Irene: 'Stormageddon' or the real deal?

I MAY HAVE BEEN too glib in my earlier post about Hurricane Irene. Most headlines are now heralding: "Thousands Evacuated as Irene Moves Up Coast." Large-scale flooding in low-lying areas may be the biggest threat. Parts of Manhattan could be underwater in 36 hours. That is no laughing matter. Yet, I'm finding it difficult to judge just how dangerous this storm is. Having underdone Pavlovian conditioning to expect fluff or outright bullshit from over-the-top media coverage, I'm sorry to say that it has become harder to discern fact from hype. The clown videos of breathless reporters being whipsawed by wind and rain do not inspire confidence. Remember the sanctimonious predictions of Ecological End Times following the BP oil spill? (Think Anderson Cooper.) Did the media's obsession with that underwater cam make us a better informed country? And how about LA's "Carmageddon?" That was a veritable parody of the news. So is Hurricane Irene a largely invented "Stormageddon" or is it the real deal? The fact that the major networks are based in New York ― a city directly in Irene's path ― does not not guarantee superb reporting. Indeed, it invites myopic thinking. Am I being too harsh? Perhaps. But, as well-documented here on The Portal, the Media-Internet Complex has worked prodigiously to earn my skepticism. In this case, I say guilty until proven innocent. That said, for the folks in harm's way, I hope Irene's ominous roar is bigger than it's bite.