Weather and Social Media Sites Discussion

[IsentropicLift]

Meteorologist Mike Faveretta from News 12 Brooklyn

 

What he's not alluding to is that the 30"+ storm is completely unrelated to the 3-6" clipper.

[winterwarlock]

This board doesn't help either by starting threads going gaga over 12 day model runs showing a storm...46 pages on the weekend event all the while the two events that happened prior had less pages

[DRVTS]

I am beginning to think we may need to name the storm that could have been. How about the Un-Storm of the Century?  People around me are saying "the europeans were saying if all the parts came together we could have got like 60 inches" 

It's becoming an urban legend. 

Now that everyone heard it is not going to happen, will people panic when they see snowflakes Sunday??

[IsentropicLift]

I am beginning to think we may need to name the storm that could have been. How about the Un-Storm of the Century?  People around me are saying "the europeans were saying if all the parts came together we could have got like 60 inches" 

It's becoming an urban legend. 

Now that everyone heard it is not going to happen, will people panic when they see snowflakes Sunday??

This happens all the time. This time it's just getting more exposure thanks to the media and facebook.

[chietanen]

This board doesn't help either by starting threads going gaga over 12 day model runs showing a storm...46 pages on the weekend event all the while the two events that happened prior had less pages

 

And this board is viewed by approximately what percentage of the population?  Less than a tenth of a percent?  It's a weather board, it's here to discuss weather.  I kind of agree with your sentiment in general regarding the weekend "threat", but I don't think, for the most part, anything that is being done on this weather board has much influence beyond us and our immediate friends and family (I should say with the exception of the mets who are posting here, but they are responsible people and don't contribute to fear mongering).

[96blizz]

If you make a forecast and attempt to back it w/ facts, you should be able to post whatever you wish about the weather.  The general public can then decide for themselves who is right and who is wrong. 

 

In this world and access to information (specifically weather related information), little can be done to stop/police this.  Unless it's copyright infringement, this is still America and freedom of speech is part of our foundation.  Someone can say, "I looked at the models and think the pattern is ripe for an all out blizzard in 10 days."  Who is to stop that?  Unless someone is 'posing' as a meteorologist, it remains, thankfully, a free country.  It would be hard to prosecute someone for showing the 'possibility' of an outcome based upon a real model image. 

 

HOWEVER, what has been done since --- the NWS, meteorologists across the country, etc. --- coming out and condmening this behavior with rational reasons as to why this is irresponsible and dangerous to the public, is the best thing that could have come out of this whole sh*t show.

 

It's about education as to what is, and isn't, acceptable -- or what/who/when should actually be taken seriously. 

 

Idiots will still abound and grace us with their presence in social media and live --- but, if the education is available to them, 'tis their own idiocy and gullibility that is to blame.

[allgame830]

If you make a forecast and attempt to back it w/ facts, you should be able to post whatever you wish about the weather. The general public can then decide for themselves who is right and who is wrong.

In this world and access to information (specifically weather related information), little can be done to stop/police this. Unless it's copyright infringement, this is still America and freedom of speech is part of our foundation. Someone can say, "I looked at the models and think the pattern is ripe for an all out blizzard in 10 days." Who is to stop that? Unless someone is 'posing' as a meteorologist, it remains, thankfully, a free country. It would be hard to prosecute someone for showing the 'possibility' of an outcome based upon a real model image.

HOWEVER, what has been done since --- the NWS, meteorologists across the country, etc. --- coming out and condmening this behavior with rational reasons as to why this is irresponsible and dangerous to the public, is the best thing that could have come out of this whole sh*t show.

It's about education as to what is, and isn't, acceptable -- or what/who/when should actually be taken seriously.

Idiots will still abound and grace us with their presence in social media and live --- but, if the education is available to them, 'tis their own idiocy and gullibility that is to blame.

I agree people can do whatever the please but in our society everyone panics over everything. It is sad and there really is nothing that can be done about it.

I had everyone at my job saying OMG I heard we were going to get 3 feet of snow this weekend and I just laughed. The general public does not have the knowledge or expertise whether or not to know if that information is true or not.

I brought up this topic in one of the storm discussions earlier today and it was moved to its own discussion. I felt like it needed to be out there for everyone to discuss because this issue with social media blowing things out of proportion is getting ridiculous.

