The economics of weather

Last week I was once again on my soapbox about the way the local TV news treats the weather.

I was saying that the methods they employ to whip the region into a hysteria at the slightest hint of snow bordered on being a public disservice. I have made this argument many times, saying it has economic consequences.

All day on Wednesday and Thursday they trumpeted the approaching storm as something akin to Armageddon. In Washington, D.C., where they actually got some snow, they were referring to it jokingly as the ‘Snowquester.’

The weather folks weren’t as lucky here. Despite dispatching reporters to every nook and cranny of the Delaware Valley, nary a flake was found. So instead they breathlessly informed us that, “THE ROADS ARE WET.” And, they assured us, snow was on the way and would accumulate 3-5 inches later in the day on Wednesday and into Thursday. So we waited. And waited. No snow.

On Friday, they told us about wind damage and flooding. At the Jersey shore. They were almost embarrassed to tell us about the flurries that covered our cars - but not the roads - around here.

It’s all part of the shtick, right? Well, it’s actually a bit more than that.

On Monday, the officials of the Philadelphia Flower Show noted that attendance at this year’s spectacular was down. Way down. Actually, 17 percent fewer people went through the turnstiles.

One of the reasons they cited for taking the bloom off the rose, so to speak, was the threat of snow on Wednesday and Thursday.

Yeah, this weather stuff is just a yuck a minute, isn’t it?

Comments