´óÏó´«Ã½

Your coverage has been interesting and informative. However, I do have to question the sense and responsibility of sending additional people and vehicles to areas under such pressure. I heard from two reporters that their own cars had been severely damaged and abandoned which could have been avoided so easily.

Your editor puts a very positive spin on this. The fact is though that ´óÏó´«Ã½ News Online was leading with the Alan Johnstone video story until 4pm yesterday (25 June), while the flood story was unfolding. There was very little about the flood online, until the sad death of the young man in Hull finally got the story to the top of the news agenda. I can't help thinking if the water had been inside the M25 it would have been the main story much earlier!

where was the blanket coverage when the flooding was taking place outside England?

It has been over 24 hrs now since the main floods have been reported. Where is the governments support to the people that have been affected.Why have they not declared a it a 'disaster zone' If this was happening abroad then the government would be the first to send our money to help. Why are they not sending money to help our own .... News reports show they are more concerned with Gordon Brown and his 1st day in office (with the obvious pay increase he will enjoy). CHARITY BEGINS AT HOME .. LETS THE GOVERNMENT PROOVE IT
Yours R Jukes ANGRY..

I heard on one news report yesterday, that Devon was one of the areas affected.

Having travelled from Torbay to Exeter yesterday (and then back later on), I was a little confused that this was reported.

In the past, relatives in London have seen reports on the news suggesting we have had floods or heavy snowfall when it hasn't been the case.

At least with citizen journalism, you get a better picture of the worst affected areas.

with regards to tonights advice about properties that are still flooded in north hull the advice that was given of washing hands and keeping clean uses more water which is then dumped down the drains causing an even bigger problem ie rising flood waters

Finaly I have had it with the ´óÏó´«Ã½ coverage. The way in which the ´óÏó´«Ã½ has presented the flood coverage to the public as if 95% of the viewers cannot understand what is going on, we can all see how deep the water has been, we all understand that the interlectual high ground that the reporters like to stand on is a farse when our money is being wasted by a silly boy who can not park his car out of harms way so we have to foot the bill to replace it. I am fed up with the news being presented to me as if I am a idiot, most of your fee paying viewers have a better grasp of what is going on that the over paid puppets that are relaying the script to us, that clearly they do not understand what they are saying at times.
Also the suggestion that we should feel sorry for the people that are not insured and have lost all in the flooding? Did they feel sorry for the rest of us that have been paying our insurances year on year or did they just have a slight smile because they were bucking the norm?

Leeds was hardly mentioned yet on an individual level many of the people affected there have suffered more than most. In the Halton area people have been flood for the 3rd time in as many years - never heard that mentioned You talk about the aftermath what are they going to do? How do you recover emotionally and financially? Did hear one comment where a lady said if this had happened abroard we the British would be asked to contribute to a relief fund. What's the government going to do to help its own people? Still it will be another justification for green taxes - not!

While the story has been difficult to judge as it has unfolded, I am stunned that two ´óÏó´«Ã½ reporters - sent to cover the flooding - have admitted on air that they werev stupid enough to park their cars where they were flooded out and ruined.

However, the ´óÏó´«Ã½ Frontpage notes that southern Europe is having a major heatwave - why doesn't the news even mention this, but is quite happy to report some bimbo in jail in LA? That is where your priorities are falling down.

Compared to Katrina, this was a hardly a puddle.

As a Geography teacher, I'm disappointed by the lack of background information on this weather event - I couldn't even find a decent weather map to show my students

I was very upset not to hear how the people of Chesterfield have suffered with all the bad weather sometimes I wonder if we exist we also suffered very bad floods that left a lot of people stranded there was one village that was completely isolated as the rother surrounds it thats barrow hill!But as usal only the big cities get mentioned.

If anything you were *slow* to start covering the story. There was already widespread flooding and chaos on the roads in Sheffield by the time you moved the story to lead in TV bulletins, and as said there were only minor links to the flooding stories on Online when that was all the public were interested in.

