Let me say that I am trained in the broadcasting field and did my internship at a NewsRadio Station(WTAG 580AM, Worcester, MA) and the intention of the majority of news agencies is not to scare the bejeezus out of everyone and cause mass hysteria, like you seem to think it is. It is to provide the most information possible. If part of that information is that "currently Hurricane Ivan is Cat 5 with winds at 160mph" then they are doing their jobs. If someone here wants to pass along that they have heard this information, regardless of how many times it will change in the next 20 minutes or the next 20 hours, they are just giving the information. Note the word "currently" in the text. It's not saying that Ivan is definitely going to be Cat 5 the whole of its existence, it's saying that right now, as it stands, it is Cat 5. What if someone on the boards had family that was in Jamaica? Don't you think they would want to know that a Cat 5 is headed for their relatives? There are more places in the world than just where you live, so maybe it's useful for those other people to know this information. Also, regardless of how weak this storm might be if it makes landfall in the US, if it were to hit an area that has just seen two major storms in two weeks, then that area is going to want to be careful anyway. Remember, there are some people that did lose everything. There are alot of people that just lost power and that's it, but you have to bear in mind that it could have been worse. Just because a house didn't get damaged in two storms, doesn't mean the third won't do anything to it either. Trees that are standing after the first two might have had their base weakened and fall over with just a Cat 1's winds. Those trees could easily cause damage that didn't happen with the previous two. I'm not trying to raise panic, I'm just trying to point out to you that there is good reason for people to keep track of things and to remain cautious. Not to panic, but to prepare. We may not get alot of hurricanes up in Massachusetts, but in the late 70s, 1978 to be exact, we had forcasters calling for "maybe a couple of inches at worst" and ended up with a multi-day blizzard that dumped 3-4 feet of snow and caused alot of damage both physical and economic. We all know that weather reporting isn't an exact science, but they have gotten better in the years since then. The forecast for weather is based on probability. The most probable in all of our computer models is this one here, so this is the one we will report. We will indicate there is a slight chance of option B, the second most likely happening as well. Given that Options A and B might be what makes up 90% of the models, Options C, D and E might be considered not worth reporting, but it doesn't mean they didn't see it as a possibility so please don't call people sad for feeling The Weather Channel is a credible source of information on weather. They certainly have a better chance of getting it right than you do, and since everyone's projections showed the "most likely" track on Charley was that it would enter Tampa Bay area when it curved past Southern Florida, the fact that it hit further South actually was a surprise. That track most likely had about a 10% chance or less, otherwise they would have brought it up as a possibility. All I'm saying is, the information provided through most, not all because I do agree that there is some sensationalism out there and I will say that Fox News does have that problem at least 70% of the time, but most news agencies is there for the benefit of the people and not because they want to spread fear.
EDIT: I was writing this post while you posted about having worked in a newsroom before. I'm sorry your experience was apparently not a positive one, as mine was actually very positive.
