. No shakiness, colors are wonderful, perfect zoom to really get the scope of the tornado and how massive it was compared to the prison. The video is beautiful and terrifying at the same time.The recent Rozel tornado could have had some spectacular footage, but what do you know, every video I see is shaky or taken from behind a windshield with wipers on! 

 

I don't expect these people to be cinematographers, but please, just do a bit of the basics.

[brettjrob]

I completely agree. I do editing and videography and many of the videos from these chasers are wobbly, zoomed to far in/out, badly focused, etc. It's like nobody wants to use a tripod or proper settings anymore...probably because if they take the time to muck around with the settings then they'll be run over by the tornado! Personally, I think the 1995 Hoover, TX tornado video, the one near the prison, is one of the best tornado videos taken in terms of aesthetics. No shakiness, colors are wonderful, perfect zoom to really get the scope of the tornado and how massive it was compared to the prison. The video is beautiful and terrifying at the same time.The recent Rozel tornado could have had some spectacular footage, but what do you know, every video I see is shaky or taken from behind a windshield with wipers on! 

 

I don't expect these people to be cinematographers, but please, just do a bit of the basics.

 

I strongly agree with most of this. Personally, I've always prioritized quality shots, and will stop short of "extreme close range" encounters so that I can use a tripod and not shoot out of a moving car. However, I also focus more on stills than video (didn't even start shooting video until last year). My hunch is that others with my disposition are often also still photographers, ala Mike Hollingshead and Mike Umscheid. There's this sort of natural filtering process whereby those of us who do stills are more conservative with our positioning and try to maintain a view of the structure (or at least the RFD cut when a tornado is occurring), while those who don't do stills at all and just shoot video continue racing down bumpy dirt roads to get uber close. This is unfortunate for fans of "quality" video, like Martin Lisuis's work. (In fact, I believe he shot the Hoover video, and he also had jaw-dropping footage from 11/7/11 in SW OK).

 

Your last bit about Rozel stings, because I was regrettably guilty of shooting through wipers with my dash-mounted camcorder. I had a stationary shot of the whole life cycle from ~3 miles away, but was too worried about getting good, tripoded stills to "waste time" setting up another tripod outside the vehicle for my camcorder. (If I'd known it would last 20 minutes, I certainly would have sacrificed 45 seconds of stills to do that at the beginning). Meanwhile, some of my video-focused friends got much closer, but were also bumping down bad roads for most of it and shooting out the window. If only I had four hands.

[jdt]

What transpired yesterday was bound to happen eventually based on chaser trends the last several years! Some how, probably by shear luck, all the chasers survived. Unfortunately a number of citizens were not so lucky and whether a suggestion via media to drive south to escape is a whole other topic. As for chasing I have chased numerous times though not nearly as much as many others. I have had the pleasure to work one of the most respected tour companies and to also chase solo. There are a few rules I have told myself I will not break. 1) never chase in May as the chaser crowds are to much for me. i personally much more prefer mid to late June on the northern high plains. 2) never chase in or into urban or suburban areas. Do not become part of the problem 3) I know my limits and will never get remotely to close and will always lean heavily on the side of caution. Heck when chasing on my own in my own vehicle I even avoid hail at all cost. By luck I tend to prefer a view slightly set back where I can take in broader storm structure along with a tornado if I am lucky enough to get one. Hopefully yesterday's events will be an eye opener for many but I doubt it will last for long. It will take a fatality before any real adjustment in the mindset of such chasers occurs.

[Jim Marusak]

i know this is going to sound like a corny and over-thought after-statement to all of this. but here's a financial/actuarial question.

 

if you're a life or auto insurance agent and you see one of your company's clients participate in storm chasing, particularly after this weekend, do you consider upping the risk category for that person's insurance policy a couple of notches thereby increasing their rates, just because they are a storm chaser? would you as an insurance company maybe consider instead of raising rates putting a specific rider in the policy saying that any costs due to injury, death, or damages caused while tornado chasing would be non-payable by the policy? what about even the policies saying if you're tornado chasing the policy could be considered null and void? and if it wasn't for Obamacare, could it be considered a "pre-existing condition" or worthy of being in a "high-risk pool"?

 

debate.

[Stebo]

i know this is going to sound like a corny and over-thought after-statement to all of this. but here's a financial/actuarial question.

 

if you're a life or auto insurance agent and you see one of your company's clients participate in storm chasing, particularly after this weekend, do you consider upping the risk category for that person's insurance policy a couple of notches thereby increasing their rates, just because they are a storm chaser? would you as an insurance company maybe consider instead of raising rates putting a specific rider in the policy saying that any costs due to injury, death, or damages caused while tornado chasing would be non-payable by the policy? what about even the policies saying if you're tornado chasing the policy could be considered null and void? and if it wasn't for Obamacare, could it be considered a "pre-existing condition" or worthy of being in a "high-risk pool"?

 

debate.

 

I won't touch the political aspect of this post, however I could see insurance companies upping the risk catagories of known chasers if that hasn't already happened.

[MidwestChaser]

So there's a rumor going around that Tim Samaras, his son, and Carl Young were killed.

[andyhb]

So there's a rumor going around that Tim Samaras, his son, and Carl Young were killed.

 

....I hope that is only a rumor

[MidwestChaser]

....I hope that is only a rumor

 

Idk I hope so. But...