I think I now understand why the local TV stations spend so much time on the weather.
Do you know anyone who wasn't talking about it yesterday?
Specifically, what they were wondering was what happened to all that snow and blizzard-like conditions that were being predicted for the region.
There was a blizzard alright, just not here.
What most forecasters were saying was going to be 6-10 inches of snow in the Philadelphia region never developed. The official snow total for Philly? A puny 1.2 inches was the official measurement for Philadelphia.
Massachusetts? Well, that's another matter. Framingham, Mass., got walloped with 33.5 inches, sparking memories of the great blizzard of 1996 that buried the Philly region with 30 inches of snow.
But as soon as it became clear that we were going to dodge a bullet, the finger-pointing started. And all those fingers wagging were pointed for the most part at our local TV weather folks.
TV makes a very big deal out of the weather in these parts. It's been a pet peeve of mine for years. But it's not going to change.
Why? It is the single item that affects everyone every day.
That's why USA Today revolutionized the weather package that appears in newspapers years ago when they rolled out their full-page, full color weather page.
My wife still loves that page. Every time I bring one home, she checks out the temperatures in warm-weather places like Arizona and California.
My problem, as I've been stating now for years, is that there is an economic angle to all this hyperventilating about the weather. How do you think the restaurant or bar owner - people who are dependent on people getting out and about, most likely in their cars - feel when all they hear on TV all day is TV folks telling people, "If you don't have to go out, don't."
Lots of small businesses in Philly took a big hit Tuesday when the city basically shut down, despite the lack of snow. All public and parochial schools were closed. Non-essential city workers got a day off.
Farther to the north, while they did get some snow, New York City was not paralyzed, and the decision to basically shut the city down was being widely criticized.
I've often wondered if there is a price tag that can be put on these doom and gloom forecasts.
One expert said yesterday's precautions in the Big Apple add up to a $200 million economic hit.
I don't expect much to change when it comes to the way local TV stations handle the weather. This despite the statement yesterday by the head of the National Weather Service that they will review their procedures in light of the missed forecast, in particular when it comes to getting word out quicker when it becomes clear that those forecasts are off the mark.
Most of the TV folks spent much of the day yesterday explaining what happened, how the system veered to the north and east, effectively missing Philadelphia and the suburbs.
But I was most impressed by someone who never shows up on TV. And whose name is not nearly as familiar as those who constantly regale us with their "double-scar radar," or First Alert forecasts.
Gary Szatkowski is a meteorologist with the National Weather Service in South Jersey. He went on Twitter when it became clear that the forecast was a huge miss and basically fell on his sword.
"There is a big storm further off to our northeast," Szatkowski Tweeted late Monday night. New York City will see good amounts of snow, and for portions of New England it will be very high impact. But for much of New Jersey, and for thed Philadelphia Metropolitan area, this is a big forecast miss.
"You made a lot of touch decisions expecting us to get it right, and we didn't. Once again, I'm sorry. My deepest apologies to many key decision makers and so many members of the general public."
Class act, Gary.
Comments