Wow! It’s Going to be Colder Tomorrow!!!

Unfortunately for the viewing public everywhere, not just in the Philadelphia area, weather “news” has overwhelmed the typical TV newscasts today more than ever.

Back in the 1960’s, this writer was a member of the Channel 3 “Eyewitness News” team.   We were the first of the “Eyewitness News” shops.  News Director Al Primo is credited with launching it.

As part of the new Eyewitness News, Channel 3 built a new studio/newsroom set.  It likely was the first time a television newsroom actually was in the studio.  More about this below.  If you are a senior citizen, you probably saw this studio in your youth.  This was where Ernie Kovacs did his network show.

Last night, on the 11 p.m. news (I usually watch my former station, Channel 3), the news had not been on for long when the “weather girl” was introduced.  Forgive the sexism but the “weather girl” has been a TV news staple since Trudy Haynes did the weather on TV news in Detroit.   Trudy moved to Channel 3, Philadelphia, not as a weather girl, but rather a reporter.

The television bosses don’t want to read items like this,  but rest assured or at least informed:  they want the babes doing the weather.   It is assumed you know why.   This is not a sexist statement but I think you also have noticed there are a lot more news bunnies today.  Some people will say that’s a good thing.  I would prefer that if they must be of the feminine gender, they ought to be able to show the professionalism of, say, Marge Pala, of Channel 3.   I think the high number of females in TV news has enabled the continuing softening of “hard news”, and I believe the station executives prefer it that way.   Some day I will have a lot more to say about this on thishere blog as this is nothing directly personal ”against” the women of today in TV news.   In large part, they are unable to fulfill a full commitment to journalism not due to their gender, but rather the policies of their bosses.   But this yarn is about….. lessee….oh yeah….the local weather!!

Last night, what was the reason the weather bunny was on almost at the start of the newscast?   It was to get 20 degrees colder “tomorrow”, i.e.,  Sunday (today, as I write this).  My, my, as I write this in the early afternoon, the temperature is 31 degrees.  The low today was 23.  The weather lady more or less suggested by her tone and commentary that weather terror was just ahead (“tomorrow”).   It may go below 20 tonight.  My, has that ever happened before???

It should be pointed out here that it would be the same reporting and emphasis situation if all the weather reporters on TV were men:   their bosses still would use weather as a major news item, even with a sprinkle of rain.  This is because most broadcasting executives are not journalists and want to stay as far away from journalism as they can. 

This also is because TV stations have conducted research of news viewers like you.  They have asked, in effect, why do you turn on the news?  To my chagrin, a most prominent response is to get the weather.   I would have preferred that you tuned in to find out the latest news.  But nowadays, it seems they mostly cover the “safe” stuff like fires and murders.  Their investigative pieces not infrequently are stings… or setups… such as the recent Channel 10 series catching pedophiles.   There are alot of murders in Philadelphia, and Mayor Street says he is concerned about that. 

But anyway, about that newsroom in a studio.  Back in the 1960s’, the Channel 3 sportscaster was Jim Leaming, who sat right behind me in the four tiers of news desks.  Jim was in the last row, I in the third tier.

Whenever I was doing a “cut in” on the six o’clock news, I would be seated at my desk, with Jim behind me.  We were part of the wide shots’ ambience during the newscast. 

Down below us, Bill Kuster would be doing the weather in the weather set portion of the floor level where the newscasters stood in front of a high table (where the late Ernie Kovacs once performed).

It was Jim’s almost nightly routine to whisper to me while Bill Kuster was on.   “Hey John!”

“Hey John!”.   I would turn around and Jim would say:  “Call WE 6-1212″.   And we would laugh.

The first time he had done this, I had asked him why.   

He replied:  “You can find out what he’s (Bill Kuster) talking about in 30 seconds.” WE 6-1212 was the phone number to get the weather forecast.
Now the phone company charges for this service.  I would not be surprised if the reason for the charges in part was because TV and radio people complained that the phone company was competing with them.

It would frustrate Jim that so much time was devoted to the weather, and so little to his sports.   You couldn’t cover the sports in 30 seconds, but frankly, you could take care of the weather with the 30-second forecast. 

When he first started at Channel 3, he was working two blocks down the street at Radio Station WIP where he did the late afternoon sports amidst a disc jockey show.  After his last radio broadcast, he would walk to KYW-TV and do the sports at 6:25 p.m., just before the Huntley-Brinkley Report.

