Jump to content
Summer Sun

Weather in the general media (Newspaper features etc)

Recommended Posts

The squirming about the bbq summer did make me laugh (not that we can talk after this summer of course!), but putting out press releases saying 'odds on for a bbq summer' was never going to lead to anything but headlines of a bbq summer being on the way - hardly the media's fault that they 'misinterpreted'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought it was okay, Nothing hugely new, but still interesting nonetheless. Lots of cool retrospective. Good to have some sensible heads talking about it. Shame I got picked on for my excitement on twitter the whole time by one crummy individual pouring scorn on it all. But hey. I like having something to look forward to. As uncertain as it may be :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If my interactions with work colleagues about forecasting are a guide (and I'm really not much of a nerd about it...), people found the whole nitty-gritty side of it an unbelievable bore although they like the charts as they look colorful. I doubt they could have made a programm to keep the hobbyists interested without losing the interest 95% of the general public...They also found my monologues about backpacking tents very weird but they enjoy the pictures... :acute:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The squirming about the bbq summer did make me laugh (not that we can talk after this summer of course!), but putting out press releases saying 'odds on for a bbq summer' was never going to lead to anything but headlines of a bbq summer being on the way - hardly the media's fault that they 'misinterpreted'.

Like you say Paul- Ewan did eventually learn his lesson it seems watching him tonight.

Anyone doing press releases just remember if its possible to get the wrong end of the stick its 100% certain they will. Nor will they ever accept that they did, apologise-you must be joking-never, ever.

So be super cautious about headlines is a must-one only has to read the full story in most papers to realise that the headline not infrequently has little to do with the main part of the story-but it sells papers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had to smile at that comment.

He is the head of the forecast division at the Met Office!

yep, I'll join you-he was one of the lecturers on my AFC (Advanced Forecast Course), I could tell a story about him but won't!

Yes I think it's better to avoid that route John. :)

Unless I missed it there has been no comment on the structure of snowflakes. A discipline in it's own right and extremely interesting as is the properties of water.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Enjoyed the programme but as others have said a few misleading mistakes, we 9months ago came out of a terrible winter was one of them, although the facts were that jan was avg and feb was very mild !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless I missed it there has been no comment on the structure of snowflakes. A discipline in it's own right and extremely interesting as is the properties of water.

I was going to mention it but could not find a thread on the program, thought there would have been one, but now i realise its being discussed here.

Anyway yes a very interesting watch, and i enjoyed it, the snowflakes look amazing close up and the different sizes and shapes are incredible, we can have powder snow and larger snowflakes, tiny flakes fall at a very low temperature and is known as power snow or the 'wrong type of snow' this causing problems as it gets into little tiny areas that large flakes miss, this can cause problems on trainlines, the large flakes falling at a higher temperature(32f/0c) can stick together and become massive, i like both types but the powder snow is non snowballer, it just breaks up. 1991 we had a big powder snowfall.

Posted Image

Edited by ElectricSnowStorm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm, I notice that this programme parroted the official Met Office/BBC line that their forecasts and warnings were adequate ahead of the 8 December 2010 central Scotland snow debacle - I appreciate that it was a bit of a ''nowcasting" situation in the end, with the front stalling, but I'm not sure many would agree that their very vague and offhand treatment of the risk on the previous day's forecasts constituted adequate warning.

While I am on my pedantic high horse, I'm sure Kate Humble said something about 2009 being the last White Christmas, when both 2009 and 2010 were white here, and various other parts, including Glasgow where she was filming the programme!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably been mentioned before. The first snow of winter they pointed to on the mountain near Braemar Cairngorms. Was in actual fact a patch from last year. The fresh snow we had two weeks ago was superficial and has all gone. So there is no forst winter snow left on the mountains. I was up Cairngorm yesterday never seen it so bare!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Noticed also that they said that at the moment they don't see a repeat of the last couple of Winters this time around. But they also said that it might well change!

I could just picture the GFS and ECM charts going back and fourth on evolutions when that part of the program was showing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably been mentioned before. The first snow of winter they pointed to on the mountain near Braemar Cairngorms. Was in actual fact a patch from last year. The fresh snow we had two weeks ago was superficial and has all gone. So there is no forst winter snow left on the mountains. I was up Cairngorm yesterday never seen it so bare!

Having just watched the programme I was assuming that they had got it wrong - and they had. What a surprise - and the local weather guru didn't mention this? (or was it edited out)?

Overall, it was a moderately entertaining little programme (albeit accompanied by some annoying background noise (..... sorry, I mean music)). But that's all it was - entertainment. Actual scientific analysis and accurate data was fairly low. Why is this subject rarely (if ever) treated properly?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(albeit accompanied by some annoying background noise (..... sorry, I mean music)).

as someone who is fairly deaf I have lost count the times I've complained to the BBC about this, even to being involved with RNID as it was, at a test last year following which the BBC were supposed to have issued new guidleines to producers. It has had some effect but that programme, along with the one with the new bloke(new to me) who had to turn down the music there was such a howl of protest even from those with nromal hearing, and the current Attenborough is not immune from it. Fine beween folks speaking but gawd alone knows why we have to have ANY when someone is speaking. In one exchange with a previous DG of the BBC(forget which one) he said sound on the News adds atmosphere! He had no answer when I said so why not add it to the radio news broadcasts.

daft-sorry for rant but believe me for deaf folk it ruins any programme.

Edited by johnholmes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I.m afraid the BBC 2 programme Will it snow? was pretty poor over all.

It didn't answer the question that the title asked. It was clearly biased towards it own forecast supplier the Met office. It derided any independent efforts at long term forecasting. To allow Ewan Mccallum to get away with saying it will snow somewhere in Britain this winter was crass.

