The Blizzard That Wasn't?

When I used to work at ABC 4, I got used to a catchphrase Marti Skold would say: "what you get depends on where you are."

It's a saying that I think bears repeating after the storm some in the KUTV newsroom dubbed "snowmageddon 2010."

Just like predicted, the front whipped into Southern Idaho early yesterday afternoon. Conditions deteriorated to the point that I-15 was shut down from Idaho Falls to the Montana border. When the storm came into Utah, it created big snowdrifts in Logan, and whiteout conditions from Tremonton to Point of the Mountain.

But, unlike many meteorologists predicted, Utah County didn't get much of anything. The weather inbox at work got a swarm of nasty emails, ragging us for covering the storm so heavily, encouraging people to stay off the road, and telling families to review their emergency supplies.

The LDS church let employees go early, school districts cancelled extra-curricular activities, and colleges cancelled classes. At 6:00pm last night, UDOT reported that I-15 was experiencing a volume of cars similar to what's normal at 5:00am. There's no way of proving this, but maybe the storm seemed anti-climatic because people had watched the news, and heeded the warnings.

Had there been as many cars on the road during the evening commute, who's to say there wouldn't have been more slide-offs (there were close to 200 as is) or possibly even fatalities. Some say coverage of the storm was "over-hyped," but to me, it was all the media attention that saved lives.

Additionally, "blizzard" doesn't mean copious amounts of snow. It means a combination of high winds, cold temperatures and snow. The wind speed last night was measured in various locations at above 50mph. Temperatures Thanksgiving morning are expected to be below zero in many locations statewide, something practically unheard of in November. And, there was up to a foot of snow associated with this storm in some areas.

"Blizzard warnings" encourage people to be ready for these conditions. All three were seen in a significant portion of the Salt Lake TV market, which stretches from Eastern Nevada to Southern Idaho, all the way to Western Wyoming and down to Northern Arizona. It's the geographically largest TV market in the nation, which is also why sometimes meteorologists may not include each specific area in their forecast; because there's simply too many cities and not enough time.

True, Utah County didn't see anything out of the ordinary, but a much larger portion of the market population-wise got slammed. I have to wonder, if we didn't dedicate the time and resources to forecasting storms, would we still have gotten the same amount of hate mail? The answer is yes. When it comes to weather, the saying is true: damned if you do, damned if you don't.

For me, it comes down to what you believe the role of newsmedia is. Some people say journalists should only report on things that have happened and are certain. Others say media outlets should inform people on what is developing, and issues posing problems in the community. If you want journalists who subscribe to the first view, then by all means, coverage of this storm was not acceptable. However, I think most people in the news business try to to follow the second set of ideals. That's why coverage of storms, and even other events can sometimes seem over-exaggerated.

Okay. I'm off my high horse now. I just wanted to get that out. Few things at work are more frustrating then seeing somebody who does a good job get vicious hate mail.

Happy Thanksgiving.

The End.