Chris Kerby
EF0
It's so weird to see the people that made me want to get into this hobby bashing each other & yet so entertaining lol
NWS office calls chaser tornado reports false, social media feud ensues
- Thread starter Dan Robinson
- Start date
- Status
Joey Ketcham
EF4
The most I will say regarding this, because quite frankly I think this is silly and being blown out of proportion, is I think Twitter is possibly the worst method one could use for reporting severe weather, especially tornadoes. To me, it has always been easiest to simply pick up the phone and call it straight into the NWS. I think had he done this, none of this would have ever happened.
Taylor Wright
EF2
NWS Amarillo offered somewhat of an apology on their Facebook page:
https://www.facebook.com/NWSAmarillo/
In their post they said "We would like to extend an invitation to the storm chaser and spotter community to help us find a way that we can filter these reports, and how to better handle storm reports that we may receive in the future in a timely manner. –NWS Amarillo Management".
It seems like some good may come out of this event by highlighting a need for developing an effective system to determine the legitimacy of reports. It also started a discussion about the trust between NWS mets and chasers. Hopefully they can develop a system in which NWS employees can quickly determine the legitimacy of a report when it's received, maybe based off of a list of reputable spotters/chasers. This could be the subject of another thread, however, but it seems like this website would be a great place to discuss that.
Someone like Dick's report should never be considered fake or false, but in the defense of the NWS met, we can't expect them to know who every chaser is. The few NWS mets I know are somewhat uninterested with the who's who and treat every report the same. This is why getting a list of reputable (based on report quality, not the size of social media following) is an easy way to sift through the garbage reports. I think there's this thing called SKYWARN that does something like that, lol.
https://www.facebook.com/NWSAmarillo/
In their post they said "We would like to extend an invitation to the storm chaser and spotter community to help us find a way that we can filter these reports, and how to better handle storm reports that we may receive in the future in a timely manner. –NWS Amarillo Management".
It seems like some good may come out of this event by highlighting a need for developing an effective system to determine the legitimacy of reports. It also started a discussion about the trust between NWS mets and chasers. Hopefully they can develop a system in which NWS employees can quickly determine the legitimacy of a report when it's received, maybe based off of a list of reputable spotters/chasers. This could be the subject of another thread, however, but it seems like this website would be a great place to discuss that.
Someone like Dick's report should never be considered fake or false, but in the defense of the NWS met, we can't expect them to know who every chaser is. The few NWS mets I know are somewhat uninterested with the who's who and treat every report the same. This is why getting a list of reputable (based on report quality, not the size of social media following) is an easy way to sift through the garbage reports. I think there's this thing called SKYWARN that does something like that, lol.
David Hodges
EF1
FAKE? FAKE? FAKE? FAKE?...... It's much to easy for NWS AMA to shift the blame on someone else instead of admitting to the outside world that oops we got it wrong this time. I personally know some of the talents of these chasers in question and would support their credibility any day.
Bob Schafer
EF5
That's great looking data, and would be somewhat convincing, but 2329Z?? On Connor's Twitter post, it says 4:25PM, and on the actual vidcap of the alleged tornado there is a timestamp of 21:21:57. That would suggest the Twitter time is in EST, which is okay with me. I am very perplexed.
There's no way this occurred at 4:25 PM CST. For one, the storm didn't exist at that time. For another, there would've been much more light available, and probably therefore a higher quality image.
Jon Strebler
EF1
Poorly handled situation all around. This is a great example of the downside of social media because one miscommunication balloons into a total mess when it could have been handled immediately with a short phone call.
Also, tweeting while angry is like texting an ex when you're drunk, nothing good comes from it.
Also, tweeting while angry is like texting an ex when you're drunk, nothing good comes from it.
Doug Crisp
EF0
Hey Taylor Wright Recall the, storm i was chasing south of Emporia Ks along with Jesse and Brandon remember the rotation on that storm? and yet the NWS in Topeka Or Wichita Ks issued a Tornado Warning on this storm. I did see a brief spin up.
