"Veteran takes storm chasers to task at ChaserCon for reckless behavior"

I think you're confusing semantics. How many responders have been put at risk because of chasing? How often has a town's fire/police/EMS resources been drained because of a chaser?

Let me rephrase it. What is more dangerous to responders and more likely to drain resources? A chaser? Or teenaged kids out drag racing?
 
Getting back to the article itself, I honestly can't see any biases one way or the other. Sounds more like a straightforward report. And, the fact that it happened to be in a Kansas newspaper is neither here nor there - so I don't understand the anti-Kansas sentiment. For anyone who's been around a while, I think we all are familiar with Chuck's views on chaser ethics, so none of this should come as a surprise. I do agree with his skepticism about the notion that "we're here to save lives." For the most part, no we are not. And it has been kind of sickening to here that refrain every time some chaser get's his one minute of fame on national TV the last few years.
 
Good recap Mike! But to participate in this thread you have to sling mud about a topic that has no value :)
 
I'll be happy when people just remember to shut their door when they got out of the car. Every time I see that or someone that is parked in the road... I think are these people not annoyed by that when others do it? But then I remember that I have ridden with people who have exhibited road rage, and then turned right around and did something twice as stupid as what had previously angered them. People are self-centered and I could get into all the whys about that but that would be a completely different topic.

I thought the "can you blame speeding tickets on NASCAR?" was a good analogy. As long as you are not breaking the law or putting others in danger beyond what is just called life, for example, driving at all... do what you want. Drive through the tornado. And the person that follows you that will be His decision. If I did that though I would of course have to make some sort of statement that I'm just doing what I love and you of course don't have to do it just because I do it.... haha, no. That is a given. It's like the stickers on mower decks of severed fingers. I realize maybe the stickers need to be there for some people, but that is not really my fault.
 
Mike Johnston said:
And, the fact that it happened to be in a Kansas newspaper is neither here nor there - so I don't understand the anti-Kansas sentiment.
Click to expand...

There have been more than a few articles out of KS in recent years that were very negative towards chasers. There have also been outcries from spotters/LEO about the negative impact of chasers. I'm not saying they aren't right in some isolated cases, but they broad brush all of us. It's probably nothing to the average person, but for me it's a bit annoying. And it's not a chasing thing, it's a "putting everyone in the same category/not really understanding what you're talking about" thing.
 
I think most of the articles are from Stan Finger. He's very passionate about weather and follows storm chasing closely. I'd fault him for always being negative, but how often do storm chasers actually do something positive?

For every inconspicuous responsible chaser on a road, I could probably point out 6 morons. It is painting with a broad brush, but it's a fairly accurate stereotype if you really think about it.
 
I don't agree with the philosophy of "invisible unless somebody does something wrong" which is what you seem to be saying regarding Stan Finger. Basically, chasers either have to actively be idiots, or actively do something positive. IMO, by not being a moron, that's actively positive enough. Here is where the media aspect of things enters; there's nothing sexy about chasers just chasing storms normally, responsibly. Much more exciting and interesting to write abrasive pieces that throw chasers under the bus. So be it, but be specific to the issue. Broad brushing a group of people is (1) a reflection of the general contempt the writer feels towards the demographic, (2) a reflection of the writer's general ignorance/indifference to the demographic, (3) and/or lazy journalism.

IMO it's a journalist's responsibility to report the facts regarding a demographic as accurately as possible, without throwing the entire group under the bus.
 
Two things:
a) Did a veteran take storm chasers to task? Did at least one reckless local chaser die at El Reno? Did storm chasers clog KS roads on 4/14/12 and 5/19/13? Yes, yes, yes.
b) Are the items from a) infinitely more interesting than reporting every few months that many chasers are responsible and not acting like morons?

Maybe storm chasers should do more than the bare minimum of "not being a moron" if they want to whine about being discriminated against or whatever. Maybe Stan Finger doesn't like chasers, so he only reports on negative things. I just tweeted him and asked him point blank what his deal with chasers was, so maybe we'll get an answer.

IMO it's a journalist's responsibility to report the facts regarding a demographic as accurately as possible
Click to expand...

It's their responsibility to report the news. If chasers only do news-worthy things that are negative, then that's what gets reported. Sucks, but no one has a responsibility to defend the hobby of a bunch of weather nerds.
 
Rob Hurkes said:
Maybe storm chasers should do more than the bare minimum of "not being a moron" if they want to whine about being discriminated against or whatever.
Click to expand...

That's like saying all law-abiding minorities should stop whining about discrimination, unless they invent a cure for cancer or donate millions to charity.


Rob Hurkes said:
If chasers only do news-worthy things that are negative, then that's what gets reported. Sucks, but no one has a responsibility to defend the hobby of a bunch of weather nerds.
Click to expand...

I agree with the first sentence. But my issue lies within the second; there's no reason to promote the negative image of the many based on a story you're writing about a few. But at the end of the day, it doesn't matter. Just something to debate on a cold, crappy, no working kind of day.
 
"I have written more than 30 stories that mention storm chasers over the years. There is no agenda, no "angle," only aspects that bring them into the news." -Stan

Sounds like if we don't like negative articles about the hobby, we need to care enough to do positive news-worthy things. I can't really blame him at all, he's not making up stuff up - there are some sh**ty people out there that call themselves chasers. I don't hold the 'chaser' label close to my heart, so maybe that's why it doesn't bother me at all. I'm just a guy that likes weather, and 'chaser' is the most convenient term to describe me for now.

Stop arguing with me here and go listen to that Soundcloud track I tagged you on!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Brian McKibben
Storm Chasing: Ethics and Safety
2 3 4 5
Replies
64
Views
27K
Hannah.Taylor
Hannah.Taylor
Back
Top