The Changing Face Of Tv Forecasts - Your Opinion

[trickydicky]

My biggest 'beef' with the BBC's modern weather forecasts is how they only do temperatures for city centres. This seems pretty pointless to me because not everyone lives right in the centre of a major conurbation, and I never have. It just comes across as doing half a job to me, a bit like if they only showed the weather for the southern half of England and then at the end said "oh, but obviously it will be a bit bit cooler than that up north and it might even snow in Scotland".

Also, for me, the best era of weather forecasting was probably 1980-1995 when they were all by people like Michael Fish, Ian McAskill, John Kettley etc. Having said that, I'd take Lucy Verasamy over some Yorkshireman with a tash and a dodgy knitted jumper everytime.

Edited October 21, 2010 by trickydicky

[J10]

Well for me, I still like to watch the weather forecast on the television. I find ITV's forecasters or so called meteorologists absolutely terrible. I can't believe they get paid to say what the weather will be like for the next 24 hours in about 1 minute! ITV's forecasters seem like they have no clue what they are talking about.

On the other hand, BBC's weather forecasts are very good. I do think its necessary that the BBC have people who are employed with the Metoffice to present the weather - It does make a lot of difference. You can tell this because after the regional news sometimes in Wales, a newspresenter broadcasts the weather instead of Derek Brockway who has worked with the Metoffice. I could tell that the newspresenter was more unsure of what to say and had limited knowledge on the weather.

Even though the Internet is used by almost everyone, there are still alot of people i think who rely on TV weather forecasts, especially BBC. It's also good to look around on different weather websites to get a better understanding of the weather and to see which websites and TV forecasts are more accurate than others.

TV forecasts are very simple...And i think this is good. The more easy to understand, the better. Do people really need to know Cape or Lifted index? Only if they are really hoping for a good Thunderstorm. "Basic" Temperature, Weather, Wind & Pressure is all people need to know.

I'm always going onto the BBC red button on Sky to check the weather i think it's great

Very well put.

The BBC produce the best TV forecast by a mile, and these provide more detail on the weather than ever before, certainly for the next 24 hours. In this regard the graphics are far superior to the old style weather symbols which were very limited.

The average weather knowledge on Net Weather is far superior to that of the general public on the whole. This coupled with the widely available weather charts both here and on other websites, makes the forecasts less important to many on here. However the better BBC forecasts, especially including the Countryfile and regional forecasts, still have widespread use of synoptic charts denoting the Current FAX. In additional to this the Graphics display the latest forecast from the UKMO Mesoscale model the NAE, and this can give information not freely available on the internet as those on Weather Onlune as an example are not the most detailed available.

[ZONE 51]

Good post JACKONE,

some interesting points their.

Does anyone still have the old teletex/ceefax to check the weather? i always wanted a radar page, the bbc have/had quite a bit of info, on page400+ it was i think, the warnings were the same as what was on their tv forecast.

[Weather-history]

We have IMO, the worst weather presenter on the box and that is Eno Eurotor who does BBC Northwest weather. She is bubbly but meteorologically clueless. She is DIRE.

Work this one out, our local BBC weather has in its caption "Formula One" at the beginning. Whats the ruddy point of that?!

[Geordiesnow]

Work this one out, our local BBC weather has in its caption "Formula One" at the beginning. Whats the ruddy point of that?!

Maybe the fact the F1 is on the beeb has something to do with it?

[damianslaw]

I remember the change in the BBC weather presentations in May 2005 and how at first I bemoaned the loss of the old style presentation and particularly the complete absence of synoptical charts. I'm glad to say I believe in the past couple of years the bbc forecasts have improved somewhat and in the main achieve the right balance between being informative whilst easily understandable. The best forecast remains the weather view forecast just before 10pm on news 24, this is a longer forecast than most and normally goes beyond 3 days and tends to show more synoptical charts - but this is just my preference. The average person possibly isn't interested in seeing the synoptical charts and is more interested in how cold/warm it will be or wet/dry/sunny.

