According to The Smoking Gun: the cable network seeks cloak on anchor harassment details:
Weather Channel In Sexual Harrasment Storm
As The Weather Channel’s owner negotiates a multibillion-dollar sale of the cable outlet, the network’s lawyers are angling to keep secret the details of a blistering arbitration ruling in favor of a former anchorwoman who charges that she was subjected to unrelenting sexual harassment by her male co-anchor, who was “romantically obsessed” with her and frequently made crude remarks. Hillary Andrews, 38, contends that the cable network’s brass turned a blind eye to the harassment because her co-anchor, Bob Stokes, was popular with viewers and scored high ratings. According to recent court filings, Andrews won her arbitration case three months ago and the final ruling was “highly critical of conduct by both Stokes and TWC management.”
( h/t TVSpy.com Shoptalk)
If you want your own custom weather channel, minus the “fluff and nonsense”, get one of these for your business: www.viziframe.com with custom weather content for your area.
UPDATE: One reader questioned why a mostly science site would post a story like this. I saw it as one more indication of an organization that used to be dedicated to truth in science and meteorology, has now lost it’s way and become just like many other TV news organizations – a ratings hound. I knew what the Weather Channel was like at it’s inception when John Coleman and Joe D’Aleo worked there. I would have been proud to work there then. Not today. See a related story about TWC’s Heidi Cullen.
With TWC being so influential in many households, we deserve to see the ugly warts too. Ask yourself this question: If TWC management looks the other way with issues such as this, why should the public trust that same management to deliver truth in reporting on weather and climate change when ratings and popularity, not facts, appear to steer their course of action?
Retired Engineer(19:14:22):
Great description of bandwagons!
Swizzle stick? Isnt that a 8 cm long, 1mm diameter piece of plastic?.
Oh, he was bragging.
Don’t mean to get Jim Cantore fired or anything, but I’ve seen him make a face when a fellow anchor blamed something on global warming. I think he’s one of us – you know, those people who believe in the existence of weather. Any reports about how the Myanmar disaster was caused by global warming? I haven’t seen any yet, but I’m sure they’re coming.
The Weather Channel seems not to be infiltrating the minds of its viewers:
http://www.weather.com/common/onlinepoll/results/lap_undeclared.html?generic_poll172
Well, I suppose this is the appropriate thread for this post. The folks at El Reg have tipped their hat to the BBC headline writers for “Great tits cope well with warming” at http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/05/09/bbc_headline/
The story, as you may have guessed, is that at one bird species has advanced its egg laying and hatching time along with the advance of the emergence of the caterpillars they feed upon.
The Register story concentrates on the headline (they are an IT rumor site, with a bent toward beer, double entendre and interesting science), the BBC story refers to previous work studying some birds that are losing sync with their food. This is the first I’ve seen where birds and food are shifting in sync.
Perhaps they’ll shift back over the next decade.
Just to answer my question above: Al Gore has now blamed global warming for the Myanmar cyclong: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,354644,00.html
Perhaps Professor Phillippe would share with us how CO2 has a demonstrated negative impact on biodiversity? No computer models allowed, let’s have some facts, not assumptions.