One brief thing about Hurricane Irene coverage, and storms in general--

For the most part, I think the coverage by local news in my neck of the woods (the Philadelphia area) was pretty good. The weather folks and the traffic folks gave great up-to-date info, and we were brought useful, necessary information--like where local emergency shelters were, what businesses, churches and schools were shut down, and announcements by local officials about road closures and things like that. It might be common sense that people shouldn't drive through "puddles" with no idea of their depth, or go out when 40-50 mph winds threaten to topple trees or other debris--or themselves!--but that doesn't mean that it isn't very useful for the, shall we say: less commonly-sensed among us to be reminded. The only thing I bemoan is the above--

Why do stations do this to their reporters? I've often wondered if it wasn't a kind of hazing. Honestly, I've never seen the value of throwing some (usually young) correspondent out in driving wind and rain, pounding surf, or, possibly, foamy residue of raw sewage. We know what lousy weather looks like. Sensible people stay out of it if they can. It seems like sensible news coverage might refrain from sending people out in waders or windbreakers to do what they are trying to demonstrate that others most certainly shouldn't do.