[jm1220]

People and the media in general don't seem to understand that hype like this can generate serious consequences. Before the 2/8/13 storm hit (I refuse to call it Nemo), the 28" at Central Park RPM run was shown various times on TV. Everyone these days has a cell phone and access to Twitter, Facebook, etc, so the photo was viral in seconds. People then lined up at gas stations, hardware and grocery stores expecting another mega-impact storm, travel plans were changed, etc, for a storm that ended up as generally moderate impact around NYC (obviously higher impact east and north). The city's economy was impacted to the tune of perhaps many millions of dollars because of a poorly thought decision to display a graphic on the weather report. And then when these are sometimes less of an impact than the crazy and most extreme graphic shows, the mets get blamed for overhyping, and then the next time a really serious storm hits, people are unprepared.

 

I think this saying says it all: a person is calm, reasonable, rational. People are irrational, unreasonable, and very easily roused. My parents were also talking about the "megablizzard" that was supposed to hit this weekend and saw the picture in question, but they know enough by my ramblings about the weather that it wouldn't be something to prepare for unless it was still a possibility a couple of days before. But most other people aren't rational like that.

[96blizz]

I agree people can do whatever the please but in our society everyone panics over everything. It is sad and there really is nothing that can be done about it.

I had everyone at my job saying OMG I heard we were going to get 3 feet of snow this weekend and I just laughed. The general public does not have the knowledge or expertise whether or not to know if that information is true or not.

I brought up this topic in one of the storm discussions earlier today and it was moved to its own discussion. I felt like it needed to be out there for everyone to discuss because this issue with social media blowing things out of proportion is getting ridiculous.

Agreed.  I think we, the folks who have some sembelance of knowledge, even if it's cursory and we're learning, are disciples of these principles.  We're all the 'go to' weather people in our family, work, etc., so telling them how idiotic that was is part of our own job! 

[allgame830]

Agreed.  I think we, the folks who have some sembelance of knowledge, even if it's cursory and we're learning, are disciples of these principles.  We're all the 'go to' weather people in our family, work, etc., so telling them how idiotic that was is part of our own job! 

 

Definitely, there have been countless times that I have been approached by friends and family asking what I thought.  Even though I am not an expert and far from it, I give them my honest opinion from reading posts from METS and more knowledge people on this board. My exact words for this "potential" were even those the models are showing a "MEGA STORM" it really should not to be believed at this time since we are still many days away and we have a current storm to worry about. 

[ILoveWinter]

Even my parents - whom never use social media and know that I follow the weather closely - fell for the hype as they changed their flight from Sunday to Saturday.   Suffice to say I was disappointed that they did not ask me first!

[SnoSki14]

The hype is disgusting, social media can be a blessing as showcased during Sandy or a total curse like with the upcoming weekend.

[donsutherland1]

My thoughts on the recent rumors:

 

1. Although individuals may post items on their Facebook page, twitter, etc., journalists have an implied responsibility of due diligence in what they report. They should not "rip" and "report" social media items unless they can corroborate those items. I include TV and radio forecasters and meteorologists among those who have the implied responsibility I attributed to journalists.

 

2. Whenever model output is discussed, it should be made clear that the models show possible scenarios. There is uncertainty and no solutions are anything close to guaranteed in the medium-term or beyond. As exact details can change dramatically, once one gets beyond 5-7 days, language should be broad and details e.g., amounts should not be mentioned. Put another way, if a station wants to say that some of the guidance hints at a significant storm, that's fine. What's not helpful is if the station tries to be too precise stating that there could be a large snowstorm that could possibly dump a foot or more of snow.

 

3. In general, social media items should not be mentioned in news coverage. The media outlets should focus on producing quality forecasts/broadcasts. By mentioning the social media items, the media played a big role in helping those items go viral. Anecdotally, I had a number of people ask me about the "coming big storm."  I asked them where they heard about it and every one of them mentioned either a TV station or radio station had mentioned it. In other words, they had not seen or heard it from social media but reports about social media. Hence, even as some TV stations have complained, by giving the story coverage, those outlets helped fan the proverbial flames. The exception concerns the stations that dug into the matter and explained what actually had happened e.g., NBC10 in Philadelphia handled the matter very well, exposed the rumors for what they were, and made clear that those rumors should not be relied upon. Glenn Schwartz did a super job, as did the NWS in rebutting the rumors.