It would've been nice to see more practical advice being given out, such as not to drive into floods. In fact it sounds like your own TV crews need to take that advice.

Just sat down to watch he ´óÏó´«Ã½'s 10.00ok news to compare the coverage of the floods to affect Rotherham and Sheffield with that of SKY Tv , and as i predicted before any commentary began, incorrect reference to Sheffield was made - this is typical of the treatment that we citizens at Rotherham have to endure time after time. Why does the ´óÏó´«Ã½ always seemingly refer to parts of South Yorkshire as near Sheffield when there are other well known towns in the area such as Rotherham, Barnsley and Doncaster - we are not suburbs if Sheffield!. Catcliffe is in Rotherham, Ulley reservoir is in Rotherham- go on a say it. Sky don't seem to have any hangups about being factually correct. News good or bad about our town needs to be broadcast to all the UK, omitting reference to small towns in favour of larger cities is downright offensive, and whilst ever this attitude is taken, people down south won't ever know where Rotherham is!

I would just like to say after all the help we have given numerous countries in their time of need,now it's our turn where is the help??

I don't have too much of a problem with the level of coverage - this is a serious story with lives being lost and people affected over a large area. But I would prefer it if you didn't refer to 'citizen journalism' since individuals submitting pictures to you aren't making editorial decisions or checking facts.

That is your role, and I would hope that , important though this story is, amateur video footage of the floods does not crowd out other important stories.

That said, the pictures on the ´óÏó´«Ã½ Yorks website are very good as they do give a good impression of how conditions are for people on the ground in the vicinity of the floods.

I agree with Johnny. The floods in Northern Ireland were severe, but weren't featured on the main ´óÏó´«Ã½ news, as far as I know

No the coverage was not too much. I live just outside Sheffield and it did bring the whole area to a standstill and completely drown the city centre. There are still rolling power cuts in place and still terrible traffic disruption due to the motorway being closed. The question of if the coverage was too much would not be asked if the floods had primarily affected the south east.

Although bizarrely the coverage has dropped to zero in favour of Tony Blair's leaving -- important, but not as important as what is having at that reservoir !! Get back on the case..

The Sheffield council website linked to the ´óÏó´«Ã½ for the current situation on roads and schools. Clearly the residents needed this information so it was not too much coverage.

National news will refer to other parts of South Yorkshire rather than the outskirts of Rotherham as most people will not have heard of it. And, to be honest, Sheffield is the hub of South Yorkshire, other parts are merely satelite towns; lots of my colleagues travel in to Sheffield from other towns, I know of nobody who travels from Sheffield to other towns for work.

Out of curiosity I recorded a half hour of Sky News while watching News 24 to compare the coverage, and I can't believe how much better Sky's is.

News 24 said the Ulley reservoir contains six billion litres of water - the correct figure, as stated by Sky, is actually 580 MILLION litres. Sky pointed out that it was the culvert behind the dam that was cutting back into the dam itself; ´óÏó´«Ã½ thought it was being "overwhelmed". Sky showed how the crane had positioned bags of rock to block the culvert; ´óÏó´«Ã½ didn't mention it all. Sky listed by names the three villages threatened by a burst; ´óÏó´«Ã½ did not.

Sky had far more aerial footage, which is what you want in a flood, the ´óÏó´«Ã½ had hardly any. They also had more still pictures.

Sky carried David Milliband's statement to the House, explaining that military and finacial aid had been made available, while the ´óÏó´«Ã½ did not report this.

´óÏó´«Ã½ managed to cut their weather forecast off half-way through; Wilson on Sky did a good job of explaining how this is fits in with global warming predictions.

I further note that the school boy error of confusing millions with billions was actually repeated in the Six and Ten O'clock bulletins.

Nothing like a bit of fact checking is there?

I didn't think the coverage was too much.

