If caught in a car, I would likely look for a deep ditch that I could potentially drive my car into if a tornado was in sight or reported to be very close. If there wasn’t a low spot large enough for my car, I’d likely leave it and take cover without it–and hope for the best. Judging from the pics from the Oakfield storm report, being in a car that’s at ground level isn’t safe to be at all.

I understand that there are a lot of people that aren’t “interested” in weather.. but for the life of me, I can’t figure out how this new message is confusing. I’m sure there are some people who will be confused – there always are some people no matter what the issue or how simple the explanations.

I think that the average person would understand this information if they are given it, especially if someone like James reminds everyone when he comes on during severe weather.

If the public is made away of these recommendations before the severe weather event, then reminded during it, that should be enough. Yes, some people will be confused. But during a time of an emergency people like James, et al. should not have to worry about if this is confusing people or not. The weather people are doing their best to keep everyone safe and informed. The general public should have some responsibility for their own safety and if they don’t understand or grasp the concept then it is up to them to ask the questions.

This is slightly off topic, but it relates. On this blog a few months ago, an discussion was brought up concerning basketball and weather coverage, and how we must decide what do to with the live coverage. From talking to the aforementioned friends and family, I have come up with some interesting thoughts. It seems for most people, the commonly used text at the top of the screen is, for the most part, ignored. From what I understand, it is usually just the NWS statement, which for most people, is undigestable, particularly in a time of emergency. My idea is that there should be two tiers of severity of tornado warnings, based on the evidence of a tornado, its location, any eyewitness evidence, etc., a bit like the “PDS” of today. This tier-ing should shouldn’t be over advertised to the public. For the higher tier tornadoes, live coverage should be used, regardless of the programming. In the case of the lower tier, live coverage would not have to be used, depending on programming. When it isn’t live, live weather updates, mostly text could be used. At the bottom of the screen, an area is reserved for text updates from the staff meteorologists. Possibly, the meteorologists could post important information, such as location, communities in danger, storm strength, every 30 seconds or a minute, depending on need. Their post could follow their name and time, so the public recognizes that the information is live and important. Also, a picture of the meteorologist could be beside the post, to further increase the credibility. After a post, that post would stay on the screen until the next post, at which point it could disappear, or get smaller, fade, etc. This text would only utilize the bottom fourth or fifth of the screen, and do away with the scrolling text from the NWS. Also, live updates could be done during commercial breaks, or at regular intervals, depending on the severity. With experienced meteorologists like James, many of the case to case decisions could be made at the moment, based on his discretion.

Just my thoughts, goodnight everyone.

You first sentence says it all…. common sense and hope you make the correct decision.