tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2759913671101666257.post6526733525303577022..comments2023-05-24T06:02:06.480-05:00Comments on Chuck's Chatter: Media as carpetbaggersChuck Doswellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03099345055614900157noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2759913671101666257.post-69046361237891228292011-06-22T09:52:56.497-05:002011-06-22T09:52:56.497-05:00Jim ...
No doubt there are a few true journalists...Jim ...<br /><br />No doubt there are a few true journalists about, but their voices are swamped by the vast outpouring of mediocrity so characteristic of media'journalism' today.Chuck Doswellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03099345055614900157noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2759913671101666257.post-82089264483261479272011-06-20T19:10:23.142-05:002011-06-20T19:10:23.142-05:00Interesting post. Some journalists try very hard t...Interesting post. Some journalists try very hard to get things right, though. There's a free tabloid publication in my town that carries a question and answer column that had a recent question about tornadoes. The answer, which can be found here, <br /><br />http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2011/jun/01/straight-why-women-scream/<br /><br />contained what I thought were some errors, particularly in the last paragraph, and I sent in a fairly long email explaining the process as I understood it. I was gratified and somewhat shocked to see the entire email published in the next week's column! I really didn't intend my explanation (which even contained some math) to make it into the column--I was just trying to make the columnist understand things better. You can see it here:<br /><br />http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2011/jun/08/straight-accident-doctors-letter-storm-chaser/<br /><br />Of course whether I did any better in my explanation is probably for someone like you do to decide.<br /><br />Anyway, I just wanted to pass along that some journalists really do try to get things perfectly correct.Jim Meansnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2759913671101666257.post-5890140690309749782011-06-09T08:55:16.392-05:002011-06-09T08:55:16.392-05:00Scott ...
I haven't seen the Fuller book. I ...Scott ...<br /><br />I haven't seen the Fuller book. I reviewed the book by Nancy Mathis, so evidently you didn't follow the link I provided at the beginning of this blog.<br /><br />My point is that carpetbaggers <b>typically</b> don't get it right. It's not impossible ... only unlikely. It's always interesting to me to see how many people (not <b>all</b> people) interpret a generality to imply an absolute statement.Chuck Doswellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03099345055614900157noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2759913671101666257.post-73243640583055968062011-06-09T07:48:02.560-05:002011-06-09T07:48:02.560-05:00"This book is the product of another 'car..."This book is the product of another 'carpetbagger' - someone migrating temporarily into the world of storm chasing, doing his research, putting down his thoughts on what he's seen, and then packing his bags, off onto some new topic to write about and sell yet another book."<br /><br />I don't think that 'carpetbagging' as you call it, is necessarily bad. <br /><br />I think that John Grant Fuller did a very nice job in his Tornado Watch 211 book giving insight into the 1985 outbreak in OH, PA, and NY. He has also written interesting books on other subjects including the incident at Fermi 1 in Detroit, and nuclear testing in Utah. <br /><br />I spent most of the night reading a book by Nancy Mathis called Storm Warning, it was about the May 3, 1999 outbreak and was such a good book, I couldn't put it down. You were mentioned over and over in that book. I wonder what you thought of it, if you read it? <br /><br />John O'toole did an excellent book on the 1953 Worcester tornado, it's called 84 minutes, 94 lives, and does a nice job of telling the story from the point of survivors. <br /><br />These writers were carpetbaggers in the sense that they were not meteorologists and were not writing in their field of expertise. However, I give them credit for doing their homework and asking the right questions and ultimately putting together some good books. <br /><br />I'd be interested to hear your comments on those books. <br /><br />I got the impression that Nancy Mathis interviewed you for the book but I didn't see you in the list of people she thanked at the end of her book. I suppose that she could have gotten the information from your essays. <br /><br />Like you I don't like shallow and inaccurate reporting. Because of that I have done what some other people have done that I know and simply stopped watching TV. <br /><br />What few shows I do see are downloaded and watched on the computer. <br /><br />I think it will be a matter of time before TV will be a thing of the past. Who want's to be told what to watch and when to watch it? No thank you. <br /><br />Who wants to watch a newscast with pretty blonde bimbos who know little about what they are reporting about? No thank you. <br /><br />Who needs the hype? <br /><br />Television news readers need to realize that they aren't the story. They aren't important. It's not about them. <br /><br />OTOH, I like authors who will go outside of their area or areas of expertise, talk to the right people, ask the right questions, and put together a book that is accurate, insightful, and educational. Even if they are carpetbaggers.Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07440053140136306351noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2759913671101666257.post-80415891429199529022011-06-07T19:24:39.919-05:002011-06-07T19:24:39.919-05:00I agree with the theme expressed in the article an...I agree with the theme expressed in the article and the comments. As a meteorologist for over 25 years... 15 of the initial years in broadcast media...I have witnessed much of the hysteria and misinformation. What scares me much more? This same process is at work with the dissemination of information regarding American foreign policy over the past 50 years. Orwell, anyone?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2759913671101666257.post-47652430467439605122011-06-02T15:25:08.027-05:002011-06-02T15:25:08.027-05:00Most people thrive on sensationalism and the media...Most people thrive on sensationalism and the media obliges by providing it in spades.<br /><br />Believing what is shown on television, especially, perpetuates a simplistic and often faulty view of the world. Because most of the population has never been taught to think critically about what they glean from the electronic or print media, they cannot segregate sensationalism from reality. To keep their audiences onboard, the media operates on a lowest standard level of presentation. It is a vicious circle.David Brownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2759913671101666257.post-64199933961707285372011-06-02T13:54:08.629-05:002011-06-02T13:54:08.629-05:00Yes, frustrating, insulting, and time-wasting. At ...Yes, frustrating, insulting, and time-wasting. At my university, we meteorology students are allowed to submit free-lance two-day weather forecasts to the student newspaper. There is no compensation (at least anymore). I occasionally submit a forecast--by e-mail the night before. So often, what appears the next day in the paper, with MY by-line, is a distortion of what I submitted. Sometimes, professors from other departments or other students ask me about why-such-and-such-is-not-happening-because-you-forecasted-it. Well, generally, I didn't! But, they got their free forecast, and I suffered embarrassment, however slight. <br /><br />Real intellect requires care; monied media inspires haste.Danny Brouillettenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2759913671101666257.post-21728639011562472942011-06-02T12:49:56.001-05:002011-06-02T12:49:56.001-05:00What I really find upsetting is that my name is us...What I really find upsetting is that my name is used to lend credibility to a story that usually includes various inaccuracies, misinformation, and misquotes. Plus I find the notion insulting that these reporters are doing me a favor by allowing me to be heard in their medium.Chuck Doswellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03099345055614900157noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2759913671101666257.post-81953815349057606842011-06-02T10:14:55.544-05:002011-06-02T10:14:55.544-05:00I found this blog post timely and relevant. It rem...I found this blog post timely and relevant. It reminds me of something that Bill Clinton quipped during the elections last year. To paraphrase--unfortunately, I cannot find the actual quotation anywhere--he was bemoaning that we are living in an era of factless media. It is a shame that I cannot find the actual quotation because he put it so well. A number of more conservative people I know--and I know plenty being from an affluent western suburb of Chicago--claim that the media are "liberal." Of course, they are into demonizing the word "liberal," but I agree with them that there is a problem with mainstream media. Media are not liberal as much as they are sensational. The media are corporations mostly, corporations seek to make money, more viewers equate to more money, and viewers apparently like sensation, which, itself, is a self-fulfilling prophecy (as you suggest). For instance, only the Weather Channel can sensationalize heat the way it does; apparently, reaching the 90's yesterday in Oklahoma and Texas is unusual news, when such an occurrence is well represented in the climate record in early June if we bother to examine actual climatology. However, many average viewers will now think that such weather is unusual. The same goes for media that attempt to assign EF ratings to tornadoes while they are still occurring. (I heard a lot of that on 24 May.) The result is that most people fail to realize that EF ratings are based on damage that is evaluated by a NOAA-sponsored damage survey team. I know better for both instances because I am a meteorology student. I found your perspective very interesting, Chuck, and don't blame you for not wanting your words to be canned into sensationalized sound-bites.Danny Brouillettenoreply@blogger.com