What's the connection between tv meteorologists and Boston?

George Tincher

EF5
Joined
Dec 26, 2004
Messages
596
Location
Booneville, KY
Is it tought in the first year of met school to mention Boston first during every tour of the nation? LOL.

Seriously, it seems all the tv mets on national news programs as well as TWC do this. I've noticed this and been amazed by it since childhood.

So can anyone offer any insight into why all the tv mets on national programs lead off with Boston?

-George
 
It'a America's eastern most big city. No big conspiracy here. You talk about weather in the east first (where all the people live) and move west. You can even get away with skipping states like Wyoming and North Dakota where it is easier to just call everyone and tell them the weather.
 
I can hardly stomach to watch the Weather Channel anymore. I don't know why they don't just cut off all the states west of the Mississippi and leave the half maps up instead.
 
Oh, I can understand covering the big cities with huge populations. But I mean there's other large cities besides Boston. There's New York, Washington, Baltimore, Chicago, Los Angeles, Miami, Dallas, etc. It just seems interesting that regardless of what's happening elsewhere, Boston is almost always the lead city in the weathercast. Not saying there's a conspiracy or anything (afterall, what would there be to conspire...lol?), it's just interesting.

For example, I've been watching TWC while a major tornado outbreak was taking place somewhere in the Midwest only to hear something such as......"It's a dangerous evening in mid-America, but first, there's light showers in Boston". LOL. It just seems strange is all. I'm sure most of you know exactly what I am talking about when it comes to national weathercasts.

Anyway, this wasn't meant as a totally serious topic and it's not intended as an insult to people living in or near Boston. I was just curious if anyone else had noticed the frequency in which Boston is the lead story when it comes to weather.

-George
 
I can hardly stomach to watch the Weather Channel anymore. I don't know why they don't just cut off all the states west of the Mississippi and leave the half maps up instead.
Click to expand...

I worked as an intern at TWC in the 1980s. It was stated to me that they spend more time covering certain parts of the nation simply because their viewership was higher in those regions. At that time, the Northeast U.S. and Florida had the largest number of cable susbscribers, and thus, most attention was given to them. I wouldn't be surprised that this is still their policy.

Some may argue that this is a legitimate business decision - catering to the locations giving them the most profit. It is this very reason why I continue to support the government's role in public weather services - their motivations are not dictated by profits, and thus coverage is equal for all parts of our nation. Not that I'm opposed to the private side of meteorology - there are endless weather-sensitive business activities where weather information provides a market edge - this should be the role of private industry. Re-packaging of weather information for specific clients (e.g., media, other private industries like utility companies) in order to increase their partner's profits should be the domain of the privates.
 
I worked as an intern at TWC in the 1980s. It was stated to me that they spend more time covering certain parts of the nation simply because their viewership was higher in those regions. At that time, the Northeast U.S. and Florida had the largest number of cable susbscribers, and thus, most attention was given to them. I wouldn't be surprised that this is still their policy.
Click to expand...

I've also heard this before. Why, then, do they spend countless hours every year talking about poofs of convection in the deep Atlantic that have no chance of ever becoming a threatening tropical system? Of course, none of this really explains their bizarre idea this past weekend to go ahead and show "Forecast Earth" and "Storm Stories" during potentially the biggest northeast U.S. blizzard of the decade.

Some may argue that this is a legitimate business decision - catering to the locations giving them the most profit. It is this very reason why I continue to support the government's role in public weather services - their motivations are not dictated by profits, and thus coverage is equal for all parts of our nation. Not that I'm opposed to the private side of meteorology - there are endless weather-sensitive business activities where weather information provides a market edge - this should be the role of private industry. Re-packaging of weather information for specific clients (e.g., media, other private industries like utility companies) in order to increase their partner's profits should be the domain of the privates.
Click to expand...

Well said! Growing up, I listened to years to the radio forecasts of a certain large private weather corporations for Little Rock (let's call them "Accu--------") and they were consistently horrific (trust me, I kept score for awhile). The same has proven true for their OKC forecasts.
 