Post 14. Stuart Alexander. I'm receiving this information from Toronto, Canada. Technically, I'm not in Toronto but I don't expect people who aren't local to the area to know the difference between Toronto and Orangeville or Barrie Ontario. None of which are really suburbs of Toronto. It seems altogether reasonable that large media organizations are going to refer to the closest major city. I'm not sure why the southern UK need to know where Rotherham is anymore than why you would need to know where Orangeville is? I would expect we just need to know regionally where it is.

There was too much coverage based around the journalists and their traumas 'oo look at me i'm standing in 3 foot of water' and ' my car i parked over there has now got washed away' and 'oh no its just started raining on me again' The focus was too much on the emotional and not enough on the factual. What about maps showing the affected areas, how about an explanation as why the weather was like it was? The ´óÏó´«Ã½ should take responsibility to rise above the current media trend of exploiting personal emotional tradgedy and the use of imagery and poetic journalism to dramatise stories into something they are not.

I think you've got the amount of coverage about right. It's a big story, and deserves a lot of airtime.

However, I would have liked to have seen a lot more on investigating the reasons why it happened. Just how unusual was the weather? What flood defences were in place and were they adequate? Are the privatised water companies doing all they should be in terms of their responsibilities with drainage?

I see that some of these stories are starting to be covered, but let's have some more please!

This is all over the top.
It was the biggest story in town until 1pm today, then was relegated to 2nd or 3rd string behind the politics of change.
People must understand that the news dosent stand still, and the ´óÏó´«Ã½ will try where possible to be impartial.
It dosent always succeed, but at least it tries.
unlike other privately owned news sources.

I agree the floods in UK should be a desater zone and I call Mr Brown to go and vist all areas of the floods this will show that he is intrest in this country and its problems. There should be asitsace given in all aeras. The uk is always the first to give monnie to other countries but it can not help it's own people.

Simon, would not dispatching reporters *but telling them not to drive into the floods themselves* have been a better idea?

It's definitely worth giving these events coverage - and I'm sure you're aware of this already, but coverage doesn't just mean dramatic footage on the days of the floods, it means follow-up stories in the weeks afterwards as well, and that's an area where I expect the ´óÏó´«Ã½ to deliver to a greater extent than other news outlets (don't let me down!).

It does certainly seem to me that these 'large-scale' floods are happening more than they used to, though I suppose I'm also more aware of them than I used to be. I'd love to see an article, or even a programme on the trends behind floods and whether there are areas that used to be safe and now aren't, and what's been done to predict which places are next.

I understand that for people who are unaffected by the flooding, that the coverage may have seemed over the top.

On the other hand, living in Hull, I feel that the information provided was not always portrayed clearly enough to aid those caught in the floods. Communication has not been as good as it could have been. It is all well and good telling the public which motorways are flooded, but there has been little mention both on radio and television, or even the internet, of transport links within the city.

Being right in the middle of it all, I feel completely bewildered by the situation, and any information that I can get my hands on is appreciated.

Call me selfish, but I would much rather hear news that directly affects the people of this country than the headlines from around the world, especially when the British public are at risk, and lives are in danger.

I am dissapointed by some of the poor commentary by a couple of your reporters on Tuesday evening's local ´óÏó´«Ã½ News.

Your female reporter on location in Sheffield commented that there seemed to have been little assistance from the people in the south on England. Lets not create an escalated north south divide issue here. I ask, what on earth could the people in the south do to help in a flash flood situation like this. Also, did we in Yorkshire with all our plentiful supply of water last summer bother sending water to the south east. No, becuase it was not practical either.

Secondly, again one of your other female reporters was broadcasting from a refuge centre for stranded families and on location commented that there was good community spirit. She highlighted that food had been offered. It does not help however to show a single tin of dog food. Anyone from the south would think that people in the north purely eat dog food. This is not the case as far as I know.

Finally the first female reporter I referred to suggested that no prior warning had ben given. If people can understand weather forecasts for the 10 day period prior coupled with the numerous severe weather warnings then what else were some people expecting?

I have personally been affected by our family house being flooded this time by 6 inches of water and whilst I believe it is important be keep ones self informed, please can the ´óÏó´«Ã½ try a little harder produce scripts which are devoid of stupid or unhelpful commentary.