 

4. The general public also has an implied responsibility to have a reasonable understanding of their local area's climate/weather. A passive bystander role can only lead to gullibility. The public should be in a position to understand that events along the lines of the rumored one are rare (therefore don't really accept the rumors until there is concrete information that supports that case) and that once one gets beyond the short-term, forecasting uncertainty increases markedly.

 

5. That Glenn Schwartz and the NWS took on the rumors does not mean that they were trying to infringe upon free speech or undermine possible competition (as some asserted). They were arguing that those who provide information should be responsible, properly disclose the limits of that information, etc. That's not inconsistent with free speech. Moreover, over time, competition in the marketplace (public and private providers including substitutes) rests upon value added. I don't believe NWS or Glenn Schwartz have anything to worry about when it comes to the particular source of the rumored "big storm." Moreover, they have little to worry about from waiting for the details to sort themselves out.

 

Indeed, one can apply an analogy from options trading here. An American call option, in this case, allows one to buy shares at a given price by a given date. If the stock is trading at a value above the strike (or stock purchase) price in excess of the premium (option purchase price) and commissions, one can exercise the option profitably. If not, one can't exercise the option profitably and if the option expires, one suffers losses to the extent of the premium + commissions from purchasing the option. Now, if one waits for new information, the stock price can continue to rise, leading to potential larger profits.

 

In other words, not acting hastily can allow one to earn a better profit, though there is no guarantee. Waiting for better information can have value. In forecasting the weather, one can wait until model data becomes more conclusive and that leads to better forecasts. One might miss out on being "first" to call a storm (just as one might miss out on the profit from an early exercise of the option should the stock price decline), but in general the forecasts of those who wait for the details to work themselves out are superior to those of rivals who continually try to be first with the latter group making judgments when data is far less certain and risk of error is greater.

[WintersGrasp]

Don....EXCELLENT post. You hit on just about every point on all of our minds, I'm sure ! I think so many news stations want to be the ones, in the small chance it pans out, to say "you heard it HERE FIRST. We said 30" was possible, it now IS"

[jm1220]

Even my parents - whom never use social media and know that I follow the weather closely - fell for the hype as they changed their flight from Sunday to Saturday.   Suffice to say I was disappointed that they did not ask me first!

Everyone has an implied responsibility to separate rumor from reality, but the news media especially should hold a large share of the blame for furthering the rumors in an attempt to generate ratings/more profit for themselves. The economic and societal impact of rumors over social media in this day and age can't be overstated, since rumors become reality when spread around enough people and are aired on traditional media sources. It feeds on itself and becomes a major problem.

[pazzo83]

Don....EXCELLENT post. You hit on just about every point on all of our minds, I'm sure ! I think so many news stations want to be the ones, in the small chance it pans out, to say "you heard it HERE FIRST. We said 30" was possible, it now IS"

 

Don kills it as usual.

[pazzo83]

The options trading analogy is spot-on.

[MJO812]

I think the hype for the suppose 30 inch storm might be bigger than the Boxing Day Storm.Sad.

[REDMK6GLI]

I think the hype for the suppose 30 inch storm might be bigger than the Boxing Day Storm.Sad.

Watch when the systems get sampled tonight at 0z its boxing day redux

[allgame830]

Watch when the systems get sampled tonight at 0z its boxing day redux

 

Actually at this point that might be the worse thing for everyone that relies on just news outlets (nobody would ever listen to them again) For us we would be jumping up for joy and funny at the same time. And also the boxing day storm 48 hours out wasn't remotely close to us and we all know what happened.

[IsentropicLift]

Lets see how long it takes for the 192hr JMA to go viral

[PB GFI]

The options trading analogy is spot-on.

1 call is a 100 shares. But he was close enough.

[PB GFI]

My thoughts on the recent rumors:

 

1. Although individuals may post items on their Facebook page, twitter, etc., journalists have an implied responsibility of due diligence in what they report. They should not "rip" and "report" social media items unless they can corroborate those items. I include TV and radio forecasters and meteorologists among those who have the implied responsibility I attributed to journalists.

 

2. Whenever model output is discussed, it should be made clear that the models show possible scenarios. There is uncertainty and no solutions are anything close to guaranteed in the medium-term or beyond. As exact details can change dramatically, once one gets beyond 5-7 days, language should be broad and details e.g., amounts should not be mentioned. Put another way, if a station wants to say that some of the guidance hints at a significant storm, that's fine. What's not helpful is if the station tries to be too precise stating that there could be a large snowstorm that could possibly dump a foot or more of snow.

