I hesitate to step into this minefield, but for what’s it is worth I’ll throw my two cents at this “problem.” First, it would seem to be unreasonable and an infeasibility to monitor all posts for accuracy and truthfulness. I would hope that most people take these sorts of allegations with a grain of salt, but you can not stop those who will want to believe them. There are people who do not believe we landed on the moon and there is no amount of facts you can put before certain people to convince them otherwise. Being a person in the public eye unfortunately brings rise to these issues which are inherently difficult to control.

It would seem that the most efficacious “solution” to this issue is what is going on here. If the offending comment ellicts a response from the person at issue, in this case Mr. Slater, then the response should be posted and in potentially egregious cases, the responses can be more prominently posted as has occurred here (and with Mr. Morgan’s earlier responses). There have been multiple instances in other blog entries where certain statements of “fact” have been made and people have posted disputing “facts.” In my opinion, that is as it should be.

In this type of forum we will have to rely on the discerning reader to make the “correct” judgment as to what is the truth and what is not, much to the (often rightful) consternation of those whose names may be brought up from time to time. Unfortunately the blog police (aka Steve) would be spending far too much time determining what is true and what is not true. Were the rule just to carte blanche delete all posts for which one could possibly construe as derogatory, there would be many comments deleted which may rightly raise issues of concern that need to be addressed. In any event, I’ll step off the soap box for now and hopefully we can put this to rest before too long–at least until the next great “Snow-storm-that-wasn’t.”

Thanks Brent. Well said. Add one more thing: I’m loathe to censor people – it goes against my nature. I’ve seen all too often where even the most extreme voice sometimes have good points to make, even if they are poorly stated. And sometimes it’s my job to help them state those views with more clarity.

True, fact checking every blog comment before it’s posted doesn’t seem reasonable. I like that OKC Central is an open forum with opposing viewpoints welcomed.

Speaking of facts, is there any truth to Jon Slater’s comment, “In fact several TV weather folks right here in OKC have seals but do NOT have degrees in meteorology. I’m not here to out anyone but I would like you to set my record straight.”?

And does it matter?

Concerned Oklahoman, let’s stay on topic please. Let’s not hurl personal insults, even if it’s meant as a joke. In the digital world this sort of thing can get out of hand quickly, and that’s when everybody start hauling out tridents.

I’ve lived here since 1969 and seen weather coverage progress significantly. Much of the improvments can be attributed to technology, at NOAA and the local affiliates.

The issue that appears to have started the firestorm is use of the information at hand and delivery. This has been a subject for years in private conversations I have had with many others. In fairness, however, it is very easy to second guess those whose responsibility it is to assemble this information and provide forcasts for the general public’s use.

All this being said, anyone who works in the public’s eye has to accept the notion that from time to time, their work product may be called into question. I think Mike Morgan over-reacted in his initial email response, even though he obviously felt the need to defend himself. Often times such reactions tend to throw gas on a fire that otherwise would have gone out on its own.

If Morgan didn’t know what he was doing, he would have been toast years ago. Apparently O.U. simply didn’t offer a course in tact and diplomacy when under fire.

Let’s give everyone a pass on this issue and move on to more important issues. Please.

True. But I have to wonder whether instances such as when KWTV created a Hollywood movie style commercial promoting Gary England a couple years ago (as famously parodied by The Daily Show) fuels suspicions that the weather is being sensationized here and turned into entertainment.

All I did was to dare ask the questions and give voice to the complaints.

The reality is that we have weather here in Oklahoma that can most certainly kill people. I think native Okies accept that and sometimes tend to forget it. Put yourself in the meteorologists’ shoes…if was your responsibility to warn people about something that you knew had the potential kill them, how insistant would you be in trying to get that message across? Also…regarding Jon Slater’s comment about several weathermen in OKC not having meteorology degrees…I don’t know if that’s accurate or not. But what I DO know is that the weathermen aren’t immune to spreading gossip of their own. A few years back, a co-worker was in a VIP suite where one of the well-known local weathermen was very vocally spreading incorrect information about one of his competitors.

Jon, check what I said about the seal and a degree. I never said you had to have a degree. I said you had to be educated. Whether that is the distance education you can get from Mississippi State or a degree in meteorology from an accredited school. And regarding you no longer being at KOKI, why attack me? Why not attack all the people @ the Tulsa World who’ve attacked you? You and Mike both need to grow up.

Actually, I said that the forecasters I knew had degrees. Maybe I should start attacking myself for not providing accurate information.