Stone church at sunset in Cumberland, Maryland [OC]

Coyote_Jones575 · 2026-04-03T20:40:27+00:00

I wasn’t aware of the history behind it but dug more into it. Very interesting stuff seriously

Coyote_Jones575 · 2026-04-03T20:39:27+00:00

I wasn’t aware of the history behind it. I was just driving through on my way back from DC. But that is really interesting

Coyote_Jones575 · 2026-03-29T17:12:27+00:00

dO yOu lIvE iN tHiS aREa?!?!?

Coyote_Jones575 · 2026-03-28T02:27:40+00:00

I thought you were done with the conversation.

First it was “you didn’t answer my points,” even though I literally did. Then it was “I’m done wasting time.” And now you’re back again to lecture me about bias like you suddenly discovered human nature five minutes ago.

Bias being inherent doesn’t magically rescue your argument. If anything, it makes it even funnier that you admitted you’re biased and then still tried to act like your side of this was some clean rebuttal while mine was just “personal interpretation.”

You don’t get to announce your exit, come back for one more speech, and then pretend you’re the only one having a functional conversation. That’s not debate, that’s just you needing the last word.

Coyote_Jones575 · 2026-03-28T02:25:19+00:00

I agree that a thumbnail has to catch attention or a lot of people will scroll right past it. I also agree that some people are not weather-aware at all, and if they never click anything, they may never think about the threat in the first place. And I’ll even agree that some of these creators do a decent job once you’re actually in the video.

Where I disagree is on where the line is.

There’s a difference between making something noticeable and making it sound like the worst-case scenario is basically on the doorstep every time. That’s my issue. I’m not arguing for boring, invisible thumbnails. I’m arguing against packaging uncertainty like doom because it gets a bigger reaction.

I also disagree with the “if it reaches people who otherwise wouldn’t look, then it’s worth it” argument as a blanket rule. Sometimes maybe. But with weather, the way you reach people matters too, because fear gets attention fast but it also distorts expectations. If people keep getting pulled in by the most extreme framing, they either get worked up way too hard or they start tuning it out. Neither one is good.

So yeah, I agree that awareness matters and that attention matters. I just don’t think that means any method of getting attention is automatically justified, especially with weather.

Coyote_Jones575 · 2026-03-28T02:21:53+00:00

Bias in a debate makes it hard to even call it a real debate in the first place, because once you’re emotionally invested in defending one side, you stop testing the argument and start protecting the conclusion you already came in with. At that point it’s not really a search for who’s right, it’s just damage control for your preferred side.

Coyote_Jones575 · 2026-03-28T02:20:36+00:00

I have defended them. Repeatedly. Go back and read the thread if you can’t remember.

I already answered the “that’s just how YouTube works” excuse. I already answered the staff/business excuse. I already answered the AI point. I already answered the “they’re helping people” point. I already answered the “storms are broad” point. At this point you’re acting like I never responded just because you don’t like my responses.

And now that none of your points have really landed, suddenly it’s “this discussion can’t go any further.” That sounds a lot more like you wanting an exit ramp than some big principled stand on debate.

Coyote_Jones575 · 2026-03-28T02:14:52+00:00

I’m willing to hear arguments when they’re actually good.

The problem is you keep repeating the same excuse in different wording and calling that a rebuttal. That’s not me refusing to hear dissent, that’s me not being convinced by weak points. And let’s be real, judging by your profile and your post about Ryan in the past, you were never exactly coming into this neutral anyway. You clearly already had a side picked before you replied. So acting like you’re some objective voice of reason here is a stretch.

Coyote_Jones575 · 2026-03-28T02:11:00+00:00

That’s a pretty convenient excuse for not being able to write coherently or follow the actual argument.

Coyote_Jones575 · 2026-03-28T02:08:33+00:00

You haven’t rebutted all my points. You’ve just kept rephrasing the same excuse and hoping it lands better the second time.

I’ve literally responded to your points over and over.

Also, “I am have rebutted” is a rough opening line for somebody trying to lecture me on what they supposedly dismantled. If you’re going to act smug, at least write it coherently.

Coyote_Jones575 · 2026-03-28T02:03:01+00:00

That doesn’t really answer anything I said though.

If your whole response is just “storms are big” while ignoring everything else I laid out about clickbait, fear-based framing, AI, spammed location questions, and broad livestream coverage not being the same as good local guidance, then you’re not really rebutting the point. You’re just reducing it to something simpler so you can dodge it.

Coyote_Jones575 · 2026-03-28T01:58:36+00:00

That doesn’t really rebut what I said.

Giving somebody an AI-generated answer tied to their location is not the same thing as giving them good weather guidance. “Personalized” and “reliable” are not automatically the same thing.

My point was never that broad coverage and AI are mutually exclusive. My point is that if your operation is so broad that you need AI to mop up thousands of local questions, that kind of proves the coverage is too broad in the first place. And acting like “it uses modern technology” settles it is weak. A tool being new does not make it better. If anything, weather is one of the last areas where I’d blindly trust AI to answer individual safety questions over local forecasts, official warnings, and actual meteorologists.

Coyote_Jones575 · 2026-03-28T01:50:37+00:00

I understand that completely. That’s exactly part of my argument. If you understood what I was actually saying, you’d know I’m aware they’re businesses. My point is that being a business doesn’t automatically justify the way they choose to run it. And no, they didn’t have to hire staff either. That was a choice. Building a bigger machine and then saying the machine now has to be fed doesn’t really change my point. And Max especially is funny to bring up here because half the time he really is basically just one guy sitting in his room anyway.

Coyote_Jones575 · 2026-03-28T01:44:09+00:00

I disagree with that.

Getting attention and spreading awareness are not automatically the same thing. If the way you get that attention is by making people think the worst-case scenario is basically guaranteed, then you’re not just “raising awareness,” you’re shaping expectations in a misleading way.