I do think the national forecasts need to improve how they show temperatures - these are very misleading and relate to city/town centres (though I am very lucky that they show Kendal which is a 'rural town' on most of the national forecasts. I have noticed the BBC often say towns and city centre mins will be ... but in rural areas a frost is likely. The regional forecasts are the ones to watch for temperatures not the national forecasts. Indeed the bbc regional forecasts are more important in terms of seeing what local conditions will be like - however, I have lost count of the number of times there are disparities between the national and regional forecast, and how often the regional forecasts don't appear to react quick enough to sudden changes unlike the national forecasts - you would think there were two different organisations at work. The NW regional forecasts in my opinion are very poor compared to the NE in terms of presentation and just general inaccuracy.

[The PIT]

There has been improvements. I used to always extremely annoyed when the Weather girls on the beeb were going on "It's freezing" when the temp at 06:45 was already at the normal max for the day or way above. That does seem to have been cut out. Sometimes though they still say things like a cold night when temperatures are at normal values or just above.

I also wish they stick to terms like ground frost rather than grass frost. Are we going to have windscreen frost in the future???

Also sometimes they clearly don't have the latest information. I still remember I think it was Louise Lear going on about the a dry day across the UK while the radar showed a massive shower over the south west which was causing floods at the very same time. They need a little laptop with netweather extra being displayed.

Against that anyone who saw this lunchtimes Country file forecast had to be impressed how the forecast was delivered despite the crashed computer and attempts to fix it that resulted in multi colour flashing lights in the background.

I see Damianslaw mentioned night time temps. Well they do say these are city temps and rural areas will be much lower and actually do give a figure.

[Thundery wintry showers]

the better BBC forecasts, especially including the Countryfile and regional forecasts, still have widespread use of synoptic charts denoting the Current FAX. In additional to this the Graphics display the latest forecast from the UKMO Mesoscale model the NAE, and this can give information not freely available on the internet as those on Weather Onlune as an example are not the most detailed available.

Actually (some might be surprised to see me say this) I can't really argue with that part of JACKONE's post. From the sample that I've seen over the last year, there's been quite a few that pleasantly surprised me, and it does appear that the better BBC forecasts have improved over the last couple of years and are at least a match for those of the 1990s.

But mixed in with the good ones we also get forecasts showing classic "dumbing down" symptoms where a large percentage of the time is spent panning around the UK at 8am and the main focus is on reassuring us that "bad" weather is clearing away and "good" weather is set to arrive at some point, rather than simply telling us the weather. I think if the BBC toned both of those down on a consistent basis, and sorted its time allocation out, I'd probably be as positive as JACKONE about modern-day BBC forecasts- whereas, regrettably, to make me feel positive about ITV's national broadcasts we'd need a much longer list of tweaks.

[damianslaw]

Actually (some might be surprised to see me say this) I can't really argue with that part of JACKONE's post. From the sample that I've seen over the last year, there's been quite a few that pleasantly surprised me, and it does appear that the better BBC forecasts have improved over the last couple of years and are at least a match for those of the 1990s.

But mixed in with the good ones we also get forecasts showing classic "dumbing down" symptoms where a large percentage of the time is spent panning around the UK at 8am and the main focus is on reassuring us that "bad" weather is clearing away and "good" weather is set to arrive at some point, rather than simply telling us the weather. I think if the BBC toned both of those down on a consistent basis, and sorted its time allocation out, I'd probably be as positive as JACKONE about modern-day BBC forecasts- whereas, regrettably, to make me feel positive about ITV's national broadcasts we'd need a much longer list of tweaks.

Yes I have noted they focus much more on the positives probably to make people feel happier but this is often misleading and full of bias. This evening for instance they just keep saying it will be much milder tomorrow thankfully but seem to forget that it will also be wetter and cloudier and generally more miserable. Whilst many do not like the cold when it is accompanied by clear skies sunshine and no wind I don't hear many people complaining - whereas a wet day is a wet day doesn't matter what the temp is generally most people do not like such days. Also certain presenters have their preferences - Peter Gibbs, Jay Wynne, Louise Lear are mild lovers, Rob M a cold lover which affects their presentation - this isn't anything new, in the old days forecasters also brought their preferences out, Michael Fish was notorious for saying how much he was fed up of the cold mind in the late 70's and early-mid 80's I'm not surprised.

