Met Office To Pick Up A Gong?

[Coast]

Oh dear, the weather forecasts are not straight forward enough!

The Meteorological Office's description of its new weather forecasts has been branded as gobbledygook by the Plain English Campaign.

Talking about "probabilities of precipitation" instead of discussing whether "rain is likely", is baffling, says the group. It has chosen the UK weather service as a recipient of its Golden Bull booby prize. But the Met Office has pointed out that precipitation does not only mean rain. The change to the forecasts, introduced in November, refers to the percentage chance of precipitation. A Met Office spokesman said: "Precipitation covers a wide range of stuff falling from the sky including rain, sleet, snow, hail, drizzle and even cats and dogs - but sums it up in just one word."

'Crystal clear'

The Plain English Campaign says it aims to persuade UK and worldwide organisations to communicate with the public in plain language. It says the government needs to make it a legal duty that public communications are clear. Other award winners include the Houses of Parliament for their use of 'archaic language' and the Office for National Statistics, which gets a prize for asking businesses to identify "activities of extraterritorial organisations". The founder of the Plain English Campaign, Chrissie Maher, said: "Even though most people agree that plain English is plain common sense, our government needs to make it a legal duty that public communications are crystal-clear."

Several organisations have received awards from the campaign for their use of clear and concise English. Channel 4's Fact Check blog and the website of Jo's Cervical Cancer Trust - an organisation which supports women affected by cancer - have been singled out for their jargon-free information.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16100112

Do you have any examples of over use of wordy descriptions in forecasts? Does the Met Office accurately describe the weather outlook in understandable language?

[Radiating Dendrite]

Most of GPs forecasts read as gobbledygook to me!

I think that is down to my lack of technical understanding though!!

[BleakMidwinter]

Well, given that the BBC's weather forecasts have been re-jigged AWAY from everyday phrasing by listener demand... the PM programme started a deluge of complaints about the forecast being full of stupid phrases like "spits and spots" instead of "light shower" and people got very cross about being given instructions - "you will need an umbrella" or "you won't enjoy the next two days' weather".

The upshot was that the Radio4 forecasts now follow a set geographic order, and are limited to clear, concise technical terms.

I find the MetO absolutely fine. The page I use has a paragraph of text about my region, which I've never had a problem with, but also has a lot of graphic versions.

[Coast]

Our own dear Kaddy Lee-Preston has a funny way with her forecasts:

[Thundery wintry showers]

Personally I have no problems at all with the wording of the forecasts on the Met Office site. Perhaps it might be confusing to those with next to no understanding about the weather, but then there's the argument that offering some more technical details/explanations helps to improve the general public's understanding over time.

[Methuselah]

I've always been able to understand television forecasts...I usually admire the work of the Plain English people, but here it's seems they're merely dumbing down? If one doesn't understand a word why not consult a 'Dick and Harry'??

[VillagePlank]

You have a surprising collection of KLP forecast videos to hand, Mr Coast - it seems, one for any occasion ....

[Gorath]

Do you have any examples of over use of wordy descriptions in forecasts?

Well, these forums are full of them! The one that bugs me is when people give an altitude in metres, then specify that it's metres above sea level. well... DUH! Surely that's the standard form, and if you WERE to use some unusual method of measuring altitude, then that's when you should specify.

Anyway, whilst the Plain English Campaign does frequently have a point, I fear it is misguided this time. Surely this is more a case of highlighting a poor understanding of the English language by the people of Britain?

The Met office is expected to carry out it's duties in a scientific, technically accurate manner, so it's stupid to expect their forecasts to read like a "children's book of weather".

It seems to be a certainty, whenever language issues are discussed, that overzealous folk with their own personal agenda will become involved, and derail the original point of the issue. And I fear that's what's happening here.

A particularly annoying example I came across a while ago, was a website where people were publicly mocking the absolutely insane Welsh translations on signs here in Wales. There are of course, some absolute corkers, where left and right have been accidentally substituted and so on. Eventually, however, it became a sounding board for people moaning that signs didn't use the correct tense, or abbreviated sentences to such things as "floods likely" instead of "flooding is likely".

All that really achieved was for people to lose interest, and pay less attention to the original, real issue.

And I fear that's what's happening here. There really are cases where plain English campaigners should raise awareness, but this, is not one of those cases.

[Jude 00]

I'd say that 'dumbing' down' the forecasts is pandering to the lowest common denominator. Except denominator is probably too long a word...

(Hello, by the way - long time lurker, just had to pipe up on this thread as I think this is a little ridiculous. Maybe someone at the Campaign had bad weather at an important event or something and is taking it out on the met office?)

[Coast]

You have a surprising collection of KLP forecast videos to hand, Mr Coast - it seems, one for any occasion ....

