Al Jazeera:

> The US National Tsunami Warning Center, which downgraded the quake from an earlier estimate of magnitude 8.2, said the quake posed no threat to coastal areas of the US.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/6/8/tsunami-warnings-iss...

Lots of sources are initially approximate or conflicting, scientists consolidate and update the figures within minutes, but tabloid journalists take the highest bid

You need to wait for a story to build up to have a clear picture

I live in some area where an earthquake you can hardly feel happens every other year. Some newspapers would tell reader how it was pandemonium, because they have a new topic besides city hall plans to install a bench that's nowhere near trees

Yes, that is common though. You have a variety of measurements, from a variety of technologies, from a variety of distances, and from a variety of sources. Given the damage a quake and tsunami can cause, especially the early measurements are estimates that later get corrected in light of new information. In Japan for example, it is very much not uncommon that early tsunami warnings are later cancelled. Yes, false alarms are bad, but the example I usually use in terms of how much time can matter is the 1983 Sea of Japan quake [1], where the tsunami hit in 12 minutes after the quake.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_Sea_of_Japan_earthquake