[Norway Nut]

Living here in Norway, the weather forecasts are pretty hopeless and I long for the days of BBC forecasts (domestic). I also watch BBC World forecasts where the presenter has to cover the globe in under 2 mins - see it, it's terrible!

One way they could make the forecasts better in the UK would be to allocate 5 mins once a day for a proper in-depth analysis. Met Office presenters of course.

[Thundery wintry showers]

Yes I have noted they focus much more on the positives probably to make people feel happier but this is often misleading and full of bias. This evening for instance they just keep saying it will be much milder tomorrow thankfully but seem to forget that it will also be wetter and cloudier and generally more miserable. Whilst many do not like the cold when it is accompanied by clear skies sunshine and no wind I don't hear many people complaining - whereas a wet day is a wet day doesn't matter what the temp is generally most people do not like such days. Also certain presenters have their preferences - Peter Gibbs, Jay Wynne, Louise Lear are mild lovers, Rob M a cold lover which affects their presentation - this isn't anything new, in the old days forecasters also brought their preferences out, Michael Fish was notorious for saying how much he was fed up of the cold mind in the late 70's and early-mid 80's I'm not surprised.

It's true that forecasters have always brought their preferences out- I remember it happening at times during the 1990s, and in fairness, I think if a forecaster tries to make a forecast interesting and jolly that's always likely to happen to a certain extent. The key lies in extent and emphasis- I think if a forecast focuses on telling us what the weather will be, and a bit of opinion creeps in here and there, it's not a big deal.

The problem seems to be the emergence of a BBC policy on reassuring viewers about "good" weather- like you say, it's probably to try to make viewers feel happier- which sometimes leads to that emphasis being reversed. I have a suspicion that many of the presenters who come across as "mild lovers" are actually snow lovers but have chosen to conform to that BBC policy.

[Harry]

IMO, weather forecasts should combine scientific information with self explanatory symbols/graphics, much the way the likes of (take note BBC) ROB MCELWEE and PHIL AVERY do!!! (sorry, had to get that in!)...well, you'd get that on ITV. On the BBC you'd need someone to point at an area of a map and tell you if its clear skies/overcast, or whether blue dots represent light drizzle showers or supercells!

If the scientific element to forecasts is going to be scrapped, or severely dumbed down, we might as well conclude that forecasters are surplus to requirements.

With the exception of people with visual impairment, or those who tend to walk out of the room during the forecast, forecasters simply saying "sunny and warm at 25C in the SE, cloudy across Norfolk at 22C, sunny and cool across the NE with temps of 21C etc etc", is something symbols/number icons tell us. The only extra thing forecasters bring us is someone with a smile (well, most of them anyway) and a waving arm across a map.

If scientific forecasts are going to go, you might as well get bill board models in to wave an arm and read off of an auto-cue.

Many people, while its not something they discuss much in public conversation, are actually interested in that bit of extra info and explanation as to why such weather conditions are prevailing. People knowing I'm a weather nut tend to say this to me on a fairly regular basis. But then, knowing certain organisations, they'll probably go ahead and scrap those extra bits of info irrespective of public want, much the same way the more popular of forecasters are axed irrespective of whether or not they are the best at it.

Apologies for the occasional mini-rants mixed in there.

Edited October 26, 2010 by Harry

[Geordiesnow]

I have a suspicion that many of the presenters who come across as "mild lovers" are actually snow lovers but have chosen to conform to that BBC policy.

I don't agree with that TWS. The fact that people like Rob McElwee, John Hammond and Helen Willetts would appear to be cold rampers would suggest that a forecaster does not have root for mild weather and make cold weather set ups as bad news. At the end of the day, its up to the forecaster whether they think mild and wet at 13C is better than sunshine and snow showers at 0C and i'm sure the majority of the public would prefer it to be mild and wet hence we see more forecasters would appear to have a preferance for it.

A forecaster should not be shot down because they prefer mild weather but the only thing that annoys me and it probably has been menturned before in this thread is that the majority of forecasters would appear to prefer a dry mild, cloudy start to the day than a sunshine but cold frosty start because you would think the majority of the public would prefer it to mild than cold.

