The May 19 op-ed piece on dramatic TV reports by Larry D. Lauer, vice chancellor emeritus at Texas Christian University, was on target.
Drama sells and we buy. We need more commentaries like this to address our culture.
I’ve admired Dr. Lauer since taking his course in film history and criticism in the early 1960s at TCU. He was knowledgeable, articulate and credible.
In his article, he asked whether these dramatic images of disaster and distress make you more secure, make you more fortunate to be alive, or what? Or do they create anxiety?
— Jean Crane, Fort Worth
Larry D. Lauer’s article (“TV weather report drawn to drama”) was brilliant. It just didn’t go far enough.
The talking heads are all about face time before the camera, and not about public safety as they would have us believe.
The showing of the same Doppler radar over and over ad nauseam, and the interruption of programming to repeat what they said 15 minutes earlier is extremely annoying.
I can’t fit my 65-inch flat screen TV into the hall closet, which is our shelter. I do have several battery-powered NOAA radios, which is the source from which the TV weather reporters get most of their data.
— Rod Longino, Colleyville
Please add my comments to the op-ed by Larry D. Lauer. After two months of constant weather reports, it has all become tedious.
A tornado in Oklahoma (albeit terrible) does not rate four hours of reporting that breaks into regular programming.
The weather reporters at all Dallas-Fort Worth stations are milking our weather for all it’s worth. We get reports of possible rain (continuously), possible high winds (multiple times) and possible hail (far more than necessary).
Rarely does any of this occur. And this TV interference can go on for hours. We ignore them because of potential-disaster overload. The weatherman who cried “wolf” comes to mind.
My husband ranks the weather importance as follows: If the weatherman has his suit jacket on, nothing will happen; if he’s down to his shirtsleeves, we might have some weather disturbance; and if he has his shirtsleeves rolled up, we might pay attention as something important might happen. (Please note that this does not apply to weatherwomen.)
— Pamela Sorrells, Fort Worth
I voted early in the May 9 election for members of the Tarrant Regional Water District board, and I was shocked by the antics of the Dallas lawyer trying to stop the pipeline — Monty Bennett.
So I thought that after the election, with Marty Leonard and Jim Lane clear winners, that that was the end of it. But, no. On a recent evening I got a call from a 517 area code.
The recording said it was a three-minute survey about the water board election. It asked such leading questions as: “Have you or your fellow workers discussed the lack of transparency in the current water board?” “Are you fed up with the members of the water board lying to the public?” “Isn’t it time to do something about the current water board?”
It was clear who was paying for this.
Then, the other evening at 7:30, a pollster on a bike came to my house and asked if I would take a survey — about the water board election. He asked questions like: “What single issue caused you to vote in the water board election.” When he left he didn’t poll anyone else on the block.
What’s going on here?
— John Hutchinson, Fort Worth
Letters should be no longer than 200 words and must have a full name, home street address, city of residence and both a home and daytime telephone number for verification.
E-mail (preferred): email@example.com; Fax: 817-390-7688
Regular mail: Letters to the Editor, Box 1870, Fort Worth TX 76101