But i did not see a Tornado on the ground but i would have thought they would have issued a warning based on radar. That being said i was wondering why that never happened. Also the velocities on that storm was crazy.
But i did not see a Tornado on the ground but i would have thought they would have issued a warning based on radar. That being said i was wondering why that never happened. Also the velocities on that storm was crazy.
rdale
EF5
Reverse 911 is a horrible idea for alerting. Not sure what this has to do with the AMA issue anyways?
David Reimer
EF2
Previous posters have commented on the social media feud so I'll forgo that. What pissed me off was a chaser posted NWSChat logs directly onto social media. It was slightly amusing though that the individual who posted the chat log did so in a public forum almost assuring his quick removal from the program. Storm chasers are a part of the Integrated Warning Team along with broadcast media, emergency management, local spotter groups, and certain VOST elements. Leaking confidential chat logs puts a strain on the trust required for a IWT. As someone who has spent years building up trust with Texas NWS offices as part of my VOST duties I believe the 'leaking' of chat logs was probably the most damaging aspect of this conflict. I hope Dick and the Amarillo office can sit down together and make this a learning experience. I know both Amarillo and Dick have made amends on social media.
Tim Marquis
I think everyone covered most of the main points but I'll leave this caveat. If you're chasing I understand that social media can be an easier platform to submit a report but I've always found that if you are submitting a report to do the following: a) Physically pick up the phone and dial the NWS. You can refer a lot more information than a tweet and b) Talk to them calmly by stating who you are, your approximate location, your approximate distance and direction where you're looking and what you're seeing. I think this incident brought to a head a growing problem with social media reporting and the NWS. I know for a fact that there have been people several states away submitting reports and fake photos to the NWS during an event (alot more than you'd think). By calling, it doesnt mean you shouldnt submit a social media report as well. Normally a NWS office will take my report and then ask for me to send pictures as soon as I can.
Storing the NWS office number you're chasing in on your phone is always something I do before a chase so I dont have to google it while its ongoing. Also, it shocks me that there are people both in broadcasting and the chaser community that refuse to visit or get to know someone at the local NWS. Take the time to sit down and chat with them for 5 minutes so that they know you, even if you are a chaser who crosses state lines. Lastly, calling a NWS office that borders one that the event is taking place where they know who you are can go a long way too since they can then refer the report on as a credible source to the main office.
I think if more chasers followed the above advice, we'd mitigate this problem.
Storing the NWS office number you're chasing in on your phone is always something I do before a chase so I dont have to google it while its ongoing. Also, it shocks me that there are people both in broadcasting and the chaser community that refuse to visit or get to know someone at the local NWS. Take the time to sit down and chat with them for 5 minutes so that they know you, even if you are a chaser who crosses state lines. Lastly, calling a NWS office that borders one that the event is taking place where they know who you are can go a long way too since they can then refer the report on as a credible source to the main office.
I think if more chasers followed the above advice, we'd mitigate this problem.
Last edited by a moderator:
Warren Faidley
Supporter
Social media is the worse possible severe weather reporting method unless the system incorporates a method of confirming the reliability and accuracy of the information and who is reporting it.
Social media is good for official agencies to distribute confirmed information, but using an open, uncontrolled reporting system is filled with danger. In addition, the NWS does not have time to be filtering through multiple social media sites and reports trying to determine what is real, or not. Mr. McGowan did the right thing, but the NWS was being cautious based on past experiences and maybe a lack of data to support such a report.
Social media is overrun with bogus forecasts and "fake" reports, many designed for publicity and "likes", not accuracy. Shame on the NWS and other authorities for not calling these individuals out by name when it happens. The lack of attention has lead to a untrustworthy system based more on entertainment and self-promotion than safety. Time and time again I've seen chasers post urgent warnings regarding major, deadly tornadoes.... but when you study the timeline, the reports came precious minutes after they took the time to post images and comments for publicity purposes. (This does not apply to this event).