Regarding the BBC graphics, i'm with JACKONE on this one, they have improved alot especially when you watch one of the first ever forecasts compared to now. If your a person interested in pressure charts, watch the weatherview/countryfile forecasts but i have seen quite a few forecasts in recent times when you see pressure charts being shown so for me, i have no real problem with BBC weather at the moment. The only gripe i have is where we see forecasts at 28mins past the hour and they only show you a forecast for 12-24 hours and we see a "detailed outlook in half an hour" at the end - makes me think why could they not just show us a longer range forecast for.

[Thundery wintry showers]

I don't agree with that TWS. The fact that people like Rob McElwee, John Hammond and Helen Willetts would appear to be cold rampers would suggest that a forecaster does not have root for mild weather and make cold weather set ups as bad news. At the end of the day, its up to the forecaster whether they think mild and wet at 13C is better than sunshine and snow showers at 0C and i'm sure the majority of the public would prefer it to be mild and wet hence we see more forecasters would appear to have a preferance for it.

A forecaster should not be shot down because they prefer mild weather but the only thing that annoys me and it probably has been menturned before in this thread is that the majority of forecasters would appear to prefer a dry mild, cloudy start to the day than a sunshine but cold frosty start because you would think the majority of the public would prefer it to mild than cold.

I don't think it follows at all- it's more likely that some forecasters have chosen to embrace the "reassure viewers, who are expected to prefer X to Y, that X is good, Y is bad, and X will prevail over Y" line, while others, such as Rob, have chosen not to. I still recall the glaring example when, the day before Whit Holiday Monday, the forecaster tried to reassure us that it would be a fine day and completely overlooked the area of drizzle that the map showed over eastern Scotland and north-east England.

I actually sympathise with the presenters here as it must be very difficult to follow the "reassure viewers" policy yet not go far enough with it to compromise forecast accuracy, within a notoriously unpredictable time slot- again I think this situation is largely down to the BBC.

In contrast, I don't really have a problem with forecasters' own preferences coming across (e.g. appearing more enthusiastic about mild than cold) it's probably unavoidable to some extent anyway, and as Damianslaw rightly pointed out, it has always happened, and significantly, it never put me off watching BBC forecasts regularly in the 1990s.

Edited October 26, 2010 by Thundery wintry showers

[WhiteFox]

Living here in Norway, the weather forecasts are pretty hopeless and I long for the days of BBC forecasts (domestic). I also watch BBC World forecasts where the presenter has to cover the globe in under 2 mins - see it, it's terrible!

One way they could make the forecasts better in the UK would be to allocate 5 mins once a day for a proper in-depth analysis. Met Office presenters of course.

Indeed. THe only English language TV station in my hotel is BBC News 24: described by Charlie Brooker as only ever being watched by men in hotel rooms waiting for something to do. The forecasts on there are comnpletely laughable: why do I need a list of capital cities with temperatures and a little symbol showing me the weather? I can get that in The Times if I want it. Furthermore, some cities should be excluded: 'Singapore is 33 degrees with a chance of afternoon showers'. Well, there's a shock!

As for the UK, BBC still by far the best, but then it always was. I agree with comments about too much time spent on 'now' rather than actual forecasting. I want to know what it will do tomorrow or at the weekend, not what it was like today; that is not a forecast, it's a summary of the past 24 hours. Remove it.

[phil nw.]

Indeed. THe only English language TV station in my hotel is BBC News 24: described by Charlie Brooker as only ever being watched by men in hotel rooms waiting for something to do. The forecasts on there are comnpletely laughable: why do I need a list of capital cities with temperatures and a little symbol showing me the weather? I can get that in The Times if I want it. Furthermore, some cities should be excluded: 'Singapore is 33 degrees with a chance of afternoon showers'. Well, there's a shock!

As for the UK, BBC still by far the best, but then it always was. I agree with comments about too much time spent on 'now' rather than actual forecasting. I want to know what it will do tomorrow or at the weekend, not what it was like today; that is not a forecast, it's a summary of the past 24 hours. Remove it.

Yes the nowpart of the bbc tv forecasts really irritate me.

Going around the country by region at say 8am on the bbc breakfast time programe is a prime example.

We only need to look out of the window for that info.

A waste of valuable forecasting time imo.

[Terminal Moraine]

Advertising various sporting events, being televised by the BBC, under the guise of a brief forecast for said event is something I think should be dropped.

