Blizzards and the name game

Humans have an insatiable appetite for anthropomorphizing, and that quality is of considerable value in naming tropical storms and hurricanes.

Affixing names is an important tool in the tracking and drawing of attention to storms with the potential to become some of the most-dangerous storms on the planet.

The Weather Channel invoked this practice when it announced in 2012 that it would start affixing names to winter storms.

The comparison, however, doesn't hold much water.

Tropical storms and hurricanes earn names only by meeting specific meteorological criteria. For a name, a tropical storm has to gain peak winds of at least 39 m.p.h., a hurricane, 74 m.p.h. The names are approved by  the World Meteorological Organization.

No such official criteria apply to the term "winter storm."

Often, disturbances over the Great Lakes or "clipper" systems from the Northwest swing across the country and re-form off the Atlantic Coast. Is that one storm?

Under the TWC  system, the criteria for naming a winter storm essentially are determined at the sole discretion of the Weather Channel.

Storms often are nature's guerrilla operations.  It is unlikely that something like the disruptive ice storm of Jan. 7, 1994, would have merited a TWC name.

The Weather Channel has said its naming system would help " consumers to better understand forecasts that could significantly affect their lives."

And did we mention TWC ratings?

Neither the National Weather Service nor other commercial outfits have adopted the TWC system. We're with them.

After the Weather Channel unveiled its naming system, The Inquirer opined that the naming system "looks to have been developed by the marketing staff in a fluorescent-lit meeting room somewhere deep within its offices off an Atlanta-area highway interchange."

We can't take the credit, those were the words of our editorial writers. But we think they got it right.