The ONLY way to fix this is to go back to the spotter ID system used years ago where experienced spotters and chasers were issued an ID number. This worked extremely well with ham radio operators. There is no better feeling than to call in a tornado report and hear the warning tones seconds later.
W.
Social media is good for official agencies to distribute confirmed information, but using an open, uncontrolled reporting system is filled with danger. In addition, the NWS does not have time to be filtering through multiple social media sites and reports trying to determine what is real, or not. Mr. McGowan did the right thing, but the NWS was being cautious based on past experiences and maybe a lack of data to support such a report.
Social media is overrun with bogus forecasts and "fake" reports, many designed for publicity and "likes", not accuracy. Shame on the NWS and other authorities for not calling these individuals out by name when it happens. The lack of attention has lead to a untrustworthy system based more on entertainment and self-promotion than safety. Time and time again I've seen chasers post urgent warnings regarding major, deadly tornadoes.... but when you study the timeline, the reports came precious minutes after they took the time to post images and comments for publicity purposes. (This does not apply to this event).
The ONLY way to fix this is to go back to the spotter ID system used years ago where experienced spotters and chasers were issued an ID number. This worked extremely well with ham radio operators. There is no better feeling than to call in a tornado report and hear the warning tones seconds later.
W.
B. Dean Berry
EF4
- Joined
- May 25, 2014
- Messages
- 405
<-----Commercial radio technician here.
One of the most surefire ways to ensure the reports you are getting are from a trusted, trained, and reliable source will probably never be used.
The NWS, and by extension, the Skywarn program, is a Federal program. The Federal Government has multiple UHF P25 trunked networks that blanket large swaths of the nation, and have emergency power, failsoft, redundant backups, etc. How hard would it be to assign new talkgroups to every WFO on the existing system, install base radios on those talkgroups in every WFO, and have the system administrators greenlight any trained Skywarn spotter in the country to have a user ID on JUST those NWS talkgroups? The spotter would be responsible for buying their own radio, but could get access to the system.
No social media nonsense, no 7-minute delay in warning issuance, no need to study and take a test, no need to depend on ham radio clubs full of 70-year-old men who may or may not allow the use of their repeater for Skywarn, no questioning if the person giving the report is legit.
There is no down side. The spotters would only have access to the NWS talkgroups, and wouldn't be able to hear to talk on stuff like the military channels or the DEA or FBI, and you can't hack the system as an outsider.
One of the most surefire ways to ensure the reports you are getting are from a trusted, trained, and reliable source will probably never be used.
The NWS, and by extension, the Skywarn program, is a Federal program. The Federal Government has multiple UHF P25 trunked networks that blanket large swaths of the nation, and have emergency power, failsoft, redundant backups, etc. How hard would it be to assign new talkgroups to every WFO on the existing system, install base radios on those talkgroups in every WFO, and have the system administrators greenlight any trained Skywarn spotter in the country to have a user ID on JUST those NWS talkgroups? The spotter would be responsible for buying their own radio, but could get access to the system.
No social media nonsense, no 7-minute delay in warning issuance, no need to study and take a test, no need to depend on ham radio clubs full of 70-year-old men who may or may not allow the use of their repeater for Skywarn, no questioning if the person giving the report is legit.
There is no down side. The spotters would only have access to the NWS talkgroups, and wouldn't be able to hear to talk on stuff like the military channels or the DEA or FBI, and you can't hack the system as an outsider.
rdale
EF5
Ehh - no. There may be some in urban areas, but certainly not the AMA panhandle.
At $1500+ per radio, I don't see [m]any spotters let alone chasers popping this out on their Christmas list. Plus as mentioned, it doesn't cover most of Chaser Alley. SpotterNetwork is the way to go. This is 2015, not 2000
Ben Holcomb
EF5
No way am I dropping the cash on a UHF P25 trunked radio when my cell phone does the same thing. As much as people want to say Social Media is terrible for reporting, it's what Dick had access to quickly and it's the way things will be headed in the future. Absolutely offices need to figure out how to filter the crap from the good.
- Status