It was factually incorrect within one minute of the start stating that last December was the coldest month for a hundred years. (If I was january 63 or feb 47 I'd seriously think about sueing.)

It spread itself too thin instead of concentrating on answering the question at hand.

God. How Meteorology cries out for an Attenborough or a Prof Brian Cox.

Edited by mcweather

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I finally got to watch it last night and I thought it was OK, considering the target audience. We have to remember, people in here will always want more than a 60 minute overview, aimed at the general public, can give.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was aimed at the general public, not weather enthusiasts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It didn't answer the question that the title asked. It was clearly biased towards it own forecast supplier the Met office. It derided any independent efforts at long term forecasting.

That is factually incorrect. I'm thinking of sueing. It merely stated that given the state of play of the science at the moment accurate long range forecasts are not feasable irrespective whether the organisation is independant or the METO, NOAA, etc.. Would you disagree with that and if so can you support your disagreement with solid scientific evidence?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I wasn't taken that much by the programme myself, we didn't really need it. The public probably don't care about such things (they'd much rather watch soaps in general I'm sure).. the public need to be educated on what do in cold scenarios but I couldn't really see this as a useful programme because it told us what we knew already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I.m afraid the BBC 2 programme Will it snow? was pretty poor over all.

It didn't answer the question that the title asked. It was clearly biased towards it own forecast supplier the Met office. It derided any independent efforts at long term forecasting. To allow Ewan Mccallum to get away with saying it will snow somewhere in Britain this winter was crass.

It was factually incorrect within one minute of the start stating that last December was the coldest month for a hundred years. (If I was january 63 or feb 47 I'd seriously think about sueing.)

It spread itself too thin instead of concentrating on answering the question at hand.

God. How Meteorology cries out for an Attenborough or a Prof Brian Cox.

Here, Here, I could not have put it better myself. Spot on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I.m afraid the BBC 2 programme Will it snow? was pretty poor over all.

It didn't answer the question that the title asked. It was clearly biased towards it own forecast supplier the Met office. It derided any independent efforts at long term forecasting. To allow Ewan Mccallum to get away with saying it will snow somewhere in Britain this winter was crass.

It was factually incorrect within one minute of the start stating that last December was the coldest month for a hundred years. (If I was january 63 or feb 47 I'd seriously think about sueing.)

It spread itself too thin instead of concentrating on answering the question at hand.

God. How Meteorology cries out for an Attenborough or a Prof Brian Cox.

I don't really agree, it was an OK programme. If you want to gripe at a weather programme then just look at that "Bang Goes one" earlier this year which was atrocious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't watch the programme so can't criticise it but, from reading the comments posted on here, it sounds as though it was in similar vein to various other weather related programmes broadcast over the last couple of years.

These are all aimed at the general public rather than enthusiasts/obsessives and are all designed to be informative at a fairly basic level whilst simultaneously being entertaining.

This type of programme is never likely to satisfy people who are willing to spend hours analysing model output or sitting up all night watching the radar for thunderstorms and in all likelihood the presenters are just that, rather than people who know more than 'we' do about the weather.

Apart from the occasional 'Horizon' , or similar, my ideal weather programme would be an 8 parter, 40 minutes each, with Glacier Point going through the various teleconnections in fine detail .

I could then record it, watch it to my heart's content, and perhaps finally understand as much about it as he does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I.m afraid the BBC 2 programme Will it snow? was pretty poor over all.

It didn't answer the question that the title asked. It was clearly biased towards it own forecast supplier the Met office. It derided any independent efforts at long term forecasting. To allow Ewan Mccallum to get away with saying it will snow somewhere in Britain this winter was crass.

It was factually incorrect within one minute of the start stating that last December was the coldest month for a hundred years. (If I was january 63 or feb 47 I'd seriously think about sueing.)

It spread itself too thin instead of concentrating on answering the question at hand.

God. How Meteorology cries out for an Attenborough or a Prof Brian Cox.

Never a truer word spoken!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

UK on course for mildest November in 300 years

Britons bask in unseasonal highs of 18C at the weekend, boosting drinks and seaside trade

The UK's famously fickle weather is poised to pull off another unexpected trick by giving the country the mildest November since reliable records began, three centuries ago. Warnings of early Arctic snaps, backed by much local spotting of bumper berry crops on holly, yew and other "animal larder" trees, have failed to bear fruit as the Christmas season approaches. With December just over a fortnight away, the country enjoyed pleasantly unseasonal highs of 18C (65F) at the weekend, boosting the drinks and seaside economies but alarming supermarket wholesale buyers of snow shovels and heavy-duty duvets.

The Meteorological Office suggests little change over the next 30 days, although the prudent word "unsettled" is sprinkled liberally through its forecasts. A slight drop in temperatures at the start of the week is expected to revert to mild conditions by Wednesday before yo-yoing back to the possibility of gales at the end of the week. The first mention of snow is flagged up within the six- to 15-day forecast, but only on northern hills and followed by another milder patch. The Met Office's prediction for the start of the Christmas season is a classic of cautious reserve, suggesting the turn of the month "looks set to see some rather changeable weather across the UK, with rain and wind for most parts at times, though some drier and brighter periods are also likely". But the forecast is more assured about frost, saying that temperatures in early December will peak at the seasonal average, which means single-degree figures in celsius.

The forecast warns of "an increasing chance of overnight frost. A few milder days are still possible, but on the whole it will feel significantly colder than during the current mild spell." Meanwhile, plants and animals enjoying what may appear to them to be an early spring will not be under that illusion for much longer

http://www.guardian....s?newsfeed=true

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...