This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/aug/24/the-guardian-view-on-the-bbc-and-the-met-office-faltering-forecasts

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
The Guardian view on the BBC and the Met Office: faltering forecasts The Guardian view on the BBC and the Met Office: faltering forecasts
(2 days later)
Since November 1922, the Meteorological Office has provided weather forecasts to the BBC. Both the Met Office and the BBC are established British institutions. Both enjoy a significant degree of public trust. They may not necessarily always merit that trust in all respects; on the other hand, no competitor in either field, weather forecasting or broadcasting, merits more. To many, therefore, the BBC’s decision to pull the plug on the Met Office’s forecasts after 93 years will seem both perverse and damaging. It is hard not to see the decision as another binding national tradition binned for short-term reasons.Since November 1922, the Meteorological Office has provided weather forecasts to the BBC. Both the Met Office and the BBC are established British institutions. Both enjoy a significant degree of public trust. They may not necessarily always merit that trust in all respects; on the other hand, no competitor in either field, weather forecasting or broadcasting, merits more. To many, therefore, the BBC’s decision to pull the plug on the Met Office’s forecasts after 93 years will seem both perverse and damaging. It is hard not to see the decision as another binding national tradition binned for short-term reasons.
The reality, however, is more complicated. That the Met Office provides forecasts with a high degree of accuracy is not in doubt. Admittedly, such a claim always triggers references to the Met Office’s 2009 “barbecue summer” forecast (the summer was a washout) and, further back, to Michael Fish’s October 1987 dismissal of a hurricane on the way (the hurricane killed 22 people and did £2bn worth of damage). But these failures have to be judged against a strong record of overall accuracy. The Geneva-based World Meteorological Organisation consistently shows the Met Office among the top two operational services in the world, while the Met Office claims that 86% of its minimum temperature forecasts and 92% of the maximums are within the margin of error. Given the variability of the weather over the British Isles, this is an impressive record.The reality, however, is more complicated. That the Met Office provides forecasts with a high degree of accuracy is not in doubt. Admittedly, such a claim always triggers references to the Met Office’s 2009 “barbecue summer” forecast (the summer was a washout) and, further back, to Michael Fish’s October 1987 dismissal of a hurricane on the way (the hurricane killed 22 people and did £2bn worth of damage). But these failures have to be judged against a strong record of overall accuracy. The Geneva-based World Meteorological Organisation consistently shows the Met Office among the top two operational services in the world, while the Met Office claims that 86% of its minimum temperature forecasts and 92% of the maximums are within the margin of error. Given the variability of the weather over the British Isles, this is an impressive record.
Far less impressive are some other equally essential dimensions of what the Met Office provides. It has a bad record of technological innovation. The lack of a good enough Met Office mobile phone weather app appears to have been a key problem in the latest tendering. And criticisms of the Met Office’s website — alleging lack of detail, failure to make best use of data, and too many adverts — abound. These deficiencies can’t be just brushed aside because we like British institutions.Far less impressive are some other equally essential dimensions of what the Met Office provides. It has a bad record of technological innovation. The lack of a good enough Met Office mobile phone weather app appears to have been a key problem in the latest tendering. And criticisms of the Met Office’s website — alleging lack of detail, failure to make best use of data, and too many adverts — abound. These deficiencies can’t be just brushed aside because we like British institutions.
Related: BBC has a duty to run Met Office forecasts | Letters
Moreover, if the former weather forecaster John Kettley is correct, the Met Office has become complacent about the finances of the service too. With the BBC rightly facing the need to get value for money and the Met Office apparently relying on its ability to extract ever higher margins from the corporation contract, something was bound to give, and now has. Then there is the dumbing down. A post-hurricane risk aversion culture manifests itself in over-frequent “weather warnings” and in a tendency to nanny the nation about decisions — like packing an umbrella — that free citizens are capable of making on their own. An insidious form of forecast-speak irritates many. Would alternative providers do a better job? In some respects surely yes; in others, probably no. But alternative providers are not the end of civilisation. The most important weather forecasts in British history — the ones that first postponed and then gave the all clear for the 1944 D-day landings — were not exclusively provided by the Met Office; yet they were spot-on.Moreover, if the former weather forecaster John Kettley is correct, the Met Office has become complacent about the finances of the service too. With the BBC rightly facing the need to get value for money and the Met Office apparently relying on its ability to extract ever higher margins from the corporation contract, something was bound to give, and now has. Then there is the dumbing down. A post-hurricane risk aversion culture manifests itself in over-frequent “weather warnings” and in a tendency to nanny the nation about decisions — like packing an umbrella — that free citizens are capable of making on their own. An insidious form of forecast-speak irritates many. Would alternative providers do a better job? In some respects surely yes; in others, probably no. But alternative providers are not the end of civilisation. The most important weather forecasts in British history — the ones that first postponed and then gave the all clear for the 1944 D-day landings — were not exclusively provided by the Met Office; yet they were spot-on.
There is no doubt that a better Met Office and a less ratings-obsessed BBC could generate a more innovative and data-rich weather forecast in better judged language and graphics across all media platforms. At the moment, however, they don’t — and that’s the problem. Britain deserves better, wherever it comes from.There is no doubt that a better Met Office and a less ratings-obsessed BBC could generate a more innovative and data-rich weather forecast in better judged language and graphics across all media platforms. At the moment, however, they don’t — and that’s the problem. Britain deserves better, wherever it comes from.