After doing the radio sports in the afternoon, he had most of the sports news in his head, so he didn’t require alot of preparation for his little two-minute bit on TV. 

But this is my point:  most times, the newsroom’s assignment editor would not give Jim a crew so as to film a sports story earlier in the day.  

In other words, even in the 1960’s, the emphasis was to give nearly 10 minutes to the weather, two minutes for sports.  They didn’t want to give sports more time so why waste time and money on film stories that would mean you would have to take time away from the weathercaster.  

  
In a major sports town with major and minor pro sports and five major colleges, two minutes was ridiculous.  (Alas, sometimes even today the sports on the local TV news is a blip.)

Subsequently, Jim Leaming fought for more air time and sometimes got it.  He even got film crews.  One day, he asked me to “sub” for him and go down to the Spectrum (this was 1969)  and interview the new kid on the Flyers who, the night before, had scored his first NHL goal.   I never forgot that interview with Bobby Clarke.  I came back to the studio with the film and Jim came in and asked:  how long is the interview?  I replied it’s one minute and 23 seconds; three questions.   Said Jim:  I’ll use it all.  And he did.

That evening, Jim told the Channel 3 viewers this 19-year-old kid is going to be a big star.

Of course, Jim was right.

I was sad to hear of Jim’s death a few years ago.  I do not have to tell anybody who knew him:   Jim was a gem. 

His material, if he had been given the time, would have been better than one of those Bermuda highs.

As a postscript to all of this, all three local (network-affiliated) stations with early evening Sunday news led with the weather this evening.   I submit this is pathetic.   DANGEROUSLY COLD said Channel 3.   Channel 6 used the wind chill factor to say that it feels like 11 degrees.

Lemme see, now.   Doesn’t it get cold in the winter?

Nowadays, weather has become the lead story on many occasions, both summer and winter and even spring and autumn.  Hot and cold.  It is at the expense of good television journalism.

I submit to you that you are living a dull life if you pay attention to those Bermuda highs.

 

Weather Weary

Last Monday (December 5, 2005), the company phone rang at 5:36 a.m. (We handle day and overnight bus tours, among various trips, including cruises.) The caller was group leader for a casino bus trip departing at 11:30 a.m. She wanted to cancel the trip. In recent days, the TV weather forecasters were predicting the winter’s first major storm. Her trip did not leave Philadelphia until 11:30 a.m., but presumably people already were calling her regarding the ominous warnings. She said she had heard it already was snowing heavily in Atlantic City (the report was untrue). She agreed to wait until 9:00 a.m. when a final decision to cancel could be made. And at that time, she canceled the trip.

Another Atlantic City trip that morning, from a Philadelphia suburb, did proceed. Its group leader said he was not overly-concerned by the forecast, but he asked that the departure from the casino be moved up one hour (in other words, he wanted to leave Atlantic City at 6:00 p.m. instead of 7:00). The casino agreed. The rest of this particular part of the story is that the trip proceeded without incident.

But that first trip was postponed until mid-January.

The main cause of the above developments was not the weather. It was the weather foretellers. The TV weather guys. During the past decade, they have succeeded in scaring the hell out of many people, and the damage likely has amounted to millions of dollars. And yet nobody will be able to develop an appropriate money loss total, and nobody at the TV stations cares.

So many times, the forecast has been ominous; the eventual result: not nearly as severe. This is not a direct slap at meteorologists. They are more accurate than the TV weather prognosticators (some of whom also are meteorologists). Weather reporting on the TV newscasts seems to involve personnel who relish dwelling on the most severe possibilities. And the viewing public has been sold a bill of goods. The obvious theory here is that the TV weathercasters want to boost the ratings.

And it all comes at a considerable cost.

In my business, a postponement or cancellation always costs money. If it is a postponement, the bus driver (based on the rugged rules of being a charter/tour motorcoach operator) loses a day’s pay. It is the rub of the green. The purpose of the trip may not be replaceable. If you are going to New York to see the Rockettes in the “Christmas Spectacular” at Radio City Music Hall, you are out of luck. Only once in its 75 years has the weather resulted in a show cancellation.

In extraordinary cases, Radio City would seek to offer another show date, but because the Rockettes and their annual show are so popular (they do about 200 performances at Christmastime), it may be impossible to provide a makegood.

If you cannot “make good” on the trip, you have to open your wallet, one way or another.