 

3. In general, social media items should not be mentioned in news coverage. The media outlets should focus on producing quality forecasts/broadcasts. By mentioning the social media items, the media played a big role in helping those items go viral. Anecdotally, I had a number of people ask me about the "coming big storm."  I asked them where they heard about it and every one of them mentioned either a TV station or radio station had mentioned it. In other words, they had not seen or heard it from social media but reports about social media. Hence, even as some TV stations have complained, by giving the story coverage, those outlets helped fan the proverbial flames. The exception concerns the stations that dug into the matter and explained what actually had happened e.g., NBC10 in Philadelphia handled the matter very well, exposed the rumors for what they were, and made clear that those rumors should not be relied upon. Glenn Schwartz did a super job, as did the NWS in rebutting the rumors.

 

4. The general public also has an implied responsibility to have a reasonable understanding of their local area's climate/weather. A passive bystander role can only lead to gullibility. The public should be in a position to understand that events along the lines of the rumored one are rare (therefore don't really accept the rumors until there is concrete information that supports that case) and that once one gets beyond the short-term, forecasting uncertainty increases markedly.

 

5. That Glenn Schwartz and the NWS took on the rumors does not mean that they were trying to infringe upon free speech or undermine possible competition (as some asserted). They were arguing that those who provide information should be responsible, properly disclose the limits of that information, etc. That's not inconsistent with free speech. Moreover, over time, competition in the marketplace (public and private providers including substitutes) rests upon value added. I don't believe NWS or Glenn Schwartz have anything to worry about when it comes to the particular source of the rumored "big storm." Moreover, they have little to worry about from waiting for the details to sort themselves out.

 

Indeed, one can apply an analogy from options trading here. An American call option, in this case, allows one to buy shares at a given price by a given date. If the stock is trading at a value above the strike (or stock purchase) price in excess of the premium (option purchase price) and commissions, one can exercise the option profitably. If not, one can't exercise the option profitably and if the option expires, one suffers losses to the extent of the premium + commissions from purchasing the option. Now, if one waits for new information, the stock price can continue to rise, leading to potential larger profits.

 

In other words, not acting hastily can allow one to earn a better profit, though there is no guarantee. Waiting for better information can have value. In forecasting the weather, one can wait until model data becomes more conclusive and that leads to better forecasts. One might miss out on being "first" to call a storm (just as one might miss out on the profit from an early exercise of the option should the stock price decline), but in general the forecasts of those who wait for the details to work themselves out are superior to those of rivals who continually try to be first with the latter group making judgments when data is far less certain and risk of error is greater.

When forecasting out into the LR ,  you can see the variance in terms of  model spray , and as you get closer you`re visibility improves  as does skill score  .  Like trading equity derivatives you will find  the longer you go out to purchase vega the higher cost in terms  the premium is because  time value will increase with implied volatility  .

When you look in the LR ,  you up the ante of being wrong because too much can go wrong . There`s more volatility  to solve a constantly  moving and evolving numerical equation . That's why the  verification decay scores  after day 5  and curve gets so steep .

Smarter traders stay close to the strike and buy or sell premiums  that are close to historic vols  as to mitigate  risk .

Always better to wait and let a fuzzy picture clear up .

[forkyfork]

that 30" snow map wasn't even from an op model... it was an ensemble member!

[pazzo83]

When forecasting out into the LR ,  you can see the variance in terms of  model spray , and as you get closer you`re visibility improves  as does skill score  .  Like trading equity derivatives you will find  the longer you go out to purchase vega the higher cost in terms  the premium is because  time value will increase with implied volatility  .

When you look in the LR ,  you up the ante of being wrong because too much can go wrong . There`s more volatility  to solve a constantly  moving and evolving numerical equation . That's why the  verification decay scores  after day 5  and curve gets so steep .

Smarter traders stay close to the strike and buy or sell premiums  that are close to historic vols  as to mitigate  risk .

Always better to wait and let a fuzzy picture clear up .

 

Bingo, and the atmosphere (the equations used to explain it, in other words) is non-linear, and as we are looking at predicting future events in succession, bogus/incorrect data ingested by models has an exponential effect on the inputs of the set of equations for future time periods.  The atmosphere is probably the most difficult thing in existence (that we know of) to model, due to its insane complexity.