The little minx keeps me on tenterhooks with her forecasts, I'm going to rush up to Tunbridge Wells one day and examine a warm front before her 6.50 pm forecast....

More KLP 'isms'

[AderynCoch]

The PEC (bet they don't like being referred to like that) can be a force for good in that in that they rail against management speak in business and other weasally forms of rhetoric used by government - often in these cases the wording is made to sound clever and important when it actually lacks any substance at all.

However, they're also quite capable of getting lost up their own rear passages - and this is one such instance. If you don't understand what "probabilities" and "precipitation" mean you should be taking evening classes rather than accusing the "perpetrator" of confusing you. It would be misleading to say "rain is likely" when sleet, snow and hail are all on offer ("precipitation" I think it's all called).

It reminds me of one occasion about three years ago when they backed the decision of some local councils to ban the use of Latin terms in English, despite their use being correct English (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7705922.stm). If you don't know what "ad hoc" or "bona fide" mean, consult a dictionary; if you don't know what "vice versa" or "via" mean, I simply give up.

I'd quite like to use some very plain English towards them right now, but it would probably all come out as names of vegetables.

By the way, who over the age of five confuses "e.g." with "egg"? (and no, I'm not including people with learning difficulties and the like)

Edited December 9, 2011 by AderynCoch

[Crepuscular Ray]

They're numpties who don't actually understand that a forecast of a 30% possibility of precipitation (if accompanied by a prediction of the type of precipitation) is far more useful as a forecast than a limp "it might rain". I'm all for a reduction in jargon, but that's not jargon!

[knocker]

Personally I have no problems at all with the wording of the forecasts on the Met Office site. Perhaps it might be confusing to those with next to no understanding about the weather,

Do you think that's the reason why many on the forum have problems with the METO?

[johnholmes]

The little minx keeps me on tenterhooks with her forecasts, I'm going to rush up to Tunbridge Wells one day and examine a warm front before her 6.50 pm forecast....

More KLP 'isms'

I bet you would not be so keen if it was a male doing the forecast?

Are you sure you watch the charts and not elsewhere?

[chionomaniac]

I bet you would not be so keen if it was a male doing the forecast?

Are you sure you watch the charts and not elsewhere?

Another one to add to coasts collection tonight, John!

[Thundery wintry showers]

Do you think that's the reason why many on the forum have problems with the METO?

Definitely not- I think it's mainly a case of the MetO often being accused of over-emphasising anthropogenic global warming, sometimes legitimately and sometimes somewhat unfairly.

[knocker]

Definitely not- I think it's mainly a case of the MetO often being accused of over-emphasising anthropogenic global warming, sometimes legitimately and sometimes somewhat unfairly.

I'm not sure that AGW is relevant to this discussion, I'm talking about the pseudo weather experts in the forum. Frankly as a member of the public much of the discussion is beyond me.

[Coast]

Are you sure you watch the charts and not elsewhere?

She's a bright and bouncy lass its true, but she does have a funny way of describing the weather with a strange choice of words at times.

I'm not sure if the BBC regional forecasters are Met Office employees or on contract to the BBC? Mr Fish still does our local forecast some days and I don't think he is still with the Met O is he?

[johnholmes]

She's a bright and bouncy lass its true, but she does have a funny way of describing the weather with a strange choice of words at times.

I'm not sure if the BBC regional forecasters are Met Office employees or on contract to the BBC? Mr Fish still does our local forecast some days and I don't think he is still with the Met O is he?

an increasingly grey area-some still are Met O forecasters, many seem to be presenters who have done a course on weather presentation at the Met O College.

[TonyH]

Kaddy is a fully qualified Meteorologist with a keen interest in words, place names and facts to boot!

http://www.google.co...udgihJZxuUaZ4Zw

http://www.google.co...JAEE4zOnX9gunyg

Edited December 10, 2011 by TonyH

[Terminal Moraine]

I've been impressed with the work of The Campaign for Plain English in the past when they've been tackling excessively wordy and impenetrable legalese, or management speak, but on this occasion they seem to have lost the plot.

As the Met' Office correctly point out 'precipitation' covers much more than just rain and if 'probability' is too difficult a word to understand we're in a poor way.

Will they extend their remit to cover such areas as horticultural journals where, instead of being instructed to' scarify the lawn' we will be told to 'scratch the grass really hard' ?

There's a big difference between plain understandable English and reducing the language to its lowest common denominator.

[Thundery wintry showers]

I'm not sure that AGW is relevant to this discussion, I'm talking about the pseudo weather experts in the forum. Frankly as a member of the public much of the discussion is beyond me.

It isn't on topic, but I think it's the main reason why some on here are quick to bash the MetO.

As for the Plain English Campaign's motives, it's perhaps another illustration of how a well-intentioned and often positive approach to things can be taken to too much of an extreme.