How Was Irene for You?
Posted on August 29th, 2011 in Uncategorized | 5 Comments »
I happened to have a long-planned trip to Chicago this weekend, but I watched CNN semi-obsessively to find out what was going on back East. I’m not surprised that the storm turned out to be less severe than predicted; they almost always do. The perfect storm came elsewhere, from the combination of sensationalistic media (I miss the old CNN sometimes) and hyper-cautious politicians. After Katrina, no president is ever going to risk looking lackadaisical about a storm; and after Snowmageddon, Mike Bloomberg wasn’t about to get caught in Bermuda again.
Meanwhile CNN was all Irene, all the time, and you could tell the channel was pretty darn excited about the storm and the ratings boost it promised. I can’t tell you how many times I heard a CNN anchor use the phrase “monster storm,” which particularly struck me because I’m generally irritated by the term “monster shark” (as in Martha’s Vineyard’s obscene “Monster Shark” fishing tournament”)—they’re equally meaningless terms.
Of course, it’s probably a good thing that the politicians reacted strongly, and it sounds like they avoided a lot of damage to the public transportation systems in particular by doing so. I also imagine that conducting evacuations is terrific practice for a real disaster.
But Irene shows that we still have a long way to go before we can accurately calibrate the response to a storm.
Meanwhile, Chicago has been just gorgeous: an architectural tour of the city by water, the Art Institute (with its glorious new modern wing by Renzo Piano), Millenium Park—the city really does a nice job of incorporating its history (trains going through everything) with a progressive vision of urban planning….
The view from the roof cafe of the Art Institute
5 Responses
8/29/2011 9:08 am
I love that Eric Cantor was out there saying hurricane relief was an appropriate role for the federal government, but not to worry: Whatever it cost would be deducted from some other federal program.
I am waiting for Rick Perry to say that research on weather prediction should be cut, since after all it is done by those same corrupt scientists who think the climate is changing, and in any case the idea that hurricanes are due to the science of gases and fluids is only a theory, and there are divine explanations that work even better.
Someone should ask him.
In response to your question, large parts = of Brookline lost power, but my lights barely flickered.
8/29/2011 1:00 pm
I have a theory that contemporary distrust of journalists is largely attributable to local TV stations’ practice of overblowing weather stories.
Much of what happened on local TV in NYC area is impossible to parody, it was so ridiculous.
8/29/2011 3:12 pm
With all due respect guys, you all dodged a bullet. Irene’s affect on the East coast could have been much worse. Catastrophes do happen. Please do not allow the histrionics of ratings obsessed news outlets to alter your judgement on whether or not evacuating in front of a big storm is prudent. Unless, of course, you’re looking for a harrowing adventure. Storm forcasting technology is much better now than in the recent past. I do not see it getting a whole lot better in the near future. There is only so much you can predict - there are too many variables.
8/29/2011 3:39 pm
You guys should go over to Harry’s blog and look at his new book, Baseball as a Second Language
http://harry-lewis.blogspot.com/2011/08/baseball-as-second-language.html
Thanks, Harry, a fun read.
8/29/2011 4:24 pm
As long as we’re providing reading suggestions, I definitely recommend Benjamin Ginsburg’s article in the Washington Monthly titled “Administrators Ate My Tuition”: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/septemberoctober_2011/features/administrators_ate_my_tuition031641.php?page=all&print=true