Originally Posted by Cuthbert Rizla

Just looking at all the coverage during Sandy I can't help feeling that there's been a massive amount of hype and over-dramatisation about this storm.

Although it was big in size it was barely a Cat 1 hurricane when it hit land and apart from the Jersey shoreline being flooded ( it's a shoreline,what do you expect ? ) and parts of lower Manhattan being affected ( ancient subway system barely upgraded since it was built ) most places got off pretty lightly.

Three times as many people died in the Caribbean during Sandy but this barely registered in the US media and historically Sandy really is just a storm in a teacup.

In 1938 a real "superstorm" that hit the eastern seaboard called the Yankee Clipper or the Long Island Express, it was a category 3 hurricane that left 600 people dead in New England, and 60 people in New York City alone.

In a bid to outdo each other some of the US media experts I've been watched have been laughably over-the-top.

"When I was a young boy growing up in the Northeast (New Jersey) and obsessed with the weather, I used to wonder what it’d be like when the big one comes. Well, we’re about to find out." – Stu Ostro, senior director of weather communications for The Weather Channel
"If anything, Sandy is exceeding the forecast expectations, and the forecast was for a storm of epic proportions and effects." – Bryan Norcross, hurricane specialist for The Weather Channel

"It looks like it's going to be worse than the storm of '62, which was monumental." – Willie Glass, Atlantic City's public safety director

"With this storm, it could be unprecedented. We might see more flood damage than we've seen in a long time." - Paul Walsh, Vice President of Weather Analytics for The Weather Channel

"If this all happens as forecasted, and you and your family are stuck in the cold and dark without food and light and communications because you didn't run to the store and get ready, excuses are going to be spectacularly hard to come by." – Bryan Norcross, hurricane specialist for The Weather Channel

I think they forgot it's real-life and not Hollywood.

Originally Posted by Mallory

Can you imagine if a hurricane hit London? A 12-foot tidal surge coming up the Thames. The stock exchange inundated with 3 to 4 ft of water. All the tube stations flooded! Thousands of black cabs flooded out. All the trains and buses halted because of falling trees, debris and flooding. Most of Maida Vale burned down from sparks from a fire, and spread by the wind. Thousands of houses flooded, or destroyed by wind. A huge boat capsized at sea. Blizzards 3 to 4 ft deep in Berkshire. A huge hospital losing power. Trees falling down on houses and schools. Millions without power.

It wouldn't be very newsworthy I guess. Just a small column in the local paper.

Originally Posted by yellowroom

We're obviously talking past each other, so I'm going to summarise my point as follows and leave it:

Warnings from National Weather Service, National Hurricane Centre, The Mayor, The Governor, The President, your local Police, etc = Good
Dramatic, hyperbolic news as entertainment = Bad and potentially leading to a "cry wolf" situation next time.

Originally Posted by paddingtongreen

What a load of old rubbish.

You decide that a small powerful storm is greater than a less powerful but huge storm? Are you the arbiter who sets the criteria? what are your qualifications? Certainly, on an energy level, this was greater.

In today's dollars, the 1938 storm did less than $5B, this one will probably hit $20B. The 1938 storm cost more lives but there would have been much less warning and mitigating organization back then. You cannot compare the death count of the first evening here with that in the Caribbean, you don't have a clue what it is.

In short, this was a huge storm that is still going and now headed for Canada.

Originally Posted by dakota44

Exactly spot on. The somewhat strange downplaying this storm on the part of a few here is, well, I'll keep it polite and just say ridiculous. Of course, had their house been torn from the foundation or been one of the 80 plus houses that burned to the ground in Queens, or they lived in one of the New Jersey cities that were inundated, or had one of their friends or family been one of the 30 or more who have died...they might not be so cavalier about something that is indeed a huge and powerful storm that is not yet finished doing damage.

I do hope that none of our fellow BE folk have suffered any significant loss.

Originally Posted by Cuthbert Rizla

It's all about perspective.
And the responsibility of hysterical nees organisations to put everything into perspective.
For instance, do you remember Cyclone Nargis ?
No ? Well let me remind you.
138,000 people died in it. Yes, 138,000
And caused €10billion of damage.
It was the biggest natural disaster ever to hit Burma - and there's the clue.
No-one in the US gives a toss about Burma so, of course, a Category 1 hurricane that weakens to a tropical storm before it hits land becomes an apcoalyptic " Frankenstorm " whereas something that happens in a 3rd World country doesn't really count for anything.

Oh, and by the way, Cyclone Nargis didn't happen decades ago but in 2008.
Yep, four years ago.

So whilst any loss of life and property in Sandy is unfortunate and sad for those involved put in perspective it really wasn't THAT big a deal.

Except, of course, it was handily placed right on the front doorstep of all the major news organisations in America.
That's why it was a super-storm.

Originally Posted by moneypenny20

It was a superstorm because of the size, and circumstance with the cold front. I don't understand the analogy with the cyclone in Burma. The whole my storm was bigger than yours is obscene imo. Again, had the media/powers that be not made the deal with Sandy that they did, people would be wishing 'only 50 odd people' had died. Numbers would have been way higher also the cost of rebuilding hasn't even been able to be estimated yet as it's still doing its thing.

NYC, by your reckoning wouldn't have been shut down (it's hard to shut a major city without letting people know ). Did you see the cars piled up all over central Manhattan? Had people been driving, walking etc because they hadn't been warned of possibilities, the deathtoll would have been in the hundreds. Atlantic City wouldn't have had parts evacuated, buildings boarded up etc etc etc.

Originally Posted by Cuthbert Rizla

It's all about perspective. .

Originally Posted by Cuthbert Rizla

It's all about perspective.
And the responsibility of hysterical nees organisations to put everything into perspective.
For instance, do you remember Cyclone Nargis ?
No ? Well let me remind you.
138,000 people died in it. Yes, 138,000
And caused €10billion of damage.
It was the biggest natural disaster ever to hit Burma - and there's the clue.
No-one in the US gives a toss about Burma so, of course, a Category 1 hurricane that weakens to a tropical storm before it hits land becomes an apcoalyptic " Frankenstorm " whereas something that happens in a 3rd World country doesn't really count for anything.

Oh, and by the way, Cyclone Nargis didn't happen decades ago but in 2008.
Yep, four years ago.

So whilst any loss of life and property in Sandy is unfortunate and sad for those involved put in perspective it really wasn't THAT big a deal.

Except, of course, it was handily placed right on the front doorstep of all the major news organisations in America.
That's why it was a super-storm.

Originally Posted by Cuthbert Rizla

You missed the key word,twice.
It's all about perspective..

Originally Posted by BEVS

Raises the eyebrows here. Wryly smiles a bit and thinks to self ----- wind up. Or if not, has never , ever been in such a situation. Nor been close to such a situation or known anyone, anything - animal, vegetable, mineral or general - that has been subject to this or any other of the extreme conditions our planet can throw out .