[donsutherland1]

When forecasting out into the LR ,  you can see the variance in terms of  model spray , and as you get closer you`re visibility improves  as does skill score  .  Like trading equity derivatives you will find  the longer you go out to purchase vega the higher cost in terms  the premium is because  time value will increase with implied volatility  .

When you look in the LR ,  you up the ante of being wrong because too much can go wrong . There`s more volatility  to solve a constantly  moving and evolving numerical equation . That's why the  verification decay scores  after day 5  and curve gets so steep .

Smarter traders stay close to the strike and buy or sell premiums  that are close to historic vols  as to mitigate  risk .

Always better to wait and let a fuzzy picture clear up .

Very well said, PB GFI.

[PB GFI]

Very well said, PB GFI.

Great piece as well Don .

[chietanen]

A couple of nice editorials about this from the Capital Weather Gang, one specifically about this and one from October about people trusting Facebook forecasts:

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/wp/2014/02/06/the-great-facebook-flake-out-a-little-not-a-lot-of-snow-for-east-coast-this-weekend/

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/wp/2013/10/17/beware-of-faulty-flaky-facebook-weather-forecasts/

 

BTW, very well said Don.

[tristateweatherFB]

It happens in many other situations too, when something that is untrue shows up on social media and goes viral.  The best example I can think of is when rumors start of a celebrity dying or some celebrity couple getting divorced.  Honestly, what should happen is that these Facebook pages that pertain to an important aspect of life, let's say health, news, weather, should be somewhat regulated.  These weather pages on Facebook have huge followings and the people who run them have nobody to answer to.  For example, last time I checked Tri-State Weather had over 90,000 likes and the local guy who does it in my area has over 60,000 likes.  These guys that I mentioned actually do an amazing job and don't hype storms at all, my point is that having a well liked Facebook page is a very powerful thing.   

Thank you for the kind words.  Yea I run tristate weather. I take pride on not hyping. I try to keep it brief on our page because the public wants facts. You will gain respect if you are correct on your forecast. To put out a weenie run even though all models show a big storm 1-2 weeks away, is crazy to me. when has the models or any model latch onto a solution and keep it there for a week. or for that matter 5 days? It will change! PERIOD!  Nowadays A DT/JB/Steven D want to say they said it first.  They saw a big storm coming. But, they are also the mets who have paid sites so they will tease it for you to buy the premium part of their page! Steven D / JB and others just tease their premium section like it is something special and get the inside scoop of  a storm or a pattern change. Lets put it this way. When it is a extreme weather like this yr, JB will shine. He will nail those extreme solutions.  What is going on these days are ppl like weather boy just posting a map and having snow weenies run with it and post it on FB and its goes viral. meanwhile I get all the questions of is this true? When is this going to happen?  WB did this earlier this season and he  failed. This is not the first time but is the first time the local media has to answer to it. The bottom line do not believe in a storm in the medium to long range with such extreme solutions. Know, it is change!   Ok done with my rant and thank you for the mention of our Fb page

[Stormlover74]

Thank you for the kind words. Yea I run tristate weather. I take pride on not hyping. I try to keep it brief on our page because the public wants facts. You will gain respect if you are correct on your forecast. To put out a weenie run even though all models show a big storm 1-2 weeks away, is crazy to me. when has the models or any model latch onto a solution and keep it there for a week. or for that matter 5 days? It will change! PERIOD! Nowadays A DT/JB/Steven D want to say they said it first. They saw a big storm coming. But, they are also the mets who have paid sites so they will tease it for you to buy the premium part of their page! Steven D / JB and others just tease their premium section like it is something special and get the inside scoop of a storm or a pattern change. Lets put it this way. When it is a extreme weather like this yr, JB will shine. He will nail those extreme solutions. What is going on these days are ppl like weather boy just posting a map and having snow weenies run with it and post it on FB and its goes viral. meanwhile I get all the questions of is this true? When is this going to happen? WB did this earlier this season and he failed. This is not the first time but is the first time the local media has to answer to it. The bottom line do not believe in a storm in the medium to long range with such extreme solutions. Know, it is change! Ok done with my rant and thank you for the mention of our Fb page

Thanks for your input and keep up the good job!