Why, then, do they spend countless hours every year talking about poofs of convection in the deep Atlantic that have no chance of ever becoming a threatening tropical system?
Click to expand...

Because of their Florida interests, of course.
 
Kevin,

You bring up an interesting point about TWC's tropical coverage I forgot to mention earlier. It does seem odd that they'd devote a whole 5 minutes to covering the tropics each day at 50 past the hour, every hour, even when there is nothing to cover.

I could understand them giving extra attention to the tropics once something is present. But I cannot understand why they will take us on an entire loop of the Caribbean and Atlantic to show us....well, nothing. LOL. I mean could they at least wait until they had a tropical wave before they started discussing it?

<Sigh> Oh well, this is TWC we are talking about. While I like many of their OCM's, I am not too fond of the decisions the management makes there sometimes. TWC could be so much better with proper guidance. In fact, it once was, as recently as the mid-late 1990's. After that point in time, it really started downhill.

-George
 
Some of the tropical update segments are done more as a public service. Constantly talking about the tropics helps make people aware of hurricanes. It may seem repetative, but it saves lives.

Don't forget that everything you see on TWC is done for a reason. Consumer research dicatates everything they do. If it doesn't help the bottom line than they wouldn't air it.
 
If you look at a map of the United States, starting on the upper right (as you face it) and move downward, Boston is the first major city. It is a logical choice before New York, then Philadelphia,Washington, Atlanta etc.

Bill Hark
 
All this shows is what we have known for a number of years. TWC is irrelevent and mostly useless to anybody not in the NE (and they dont cover that too well either as you could see this past storm) or that has actual wx knowledge. it is a joke. The only useful thing on the whole channel is the local radar loops on the 8's. I can get more accurate and useful information from Al Roker :lol:
 
I worked as an intern at TWC in the 1980s. It was stated to me that they spend more time covering certain parts of the nation simply because their viewership was higher in those regions. At that time, the Northeast U.S. and Florida had the largest number of cable susbscribers, and thus, most attention was given to them. I wouldn't be surprised that this is still their policy.
Click to expand...

Greg,
Oddly enough, Paul Kocin mentioned this at the AMS Conference in San Diego during his presentation on 2003-2004 Winter weather season. LOL it was kinda funny, since he actually said that they'll (TWC) spend more time in the 'big markets' since that's where the money is. I mean, I'd known it, but it was just kinda funny to hear it from the "Winter Weather expert" at TWC.
 
Paul Kocin has done quite a bit of research and has many papers out, and most NWS offices refer to winter storms in the northeast (especially the blockbuster storms) to be KU storms (Kocin & Uccellini)... Greg Forbes is pretty good as well, but they rarely give these 'experts' the airtime that they deserve...
 
Just look at the size (rankings) of the local TV markets in the Northeast area.

Nielsen's TV Markets (Top 50)
1. New York City
4. Philadelphia
5. Boston (Manchester)
8. Washington (Hagerstown)

22. Pittsburgh
23. Baltimore
27, Hartford-New Haven
42. Harrisburg-Lancaster-Lebanon-York
46. Buffalo
49. Providence-New Bedford

Big Markets mean BIg Bucks for Advertising.

Mike
 
Paul Kocin has done quite a bit of research and has many papers out, and most NWS offices refer to winter storms in the northeast (especially the blockbuster storms) to be KU storms (Kocin & Uccellini)... Greg Forbes is pretty good as well, but they rarely give these 'experts' the airtime that they deserve...
Click to expand...

I wasn't trying to imply anything about saying "Winter Weather expert", since that's how he's referred by from the other on-air TWC mets. He has done a lot of research into winter storms (particularly, Northeastern US winter storms), so I'm not discrediting him by any means...

Interesting that you brought up the fact that some NWS offices reference his recent book w/ Uccellini, as one of the discussions I read just a few days ago during 'blizzard '05' directly reference the Kocin and Uccellini Northeast Winter Storms book.

For what it's worth, it was interesting being able to talk to Paul Kocin, Dr. Forbes, and Dr. Nese at AMS.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Question regarding grad school and being a TV Met
Replies
1
Views
2K
Jeff Snyder
Jeff Snyder
Back
Top