In the aftermath of one of the worst hurricanes in history, naming the storm became a quite controversial topic. With CNN banning the coined phrase "Frankenstorm" made popular by meteorologist Jim Cisco. From Hurricane Sandy to Hurricane Exxon, this hurricane is having a bad case of an identity crisis.
But if you're someone like me, the first question that popped into my head was, "Does it even matter?" However, according to this fascinating article post, there's a lot to be learned from Hurricane Sandy's name.
Hurricane Sandy, in fact had 4 different names:
1. Frankenstorm
2. Sandy
3. Megastorm
4. Hurricane Exxon
Starting with the name Frankenstorm, a combination of Mary Shelley's Frankenstein and mother nature's wrath. The name indicates what happens when human error combines with mother nature. According to Bill Nye (Yes, the Science Guy), although climate change does not cause hurricanes, it sure makes them worse. In other words, the name is far from just a Halloween nickname, but it prompts us to recognize how this hurricane is in part due to our own mistakes.
Then there's Sandy. Following in the footsteps of the centuries old tradition of naming hurricanes, Sandy was the lucky winner. Yet, does using the name Sandy really do anything? Well, if anything, hearing the name Sandy flashes images of Olivia Newton-John or even the dog from "Annie." In other words, giving the hurricane such a common name anthropomorphizes the natural disaster. Putting names and faces to the hurricane creates a more emotional connection and allows us to talk about the hurricane in the context of our the ones we love and care about.
However, Tina Rosenberg of the New York Times reminds us, the cost of Sandy just this year might amount to nearly $50 billion. That's some major bucks, which explains this next name, Megastorm. While Sandy's impact is catastrophic, the name also reminds us the money, energy, and time that goes into "saving the world." Maybe rather than having to save it all the time, making certain choices to avoid that path would create efficiency. 
Yet, my personal favorite has to be Hurricane Exxon. As Bill Mckibben explains, "Hurricanes should be named after fossil fuel companies." As of this year only, fossil fuel companies have spent more than $150 million blocking solutions to the climate crisis that affect the companies. Naming the hurricanes after fossil fuel companies would directly associate mother nature's wrath to the big fossil fuel companies.While we don't realize it, naming makes a significant difference to what narrative we subscribe to, whether it's the belief that it's a human made error or it's the fault of fossil fuel companies. However, could the naming process be considered as a waste of time? After all, the focus might not be what we call it, but how we react to it? Could it also serve as a dividing force in a time when unity and teamwork is necessary?
Discuss!