I live in the Rotherham area.

The ´óÏó´«Ã½ coverage of the flooding situation has very comprehensive, however, whilst keeping an eye on the weather forecast for the up and coming conditions I have noticed that the ´óÏó´«Ã½ include place names of major cities such as York, but that the areas affected by the flooding are absent?

Would it be more helpful to viewers to include Rotherham or Sheffield?

With such events it would be a good opportunity to make use of some of the regional presenters. I must admit I haven't watch News24 during the day recently however often you can end up with a ´óÏó´«Ã½ National presenter/reporter, a ´óÏó´«Ã½ News 24 reporter, and a ´óÏó´«Ã½ Regional reporter/presenter all broadcasting from the same location. Making use of the regional 'senior reporter' would perhaps help.

The coverage of the flooding seems reasonable as it is significant and fairly wide spread flooding. I suspect if there hadn't been much coverage then you'd get complaints along the lines of "another example of the ´óÏó´«Ã½ not giving an event proper coverage because its outside of London".

Shame when Carlisle flooded in 2003 a similar emphasis wasn't placed there. In fact I remember no coverage at all on the national news, yet the flooding was easily as bad as in Sheffield, and cost the lives of at least three people.

Carlisle a little too far North for you? Still, at least you've found that the M1 extends above Luton...

I think 2 of the look north reporters,christa ackroyd and another lady reporter,were rude when interviewing Croline Flint,given the portfolio for the Yorkshire and Humber region,also when interviewing the mayor of Doncaster,who did admit,that in his opinion,he had failed the village where the interview was taking place.Do they really need to try to act like Geremy Paxton,then cut people of in mid sentence,i think they were rude and its embarrassing.

i have deep concerns for those victims, how can they survive on the sole responsibility of local fire brigades, the gov't needs to contribute.

Hi,
I think the coverage is justified. I think by telling the public about individual stories it gives a better idea of the total devastation that has occurred. I am currently sat in the ´óÏó´«Ã½ building trying to find somewhere for our family to live for the next 6 to 8 months.
After monday's floods we were trapped for three days in the upstairs of our house.The smell was horrendous, the lack of food was scary - if it hadn't have been for my partner wading through the sewerage both our family and our neighbours would have gone without food. The rescue people were great at getting those out that wanted to go. But some of us were worried about looting and tried to stay longer - we were told to put all contaminated furniture outside because of the health risk.

Eventually we got out and luckily found two rooms at the Quality Royal - who have been briliant. Yesterday Our insurance assessor Joanne came from the Halifax so we had to return to the house - to our horror looters had taken anything of value from the garden which made our insurance claim very awkward fortunately, Joanne was really helpful.

We are homeless, been robbed and we are due to get married in 7 weeks but I have no dress because it was damaged in the floods. The whole experience is too much nad its hard to explain to others just how bad things are unless they have had similar experiences.

I am new to viewing ´óÏó´«Ã½ News 24 and admit to being staggered at the narrow and parochial approach - what about the rest of the world? What about a meeting between two super power leaders, what about the highly relevant terrorist trial in Spain. What about everythng else? I had to watch CNN to find out what was happening elsewhere.

Is News 24 always like this? If so, I won't be bothering with it much.

The floods were important, the terrorist attacks more important, but they weren't the only things happening in the world.

"Is this violent weather something we should now expect as a regular occurrence?"

That's an interesting way of phrasing the question. It's the sort of question the ´óÏó´«Ã½ regularly bat to tame meteorologists who've signed up to the Al Gore vision of the future. Liberal consensus & all that.

Why not "has such violent weather been a regular part of
the British climate over previous centuries"? (Answer: yes).

I think it is worth mentioning the fine job which ´óÏó´«Ã½ radio Sheffield has done in reporting these awful floods. Listening in to the station courtesy of the internet, it serves as a reminder of just how valuable an asset ´óÏó´«Ã½ local radio is at moments of crisis.