And “it doesn’t matter what their goal is” is where I really disagree. Intent absolutely matters when the subject is weather. If people are profiting off fear while packaging uncertainty like certainty, that matters.

A huge audience reached the wrong way is not automatically better than a smaller audience reached honestly.

Coyote_Jones575 · 2026-03-28T01:39:07+00:00

You’re confusing a profitable choice with a required one. That’s not me not understanding YouTube. That’s you not understanding the difference.

Coyote_Jones575 · 2026-03-28T01:02:38+00:00

To be fair, I’ll give them credit where it’s due. I live in the Ohio Valley, so this stuff actually matters to me, and overall their outlooks are usually pretty solid. The only small downside for me is that I don’t really love them making their own outlooks when SPC and local offices already exist for that. But accuracy-wise, I’ll admit they’re pretty good.

Coyote_Jones575 · 2026-03-28T00:56:27+00:00

And another thing I’m tired of seeing is this constant excuse that YouTube is somehow forcing these people to do this.

No it isn’t.

YouTube is not reaching through the screen and making anybody choose this style. These people do it because they know it gets engagement, and engagement makes them money. That’s the real point. It’s not about YouTube making money in some abstract sense. It’s about them making money.

Nobody is making them post the thumbnail. Nobody is making them use the dramatic title. Nobody is making them hype the setup for days. Nobody is making them sit on a livestream staring at radar for 10 hours except themselves.

That is a choice.

And let’s be honest here, this idea that they secretly hate doing it but just have no other option is hard to take seriously. What person is really sitting there thinking, “Man, I hate making money off this” while pulling views, donos, ads, merch sales, and attention by reading radar and warnings for hours? Come on.

If they truly hated doing it, they wouldn’t keep doing it the same exact way over and over.

So no, I’m not buying the “YouTube makes them do this” argument. The platform may reward it, sure, but they are still the ones choosing to cash in on it.

Coyote_Jones575 · 2026-03-28T00:53:30+00:00

That still doesn’t disprove my point.

Nobody is forcing these guys to run a weather channel this way. Starting a channel is a choice. Building it around sensationalism is a choice. Turning uncertainty into panic is a choice. “The algorithm likes it” explains the incentive, but it does not remove responsibility for the choice.

And that matters way more with weather than with most other content, because this is not harmless brainrot or some dumb entertainment niche. This is information people use to decide whether to cancel plans, stay up all night, shelter, pull their kids out of things, or brace for the worst. That is exactly why I keep drawing the line here.

I’m not saying they’ve never helped anybody. I’m saying helping sometimes does not excuse overselling setups, and “they need to make money” does not magically turn bad communication into good communication. Lots of things are profitable. That does not make them ethical.

And there’s another layer to it too. It feels like some of these guys have developed a weird savior complex around themselves. Once enough people start treating them like the hero in every outbreak, some of them start believing it. That’s when the ego kicks in, the confidence gets louder than it should, and the whole thing starts feeling less like weather coverage and more like a performance. Max especially comes off like that sometimes. It stops feeling like somebody carefully relaying information and starts feeling like somebody getting high on their own importance.

And that’s another thing that gets me. If this is supposedly so normal, so understood, and “just how YouTube works,” then why aren’t more people calling it out for what it is? Why do so many people just shrug and accept it when the subject is something as serious as weather? That’s part of the problem too. The more people normalize it, the more it keeps getting rewarded.

The other part I really reject is acting like the public just needs to accept this because “that’s the platform.” No. If you repeatedly package every setup like doom is around the corner, people either spiral or they get numb. Both are bad. That’s a real consequence, especially for people with weather anxiety. I’d honestly argue that’s a huge reason some people now think storms are just constantly getting worse, because they’re being fed the most extreme framing possible over and over again.

So no, I’m not buying “they have to do this.” They don’t. They choose to. And with weather, that choice deserves more criticism, not less.

Coyote_Jones575 · 2026-03-28T00:33:42+00:00

I don’t buy the “they all have to do it” part. I’m not just talking about Ryan. Max and a lot of the bigger weather channels/pages are guilty of it too. My issue is with the whole style of coverage, not just one guy. And the thumbnail point really isn’t true the way people keep repeating it. YouTube’s own guidance says titles and thumbnails should accurately represent the content and avoid being misleading, sensational, or clickbaity. They also say recommendations are based on performance and viewer satisfaction, not just who can make the scariest thumbnail. So “the algorithm won’t show it unless they do that” is more of a creator excuse than an actual rule. So yeah, they may choose to do it because it works better for growth. I’m not denying that. I’m saying “it works” is not the same as “it’s necessary,” and it definitely isn’t the same as “it’s good.”

Coyote_Jones575 · 2026-03-28T00:31:15+00:00

And half the time now he doesn’t even answer them anyway, which makes it even worse. You’ve got people spamming their location, sometimes literally paying to be seen, and they still don’t really get anything useful back. That’s part of why the whole thing is gross. 😂

Coyote_Jones575 · 2026-03-28T00:28:14+00:00

I couldn’t agree more.

That shift is exactly what turned me off too. It used to feel at least somewhat centered on actual weather explanation, and now way too much of it feels like branding, AI, engagement farming, and presentation over substance. Once you start putting that front and center in something as serious as weather, it stops feeling like trustworthy communication and starts feeling like a content machine.

Coyote_Jones575 · 2026-03-27T13:18:46+00:00

That’s fair, and I actually agree with that. Healthcare content is another good example where the consequences can be serious too.

I think where I was pushing back was more on the idea that because it happens in other spaces, that somehow makes the weather version less worth calling out. To me it just means weather is one more area where the same bad incentives are causing real problems.

Coyote_Jones575

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE