Do we hype weather or is it the huge news universe?

Here we go...time to scream "Hype!"

Since I really didn't have a dog in the hunt this time around, I'm intrigued by the typical television bashing that goes on after a severe weather event. Columnists act like farm animals jumping on the "Hype-Bandwagon" because televison news outlets are an easy target.

Let's take a moment to re-cap Hurricane Irene.

LA TIMES: At least 19 people were killed in various storm-related accidents from Florida to Connecticut, and the death toll was expected to rise. And up to four million power customers, fairly evenly scattered along the hurricane’s path, still had no electricity on Sunday afternoon.
Across the length of the hurricane’s path, hundreds if not thousands of roads remained closed.

It seems hard to imagine someone using the phrase "dodged the bullet" with these preliminary statistics. Sure, the storm was not as strong as the computer and human forecasters predicted. And this, of course, starts the haters bleating, "hype, hype, hype!"

What exactly do some folks think is going on behind closed doors? Do people really think forecasters, news managers, and television executives sit around and scheme ways to hype the story? "Frank, Cheryl, contact our ad agency and ask them for ways to scare the beegeeus out of the audience."

Naturally, I watched an extensive amount of the coverage from ABC, CNN, and The Weather Channel. Not once did anyone, that I saw, fail to mention the potential for a calamity. In addition, the coverage was certainly warranted given the apparent strength, intensity and position of Hurricane Irene. Even President Obama said this could be a "historic" storm. Did the White House staff decide to "hype" the story too?

What's the solution here in an open market? Should CNN get with ABC and decide when each should go on and follow with the other's coverage later. Should we create a giant news cabal, or hand over the journalistic freedom to the government. Every news outlet carries their coverage as along as deemed necessary.

So, if you want to complain about the quantity of coverage, you have a point. Today. even ESPN used a radar picture with an update on Irene. Yet, it wasn't "hype". Irene's forecast changed the timing on the Little League World Series. When will these sheep understand this isn't hype...it's coverage! News organizations have to act independently which can lead to enormous amounts across the television spectrum...but it's coverage!

Now, I won't disagree that news managers sometimes make decisions based on ratings. I wish television news could return to the days of Cronkite, Murrow or even Brinkley. But, that ship has sailed. News is now a business and not a complete public service anymore. But, rarely, if ever, have I seen or known about circumstances that change coverage to hype a story.

The importance of the story dictates the amount of coverage necessary. There were roughly 65 million reasons to extensively cover Hurricane Irene. More importantly, you always forecast on the side of least regret. It will always save more lives and property.

Perhaps, these sheep will remember to put some context into their perspective next time.