Yes, there are times when the storm is severe enough to cause a group to cancel. But these situations are in the minority. Even so, because of the scare tactics on the TV weather reports during newscasts, the public has become panic-stricken. Surely there are times when passengers cannot get out of their driveways to get to the trip pickup point, but in a majority of situations, the people are just too scared to venture out. And the snow may be an inch, or such as last Monday, less. When the forecast is updated by weather events, the people do not listen; they go by the prior scare and stay home.

In other words, the “storm of the century” mentality has become so rampant, people are quick to cancel. Last winter, one major storm did shut down trips for a few days, causing one group leader to cancel his trip scheduled nearly one week after the snowstorm.  By the time of the trip day, the church parking lot had been completely cleared, and of course the streets and highways were open. But the people canceled, anyway.

There is some justification for being scared to death, but it is completely overblown. And the implications of the TV weather reports affect many industries, not just the bus business. It seems that practically everybody anticipates coming disastrous results if you don’t stay home.

John Bolaris, former weathercaster at Channel 10, Philadelphia, probably will be for years ahead the most infamous TV weather scarer. A couple of years ago, he was so convinced a major storm was poised to strike Philadelphia some days later, he succeeded in convincing his station to allow him to announce during the evening entertainment fare (before the 11 o’clock news) that he would have a report on “the storm of the century” at 11 o’clock.

This prompted other stations to provide similar ominous forecasts, and people were canceling things all over the place.

Isn’t it time to stop this stuff ??

A MINOR HIT

A few nights before Christmas, 2001, I believe it was Friday night, what did the Philadelphia TV stations lead with??  THERE ARE SNOWFLAKES in Chester County.

This is big news to local TV stations.  Last March, Channel 10 became infamous for weather reporting when the station broke into NBC-TV’s hit show “ER” to forecast the STORM OF THE CENTURY for the next week.  You remember the rest of that.  The storm would bring two to three feet of snow.  And it brought nada.  Despite changes in the day-to-day forecast, Channel l0 clung to the STORM OF THE CENTURY.

The viewing public, according to the TV focus groups, tune into the news for the weather.  Is that sad, or what?  That tells you of the significance of today’s local TV news, which concentrates on fender-benders that years ago were only the fodder of small market stations.

The weather forecast can be covered in 30 seconds or less, and the possibility of a storm three or four days hence deserves another 30 seconds.  But STORM OF THE CENTURY?  When nothing happens?

Well, the reason for mentioning this is that the same thing happened last week.  We were due to get a snowstorm Sunday night and Monday morning.  Supposedly.  The stations rushed to advise you that THEY were the ones to tune to for the school closing announcements.  Yet, on Saturday morning, Accu-Weather on KYW was giving the same forecast as the day before, rain Sunday afternoon into early Monday with the possibility of light snow.  Come Saturday morning, the Accu-Weather feller said Philadelphia would be getting “a minor hit”.

As people say nowadays, “HELLO!”

Into Saturday night and even Sunday morning, the TV stations still carried the big storm forecast, and spent nearly 10 minutes showing people preparing, such as the guy who bought a bunch of snow shovels.

What is NOT reported is the REASON for this coverage.  And also what is not reported are the negatives this reporting fosters.

First, the REASON for the coverage is that scaring the hell out of the people supposedly means they will tune into every newscast for weather updates, and the TV stations can show how many snowplows the City has, and how many tons of salt, and so on.  But what about Accu-Weather’s forecast of a “minor hit”?  Well, just ignore it, as the storm could switch directions and in no time we will be facing the STORM OF THE CENTURY.  So, the first reason is to attract viewers.

The “negatives” hurt alot of businesses affected by bad weather.  If you happen to operate bus trips, charter motorcoach day trips, for example, the people figuratively or actually frightened by the TV stations are afraid to travel on their scheduled trip date.  Especially senior citizens do not want to chance going out when a storm is a-comin’.  How can you blame them?  The TV newscasts would have you thinking that you will be marooned for a week.  And this serves to cancel trips, and this affects not only the bus company, but also the various attractions involved in the trip.

At the time of Channel 10’s STORM OF THE CENTURY, GSS TOURS lost four trips, even though there was no snow on the ground.  The people going on trips usually do not wait until the last day to decide NOT to go.  So, with the STORM OF THE CENTURY a-comin’, it’s best to go buy the snow shovels, stock up on food for at least a week, and pull the covers up to the neck.

For a minor hit????