If the event is taking place in the British Isles the forecast has already covered it and if it's abroad it's not relevant to the forecast.

If every forecast was 4 minutes long with a decent amount of time dedicated to the outlook I'd have no problem with 10 seconds of sport specific forecast but when the time allocation is so meagre that 10 seconds could have gone into the outlook. Instead we're treated to a drop down list of major population centres adjacent to an almost meaningless symbol. It's a fat lot of use seeing a half sun, half rain symbol for Birmingham and Manchester when you live in the Peak District, particularly when that symbol covers an entire day or weekend.

[egret]

OK my tuppennyworth as well - we seem to get two forecasts (local and national) one immediately after the other (like buses!). The informaton seems almost identical (as if repeated in case you missed it first time)

One forecast with more detailed information would be much preferable on the same timeframe. This would indeed give time for a flash of the synoptics and jetstream plus a comment on probabilities and what is happening overall.

[johnholmes]

Advertising various sporting events, being televised by the BBC, under the guise of a brief forecast for said event is something I think should be dropped.

If the event is taking place in the British Isles the forecast has already covered it and if it's abroad it's not relevant to the forecast.

If every forecast was 4 minutes long with a decent amount of time dedicated to the outlook I'd have no problem with 10 seconds of sport specific forecast but when the time allocation is so meagre that 10 seconds could have gone into the outlook. Instead we're treated to a drop down list of major population centres adjacent to an almost meaningless symbol. It's a fat lot of use seeing a half sun, half rain symbol for Birmingham and Manchester when you live in the Peak District, particularly when that symbol covers an entire day or weekend.

agreed

OK my tuppennyworth as well - we seem to get two forecasts (local and national) one immediately after the other (like buses!). The informaton seems almost identical (as if repeated in case you missed it first time)

One forecast with more detailed information would be much preferable on the same timeframe. This would indeed give time for a flash of the synoptics and jetstream plus a comment on probabilities and what is happening overall.

I quite like that suggestion but sadly its unlikely to find favour with the BBC, National or especially Regional, I suspect a sort of empire building at work?

[Isolated Frost]

Ahem. Do we have a weekly talking point #3, or no?

[Strider]

Advertising various sporting events, being televised by the BBC, under the guise of a brief forecast for said event is something I think should be dropped.

If the event is taking place in the British Isles the forecast has already covered it and if it's abroad it's not relevant to the forecast.

If every forecast was 4 minutes long with a decent amount of time dedicated to the outlook I'd have no problem with 10 seconds of sport specific forecast but when the time allocation is so meagre that 10 seconds could have gone into the outlook. Instead we're treated to a drop down list of major population centres adjacent to an almost meaningless symbol. It's a fat lot of use seeing a half sun, half rain symbol for Birmingham and Manchester when you live in the Peak District, particularly when that symbol covers an entire day or weekend.

Depends on the sport, and the occasion.

E.g. I think they should show the weather for an FA Cup final, but not an ordinary Premiership match.

Also for some sports (like F1) the weather can be critical so I prefer they show it.

[Weather-history]

Advertising various sporting events, being televised by the BBC, under the guise of a brief forecast for said event is something I think should be dropped.

If the event is taking place in the British Isles the forecast has already covered it and if it's abroad it's not relevant to the forecast.

If every forecast was 4 minutes long with a decent amount of time dedicated to the outlook I'd have no problem with 10 seconds of sport specific forecast but when the time allocation is so meagre that 10 seconds could have gone into the outlook. Instead we're treated to a drop down list of major population centres adjacent to an almost meaningless symbol. It's a fat lot of use seeing a half sun, half rain symbol for Birmingham and Manchester when you live in the Peak District, particularly when that symbol covers an entire day or weekend.

I tend to agree especially the international ones. What is the point of showing the prospect weather conditions for a World Cup football match in South Africa? Absolutely pointless. I think F1 forecasts are irrelevant as well as they can be covered by the actual sports programme themselves. I made a post earlier in this thread of a local BBC forecast having Formula 1 in its caption. What was the point of that?

Another gripe are BBC Breakfast forecasts done from Royal Ascot/Wimbledon. What is the point of that at 6.15am?

Edited October 29, 2010 by Mr_Data